Moving Beyond "Acts of Faith": Effective Scholarships for Equity Students

Deakin University CRICOS Provider Code: 00113B

MOVING BEYOND “ACTS OF FAITH”: EFFECTIVE SCHOLARSHIPS FOR EQUITY STUDENTSDr Nadine Zacharias, Deakin University (Chief Investigator)

Dr Juliana Ryan, Deakin University (Research Manager)

An equity research project funded by the National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education (NCSEHE)


THE TEAMDeakin University:

Dr Nadine Zacharias, Director Equity and Diversity (Chief Investigator),Professor Brenda Cherednichenko, Pro Vice-Chancellor (Arts and Education) (Investigator)Dr Juliana Ryan, Deakin University (Research Manager), Dr Kelly George (Data reporting and quantitative analysis)Ms Linda Gasparini (Data extraction)

QUT:Ms Mary Kelly, Equity Director, QUT (Investigator)Ms Smitha Mandre-Jackson (Data extraction and analysis)

The University of Sydney:Ms Annette Cairnduff, Director, Social Inclusion, University of Sydney (Investigator)Mr Danny Sun (Data management)


OVERVIEW• Background and context • Scope and purpose• Methodology• Overall findings• Recommendations• Further research


BACKGROUND AND CONTEXTBackground:• Lack of evidence on effectiveness and good practice in

equity scholarshipsContext:• Proposed HE reform: fee deregulation, ‘Commonwealth

Scholarships Program’, Start-up scholarship status change

(from grant to loan)


SCOPE AND PURPOSEResearch question:• Which types of equity scholarships have a positive influence on the success and retention of students from

equity groups, particularly regional and remote, low SES, Indigenous students and students with disability?

Participating universities:• Selected for geographic and institutional differences:o Deakin University (Victoria; unaligned)o QUT (Queensland; Australian Technology Network)o The University of Sydney (NSW; Group of Eight).

Purpose:• To inform the future design of equity scholarship programs at institutional and

sectoral levels.


METHODOLOGYInstitutional case studies

Triangulation of 2 data sets:

1. Quantitative data snapshot: 2013 Institutional data on retention and success of recipients of selected equity scholarship schemes

2. Qualitative data: Scholarships impact survey of 2013 scholarship recipients


QUANTITATIVE DATA PROTOCOLS•Protocols agreed to guide institutional data extraction and analysis by specifying and defining:

o ‘Equity’ and ‘equity-merit’ scholarships

o Student demographics

oAdministrative categories

oData fields


SELECTED SCHOLARSHIP SCHEMES•Deakin University (UG and PG students): 1. Deakin University Retention and Support Grants2. Deakin Access Scholarships

•QUT (UG and PG students):1. Equity Scholarships2. Indigenous Commonwealth Scholarships3. Equity Starter Bursary

• The University of Sydney (UG students only):1. Sydney Scholar2. University of Sydney Bursaries


SCHOLARSHIPS IMPACT SURVEY• Designed by QUT to assess influence of equity scholarships and gain

feedback, and implemented since 2005.• 2013 survey implemented 7 November-6 December 2013 at QUT. • Survey implemented retrospectively in 2015 with 2013 equity

scholarship recipients at Deakin University (1-24 July) and University of Sydney (1-28 July 2015).

Institution Invited population No of survey respondents

Response rate

Deakin University 1073 254 24.0%QUT 2191 553 25.5%University of Sydney 728 119 16.0%


OVERALL FINDINGS1.Equity scholarships are effective in retaining

students across 3 participating universities, demographic groups and scholarship products.

2.Success rates were variable but scholarships reduced stress and boosted recipients’ morale (survey data).


OVERALL FINDINGS3. Differences in scholarship design mattered, including value, duration and selection criteria

4. Selection criteria are an important variable in the relationships between scholarship type and student outcomes, reflecting institutional priority groups, especially ATAR/prior academic achievement

5. Scholarships help overcome financial disadvantage but not life complexity

6. The value of scholarships goes beyond the financial and includes time to focus on study, psychological lift, realisation of previously latent potential

7. Targeted scholarships are strategic support mechanisms, not ‘acts of faith’


RECOMMENDATIONS (PRACTITIONERS)1.Design simple scholarship programs with high

volume products for effective support, process efficiency and meaningful data.

2.A multi-factor assessment for scholarship eligibility is better than single-factor (e.g. include Centrelink status, existing financial support, first in family, parent/carer).


RECOMMENDATIONS (POLICY MAKERS)1. Institutional income support should be part

of a holistic support system to attract, retain and graduate ‘equity’ students.

2. Consistent, predictable and appropriate Commonwealth income support is needed.

3. Financial support should be grant-based, not loans.


FURTHER RESEARCH?1. Longitudinal study of trends identified in this study.

2. Statistical modelling of observed relationships between scholarships and equity student retention and success.

3. Relationship between recipient characteristics and student outcomes.

4. Recruitment effect of equity scholarships (not strong in this study’s data).


LAST WORDS …Deakin: “I’m so thankful to have been given this opportunity, if I did not receive this scholarship I truly believe I wouldn’t be where I am today, it motivated me to work my hardest as well as allowed me to be less focused on finances, and my GPA has improved trimester by trimester ever since, thank you …!”

QUT: “It is a wonderful initiative and makes things from a maybe to a certainty, it also gives a person in a low socio-economic situation a hand up not a hand-out this again sustains the self-worth and the self-esteem and helps a person to have a dream become a reality.”

Sydney: “They are so important to help students with financial difficulties who have significant academic potential.”


QUESTIONS/COMMENTS?