Once they got a degree, disadvantaged and advantaged Australian students did roughy equally as well -- after a slow start

The report below uses what must be the latest euphemism for "disadvantaged"  -- "Equity".  So if you start out unequal, you are an "equity" person! The logic quite escapes me despite my many years of dealing with political correctness.  But you need to know that abuse of language  to understand the report below.

They find that most people from an unpromising background (Aborigines and the disabled excepted) do roughly as well in jobs and income after they have graduated.  But that is only true if you look at the groups around seven years after graduation.  The "equity" students do catch up to the others but not initially.

The authors appear to think that the roughly equal long term outcomes for advantaged and disadvantaged students show that a university education is effective in overcoming inital disadvantages that people suffer. 

But it doesn't.  It simply shows that the selection criteria used to govern entry to university do a good job. You get into university on ability, regardless of your "equity" status.  Putting it another way, the "equity" students who get into university are a specially selected subset of the "equity" population, so how well they do does not reflect the prospects  "equity" people in general


Beyond graduation: long-term socioeconomic outcomes amongst equity students

Wojtek Tomaszewski et al.

Executive Summary

This report aimed to address significant gaps in scientific knowledge about the trajectories of post-graduation outcomes of students from equity groups by examining the following research questions:

Do equity graduates reap the benefits of university education to the same extent as non-equity graduates over the short and long run?

What are the differences in outcomes between graduates from different equity groups?

What are the specific outcome domains (e.g. labour market, social capital, wellbeing) where equity group graduates perform particularly well or particularly poorly?

To answer these research questions, the study utilised robust statistical methodologies to analyse high-quality, nationally representative longitudinal data from the ABS Census of Population and Housing (the Census) and the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey. Both sets of analyses covered five population-based equity groups:

* low socioeconomic status (low SES)
* non-English-speaking background (NESB)
* residents in regional/remote areas
* Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders (Indigenous)
* students with disability.

Analysis of the Census data focused on the labour market outcomes and provided robust evidence over a short to medium time period. The Census analyses were complemented by innovative analysis of the HILDA Survey, which enabled us to document long-term trajectories across a broader set of socioeconomic outcomes (for example, health, subjective wellbeing and social capital) that go beyond the standard labour market indicators investigated by previous studies in this area.

The analysis of the longitudinal Census data suggested that there exist relatively small but significant differences between graduates from some of the equity groups and their non-equity counterparts in relation to certain labour market outcomes.

Key findings from these analyses included:

a lower likelihood of low SES and NESB graduates to be in employment, to be employed in a managerial or professional occupation, and to have a high personal income if in full-time employment

a lower likelihood of graduates with disability to be employed.
These findings are consistent with the previous evidence from the limited body of other Australian studies in this area, while arguably offering more robust evidence being based on a high-quality and authoritative data source. Furthermore, while the Census analyses have a relatively short time horizon, covering up to five years post-graduation, this analysis went considerably beyond the four- to six-month after graduation horizon of the Graduate Outcomes Survey (GOS), which has been typically used to report employment outcomes for university graduates in Australia.

The HILDA analyses further extended the time horizon covered, capturing outcomes up to 15 years post-graduation. They also focused on a different set of outcomes, covering health and wellbeing indicators, as well as a set of subjective measures related to employment and financial circumstances. This makes it the first study in Australia to investigate such outcomes in relation to post-university outcomes of equity graduates.

Overall, the HILDA analyses suggested that for most of the outcomes investigated in this report, the trajectories of equity and non-equity graduates moved in similar directions, and at a comparable pace, after the attainment of undergraduate university qualifications. This resulted in lack of differences or a convergence in outcomes over a longer time horizon. However, while rarely statistically significant, there appeared to be some evidence that equity graduates generally reported inferior outcomes compared with non-equity graduates, at least in the first few years after graduation. This pattern appeared to be most pronounced for indicators related to subjective assessment of financial prosperity and job security but also social support.

Although the differences between equity and non-equity graduates were often not statistically significant, or converged over time, there were two notable exceptions to this pattern: students of an Indigenous background, and students with disability, both of which reported significantly inferior outcomes compared with their non-equity counterparts, particularly in terms of physical and mental health, and subjective wellbeing as captured by life satisfaction. While based on small samples, and arguably reflecting a broader underlying disadvantage for these two equity groups, these findings highlight that this kind of disadvantage is not easily alleviated through the completion of a university degree alone, but also requires a concerted policy effort within and beyond the higher education sector. For the other equity groups, the trajectories of equity and non-equity graduates appeared to converge over a longer-run so that any initial differences disappear after seven to eight years post-graduation. However, arguably more could be done to prevent this seven- or eight-year-long catch up and give an equal start to all university graduates, regardless of their background.

SOURCE  






How good is ScoMo? Popularity for the Coalition SURGES as PM enjoys post-election boost following tax cuts and help for drought-stricken farmers

Scott Morrison is squaring for a fight against union thugs as the Government's popularity surges ahead following the federal election.

