In the article of Durkheim (1950), the author imposes upon himself his duties and obligations as a good citizen of society on the basis of the laws, moral rules and public conscience. Although he is fully aware of his responsibilities to his community, he argued that no law should restrict the guaranteed rights of the people and no violent means should be used to exercise control over the citizens. In the article of Mills (1959), the author stated that personal issues occur when an individual interacts with other people. These issues refer to insecurities within himself that occurs during socialization which may or may not be recognized by such individual. These issues deal with areas of concern that go beyond the community and extend to his private life. Jencks and Riesman (1968) stated that the only way to achieve upward mobility in society is by acquiring higher learning. The study has shown that there is a strong correlation between higher education and social class. By completing higher education will not only provide jobs, but opens an access to the upper-middle social strata of equal opportunities.
James (2007) cites equity, quality and efficiency as the three essential measures to achieve and successful higher education system. This principle has been recognized globally and has promoted social justice with the hope of becoming a better society. Equity enables the qualified students to go to university and acquire higher learning. Equity removes all barriers that will prohibit access to universities. At the same time, the selection of the qualified students shall be based on academic merit, as one of the prerequisites. It assures the students that they are given equal opportunities regardless of race, gender, age, religion, social class or ethnicity (James, 2007). With this mantra, all the deserving students are given the chance to shine and hone their talents and skills in higher education.
The advancement of higher education even in developing nations remain to be struggling due to factors such as minority, gender and more importantly the low socio-economic status (SES) of the students (James, 2007). It is the social status of a person which will determine if he or she has the capacity to attain higher education because it will require financial burden. This is a common practice among developing countries since those youth who live in poverty have slimmer opportunity to gain access to higher education. This will result to ineligibility to apply for better jobs which offer greater compensation for lack of the required academic background demanded by such position. Hence, personal and career advancement is limited only to those who are able to gain entry to higher education. This usually happens for those people who are marginalized and under-represented who come from families with low socio-economic standing. This limits the opportunity to excel in life because competitive entry shall be based on the academic achievement of each individual.
In the article of James (2007, p.3), he stated that in England and in America, the access to higher education for the people who come from low socio-economic strata reduced due to the effects of the steep tuition fees and regulated entrance exams. The public and private American universities usually favor those who belong to the highly elite class since admission shall be based on the ability of the students to finance the cost of the courses being offered. The rising inequality in the U.S. education system had been experienced for several decades even if there had been expanded efforts to accommodate the underprivileged students by giving financial assistance and outreach programs. Colleges and universities in the U.S. remain to be selective because of the fact that access to higher education is dependent on the socioeconomic strata of the students (James, 2007). In order to resolve such problem, many countries all over the world established their own equity policies by removal of perceived barriers, providing scholarships to pay the costs and living expenses, giving compensatory admission for those students who possess lower levels of school achievement and helping students who come from minority groups to gain entry to the college programs (James, 2007). However, some of these affirmative actions on the part of the international academic communities have been criticized on the basis of admitting students with lower levels of educational achievement rob the opportunity that should belong to more commendable students. In the case of Australian universities, it had implemented the Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) as a powerful equity measure to finance the education of deserving students who have disabilities, minority groups and women. These groups used to be under-represented but had now earned benefit from the expansion of higher education in Australia, particularly in the case of middle-class women (James, 2007). However, there are still affected students who live in rural and far-flung areas and those who have low socio-economic backgrounds who have not taken advantage of the equity policy implemented in Australia for the past 15 years. In the case of the University of Melbourne had created its own equity policies to provide the underprivileged students gain entry in their university. However, this had been disapproved by some people due to declining standards of the university which may result to failure to achieve academic excellence.
James (2007) suggested ways on how to cure the imbalances taking place in Australian higher education that may also inspire other universities in the world. Some of his recommendations include creating a policy that will understand the causes and factors underlying underrepresentation. Although providing scholarships and financial assistance may remove the barriers to gain access to higher education, they remain only a part of the solution. Hence, the socio-economic education disadvantage and the concept of “deserving poor” students should be removed and look at the problem by taking into account the multitude of causal factors (James, 2007). In addition, it is imperative to enhance the definition and ways on measuring the socio-economic status of those who wish to avail of the education program. The problem usually lies on the method in determining the prospective students and to distinguish the patterns of educational disadvantage of each of the underprivileged groups applying for the program. Some of the considerations that have to be taken are the income levels, the occupation of the students’ parents and the educational levels of the students (James, 2007). Another way to improve the system is by setting the targets and to provide more incentives for the universities that implement their own equity policies. It is best to select the students through the mature-age entry process because this creates a personal assessment of the students’ potential to excel in the chosen course.
References:
Durkheim, E., 1950. “What is a Social Fact” excerpt from The Rules of Sociological Method
Glencoe: Free Press.
James, R., 2007. “Social Equity in a mass, globalised higher education environment: the
Unresolved issue of widening access to university”. Dean’s Lecture Series (18th
September) Centre for Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne.
Jencks, C. and Riesman, D., 1968. The Academic Revolution. New York: Doubleday.
Mills, C.W., 1959. The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford University Press.
