Twitter Debate: Student Preferences for Bachelor Degrees at TAFE
Following the release of the NCSEHE-funded report, Student Preferences for Bachelor Degrees at TAFE: The socio-spatial influence of schools, Deakin University’s Professor Trevor Gale and the Grattan Institute’s Andrew Norton took to Twitter to debate the findings:
Student Preferences for Bachelor Degrees at #TAFE: The socio-spatial influence of schools http://t.co/m9zwtGRnzt @Deakin @andrewjnorton
— NCSEHE (@NCSEHE) April 29, 2015
@NCSEHE Kemp-Norton TAFE low SES analysis based on existing vocational enrolments – assuming pathway rather than school leaver enrolments. — Andrew Norton (@andrewjnorton) April 29, 2015
@andrewjnorton @NCSEHE @Deakin What does this mean? Perhaps it is clearer in the Kemp/Norton report. What page?
— trevagale (@trevagale) April 29, 2015
@trevagale @NCSEHE Pages 39-40. Would not expect TAFE to be major school leaver choice except in niche areas. — Andrew Norton (@andrewjnorton) April 29, 2015
@trevagale @NCSEHE But overall TAFE 21% low SES which gives a feeder market for articulation into higher ed.
— Andrew Norton (@andrewjnorton) April 29, 2015
@andrewjnorton @NCSEHE Wheelahan shows TAFE no better pathway to HE than school, despite large low SES concentration http://t.co/KBgRqYQkOQ — trevagale (@trevagale) April 30, 2015
@andrewjnorton @NCSEHE AustGov 2011 low SES figs. say 14.7% in VET sub degrees but 26.5% in Uni sub-degrees https://t.co/m9jb0yT8QQ see p.42
— trevagale (@trevagale) April 30, 2015
@trevagale @NCSEHE Will read. My general analysis was 1) High SES will always outnumber low SES, due to much stronger prior academic 1/2. — Andrew Norton (@andrewjnorton) April 30, 2015
@trevagale @NCSEHE 2) At the margins, room to increase low SES attainment via more places and better matched services. 2/2
— Andrew Norton (@andrewjnorton) April 30, 2015
@trevagale @NCSEHE With low SES students/low SES population the best analytical tool, rather than low SES students/all SES students. — Andrew Norton (@andrewjnorton) April 30, 2015
@andrewjnorton @NCSEHE Bottom line, no evidence VET HE is better for low SES than Uni HE and lots that VET HE being used most by high SES.
— trevagale (@trevagale) April 30, 2015
@trevagale @NCSEHE Latter point not surprising or problematic; high SES interests and preferences are important. — Andrew Norton (@andrewjnorton) April 30, 2015
@andrewjnorton @NCSEHE Former is antithesis of ‘finding’ in your report – with implications for high SES interests
— trevagale (@trevagale) April 30, 2015
@trevagale @NCSEHE Finding was low SES would benefit from access to sub-bachelor courses. More high SES are in such courses not relevant. — Andrew Norton (@andrewjnorton) April 30, 2015
@andrewjnorton @NCSEHE 1. No evidence base for ‘finding’. 2. SES is a relational concept: high SES is always relevant.
— trevagale (@trevagale) April 30, 2015
@trevagale @NCSEHE The evidence was for low ATAR, SES by inference from over-representation among low ATAR students. — Andrew Norton (@andrewjnorton) April 30, 2015
@andrewjnorton @NCSEHE Conjecture then not finding, based on shaky logic given ATAR’s sch link and main VET HE stdts high SES with low ATAR
— trevagale (@trevagale) April 30, 2015