Greater access does not guarantee success: pandemic measures did not break “structural barriers” that “perpetuate” inequalities in higher education
The exceptional measures adopted during the covid-19 pandemic facilitated access to higher education, but did not eliminate existing socioeconomic and educational inequalities, concludes an EDULOG study, think tank for the area of education at the Belmiro de Azevedo Foundation.
Conducting national final exams only for subjects used as entrance exams for higher education, the consideration of only internal assessment for the assessment and completion of secondary education and the adjustment of the structure of exams to mitigate effects of confinement on learning, through the inclusion of optional questions, were some of the changes implemented in that period.
Starting with the analysis of the transition to higher educationthe study released this Friday shows a strong disparity between students on scientific-humanistic and professional courses: 72% of the former were in college one year after finishing high school in the 2021/2022 academic year, while of the seconds were just 22%.
SOPA Images
Among the reasons for this low transition of students from professional education to higher education are low confidence in academic abilities, uncertainty about advantages of a higher education coursepreference for practical skills, strong desire for financial independence and a negative perception of the Portuguese job market.
The data also reveal that the probability of not accessing higher education is greater for beneficiaries of school social action and for those who are the first in the family to do so. On the other hand, students of Portuguese nationality, with parents with higher education, from private schools, with good secondary grades and from scientific-humanistic courses are more likely to proceed to higher education.
In the 2020/2021 academic year, 97,145 students enrolled in initial higher education training courses for the first time in the first year, which represents an increase of 14.05% compared to the previous academic year (85,174), according to the analysis. There was a slight increase the following year, to 97,771 students. “Although a increase in the number of students in higher education Although this may seem like a positive indicator, it does not necessarily imply progress in terms of equity,” says researcher Orlanda Tavares, coordinator of the study, in a statement.
Horacio Villalobos
Abandonment increased in all scientific areas
After entry, the success across different dimensions: retention rates, abandonment, change and completion within the expected time. The study indicates that, in undergraduate and integrated master’s courses, a greater proportion of women, scholarship holders, enrolled in the first option and with at least one of the parents with a diploma is associated with less dropout and more permanence and completion. The presence of a greater proportion of worker-students, students admitted through special competitions and international students tends to increase dropout rates.
In general terms, the 2020/2021 academic year was marked by a decrease in the retention rate in undergraduate and master’s degrees integrated into universities, with a partial recovery occurring in the following year, while in polité institutes cynics the reduction was consistent. During the pandemic, completion rates within the expected time were lower and dropout rates increased in all scientific areas, with emphasis on Education, reaching 14% for students admitted in 2021/2022.
Rafael Marchante
The interviews carried out by the authors of the work with course coordinators made it possible to list factors that contribute to dropout, realizing that they begin even before arriving at college: inadequate scientific and academic preparation, unfavorable socioeconomic context and difficulties in basic skills, from Portuguese and mathematics to digital literacy, are obstacles. Then, during the course, challenges arise such as financial difficulties, high academic demands, outdated expectations and insufficient social and cultural dynamics, especially in the interior of the country.
“The changes in access policies to higher education during Covid-19 failed to increase the transition of students from more vulnerable groups to higher education, nor did they ensure successful conditions for those who entered. Therefore, more is not necessarily better,” concludes Orlanda Tavares. The document even states that the measures left “intact†the “structural barriers that perpetuate educational inequalities†.
Given this portrait, the authors list several recommendations: diversify access routes, promote financial support and social assistance (namely increase and expansion of scholarships), reinforce academic support and pedagogical interventions and encourage social integration and student involvement.
