The UniSA-PAL course attracted a high proportion of adult students from disadvantaged backgrounds with respect to their socio-economic status and disabilities.
The UniSA-Pal students in the first year of the pilot were 86.6 per cent from the lowest socio-economic quartile, based on their postcode. This falls dramatically in 2003 to 23 per cent. Although two of the four schools are located in less disadvantaged areas, this is clearly not an accurate reflection of the students’ actual socio-economic status. Taking into consideration a range of other relevant factors – highest level of schooling, income, parents’ educational and employment status – all of the cohorts of PAL students over the two years (2002 and 2003) overwhelmingly came from the lowest socio-economic quartile, almost certainly in greater proportions than those in either the Diploma in University Studies or the federally funded bridging programs across the country.
It can be concluded therefore that while students in each of the UniSA-PAL course, the Diploma in University Studies and the enabling program all show evidence of educational disadvantage, based on the data in this report those who studied the UniSA-PAL course in 2002 and 2003 were significantly disadvantaged with respect to their socio-economic location and all that follows from this in terms of educational outcomes.
There were no rural, isolated or Indigenous students in the UniSA-PAL pilot, whereas rural, isolated and Indigenous students are well represented in the federally funded bridging programs. Students with a disability were more highly represented in the UniSA-PAL cohorts than in the Diploma or the federally funded bridging programs.