University Credit for School Students

Benefits and costs

The universities expressed largely similar motives for making some units available to school students. The programs:

• provide a mechanism for recruiting very able students;

• deliver a community service through sharing the university’s intellectual resources with capable school students;

• create better relationships with schools;

• ease the eventual transition of selected students to full university study.

In fact, the first motive – the ambition to attract bright students who might otherwise have chosen a different university – rarely meets its objective. All the evidence from this investigation indicates that students choose their ‘Year 12 university’ according to one set of criteria and their ‘real’ university, post-school, by another set. There are occasions when students do switch their preference to the university where they studied in Year 12 but, judging from the experiences of respondents in this investigation, it does not happen often.

A few universities have designed programs specifically to address a fifth motive: to assist in the fulfilment of their equity objectives and the achievement of equity targets. These programs have targeted students in areas of socio-economic disadvantage and have purposely sought to push beyond the existing limits of students’ aspirations, teachers’ perceptions and familial expectations. Early signs are that, where the relationship between the university and the students is a close and personal one, these ‘equity’ objectives are being realised. It is, however, early days for such programs. Apart from these targeted equity programs, however, there is a distinct impression that, overall, the present programs enabling university credit fro school students have favoured the already most privileged students, especially those attending non-Government schools.

Successful programs from the students’ (and their schools’) point of view are those which generate exciting learning and which give the students a sense of independence. Students value the opportunity to do something ‘different’ and to extend themselves beyond school. Many students do extremely well academically: it is not unusual for a secondary school student to gain the top mark in the university unit. Students do, however, need the school to keep a watchful (if subtle) eye on their progress and to quickly provide support if the demands accumulate.

Guidelines for designing and operating successful programs could be readily distilled from the data collected during this project. The full report describes in detail five elements that need care and attention:

• clarity of purpose;

• thorough planning – which includes aligning the program with the university’s strategic direction, establishing a close working relationship with the schools involved and undertaking a comprehensive risk assessment;

• wise marketing and careful student selection – besides being academically able, students have to be motivated, excellent time-managers and not already over-committed to extra-curricular activities;

• adequate support for the students;

• perceptive monitoring of outcomes.

A wide choice of mechanisms for delivering university units to school students have been tried. The most common model is ‘normal’ on-campus delivery where students attend university lectures/tutorials (sometimes in a special tutorial group). Off-campus teaching centres have also proved popular, for example, a secondary school serving as a hub for students from a number of schools. The subject can be taught by a university staff member or an ‘accredited’ school teacher. On-line provision is rare but a number of universities are fully engaged in developing this model. Other mechanisms include: traditional distance education, using the summer break, and awarding university credit for an advanced school subject.

Three forms of ‘credit’ are possible for school students who pass a university unit. The unit studied could:

1. be recorded on the student’s official certificate of upper secondary education issued by the relevant State-based Australasian Curriculum, Assessment and Certification Authority (ACACA);

2. contribute to the student’s evidence for admission to university

3. be recorded on the student’s university transcript, either as a direct contribution to a degree, or as an un-designated contribution to advanced standing towards a degree.

Each form of credit has been used, but the variation across States/Territories and individual universities is substantial:

• in some States/Territories the unit is recorded on the student’s official secondary education certificate; in other States/Territories the ACACA agency is not even informed of the study;

• in some States/Territories the university study (and the result obtained) is factored into the student’s official Year 12 university admissions rank/score; in other States/Territories it is not;

• a very small number of universities adjust the student’s admission score to take account of results in that university’s units; such adjustments remain specific to the university where the student studied.

Some students are interested in accelerating their university studies and use the ‘credit earned’ while still at school for this purpose. The vast majority of students, however, appear not to be interested in accelerating their university course. For many students, in fact, the university subject studied at school is not particularly relevant to their intended degree.

With a handful of exceptions, these programs are currently provided by the universities without cost to the students. Most describe themselves as ‘waiving’ the fee for school students; others describe the arrangements as a scholarship. The students are admitted as non-award candidates. Few universities have had enough experience with these programs to have developed a thorough understanding of all the costs involved or precisely how to apportion the costs that they do recognise.

If the school student places were to be costed at the rate of ‘normal’ university students, on a national basis, 2,000 students taking only a single one semester university unit would create a program load of 250 EFTSU. If funded at the average rate of $11,000 per EFTSU, the program would cost of $2.75m. Alternatively if the funding were at marginal cost the program would cost $0.65m. If five percent of Australian Year 12 students (10,000 students) were to be enrolled in two one-semester units, such a base would yield a program cost of between $27.5m at the average rate and $6.7m at the marginal rate.

Future directions

Overall, these are still early days in considering, designing and operating systematic programs of university study for school students. The potential for building on the existing base is widely appreciated. But at this point it is the province of each university, on its own – in light of its own purposes and resources, subject to its own pressures – to address the issues involved. Similarly, accreditation authorities in each State/Territory have come to their own judgments about how to certificate university studies by school students.

The current situation – with many stakeholders making many isolated, independent judgments, has resulted in considerable diversity across Australia. While diversity itself is often valuable, the consequence in this case is that access to university study, and the rewards for such study, are uneven. The demonstrable benefits are available to some students but denied to most.

If more equitable access is to be generated, the reach of existing programs must be extended and new programs developed. This expansion implies, inevitably, system-wide national policies, frameworks and resource models. This is challenging because, in shifting some of the action to the system level, the spontaneity, responsiveness and innovation which are part of the strength of present provision could be lost. Equally, expansion should not be interpreted as “more pilot programs”. One can, in fact, consider the outstanding efforts of individual universities and individual champions within universities to have been effectively the pilot phase of the provision of university programs for school students.

This investigation has shown that, if “university credit for school students” is to have a productive future, there needs to be sustained conversation and information sharing within and between the higher education and school education sectors. Processes ought to be set in place to enable these ‘learning conversations’ to take place sooner rather than later, efficiently rather than sporadically. Many stakeholders can play a role in stimulating and guiding such a nation-wide conversation: DEST, the AVCC, State/Territory governments, ACACAs, teacher associations, and others. There are many interested parties. Discussions should be as frank and open as possible. One aim of the conversations should be to ensure that decisions are reached about which part of the education sector is responsible for funding these programs.

If there is a single conclusion to be drawn from this investigation it is this: carefully constructed programs that enable secondary school students to study accredited university units are of demonstrable value. It follows, then, that the opportunity to pursue this form of study should be available to all eligible students and appropriate means to pay for it devised.

Full copy    (479.84 KB) PDF