The coalition's primary vote has increased 2.6 per cent since its May victory to 44 per cent, according to the post-election Newspoll published by The Australian.

Mr Morrison has also seen the best results for a prime minister since 2016, with approval ratings shooting beyond 50 per cent for the first time in four years.

The boost in popularity comes as the Government delivers on its tax-cut promise, which saw millions of Australians receive up to $1,080 in relief when they lodged their tax returns this year.

Mr Morrison's continued support for drought-stricken farmers has also been tipped as a key factor in the surge.

The Government now leads Labor 53 per cent to 47 per cent on a two-party preferred vote.

And with four sitting days left until the long winter break, the prime minister wants to pass laws making it easier to kick rogue officials out of the union movement.

Mr Morrison also wants more power to de-register misbehaving unions and put checks on union mergers.

He has seized on John Setka's refusal to step down from the Victorian construction union as apparent proof the crackdown is needed.

This may be enough to clinch crucial Senate crossbench support for his union-busting legislation but Labor claims the industrial relations laws expose the prime minister's deep-seated 'hatred' for unions in general.

The opposition will this week try to launch an inquiry into meetings between Energy Minister Angus Taylor and environmental officials about endangered grasslands.

Labor is pursuing the cabinet minister over his interest in a family company linked to an investigation into alleged illegal land clearing.

But Mr Taylor says his interests have been widely declared and has accused the opposition of waging a 'grubby smear campaign'.

The government has so far managed to fend off an investigation. But key crossbench senator Rex Patrick has flipped his position, and is now willing to back an inquiry.

Meanwhile, Mr Morrison heads Labor leader Anthony Albanese as preferred prime minister 48 per cent to 31 per cent, according to Newspoll, while Labor's primary vote remains largely unchanged at 33 per cent.

The findings come after many pollsters took a hiatus following the May election result which they failed to predict across the board.

SOURCE  





Labor smashes the Coalition over energy bills as figures show power prices have surged by 158% since 2015

They would have been even higher under Labor

Labor is going on the attack over climbing power prices, as it tries to maintain pressure on federal Energy Minister Angus Taylor.

Mr Taylor is already under fire over controversial meetings about endangered grasslands, and for suggesting the federal government had an open mind to nuclear power generation.

Now, Labor has seized on figures showing average wholesale power prices have increased by 158 per cent across the national energy market since 2015.

The opposition is renewing calls for Mr Taylor to exhume the National Energy Guarantee, which was supposed to save households $550 each year.

'Australian households and businesses have been punished by this divided government with rising power bills,' Labor's energy spokesman Mark Butler said on Monday.

'Angus Taylor's one KPI was to reduce power prices, but instead they have continued to go up, and up and up.'

Mr Taylor has steadfastly refused to revive the NEG, instead pursuing other initiatives aimed at reducing power costs.

Labor is also continuing to push for a formal inquiry into meetings between Mr Taylor and environmental officials about endangered grasslands.

The opposition is pursuing the cabinet minister over his interest in a family company, Jam Land Pty Ltd, linked to an investigation into alleged illegal land clearing.

Its pursuit centres on 2017 meetings with environment department officials and the office of then-environment minister Josh Frydenberg to discuss the grasslands' listing as endangered.

The meetings were held while investigations were under way into the alleged poisoning of 30 hectares that contained the grassland on a NSW property Jam Land Pty Ltd owned.

Labor is concerned is the minister didn't properly disclose his interest in the company, and wants to know whether he sought to influence the endangered status of the species.

SOURCE  






Bangladesh wants Australia's coal for new power stations

Bangladesh is urging Australia to take advantage of an "enormous opportunity" to export coal and liquefied natural gas to the developing country, which is experiencing surging demand for the fossil fuels.

The country of about 165 million people has a slew of coal-fired power stations coming online over the next five years and will be importing about 45 million tonnes of coal by 2025, worth a predicted $4 billion to $5 billion annually.

"There is enormous opportunity for export of Australian coal and LNG to Bangladesh given Bangladesh's sustained energy demand," the Bangladesh high commissioner to Australia, Sufiur Rahman, said on Monday. "If these are added to the traditional traded items, Bangladesh could emerge as a major trading partner of Australia soon."

Mr Rahman called for a greater policy focus from the Australian government on the export opportunity and stronger private sector relationships to facilitate the trade.

According to figures provided by the Bangladeshi high commission, about 40 million tonnes of the country's predicted demand in 2025 will be for thermal coal while 5 million will be coking coal, used in steel production.

Bangladesh currently sources the bulk of its coal from Indonesia, South Africa and India but Australia is seen as a supplier of a high-quality, efficient product.

The Bangladeshi market could present a valuable opportunity for the coal industry as exports to China falter. The Chinese government has been subjecting Australian coal to tighter import restrictions, with some analysts fearing political tensions between Beijing and Canberra are to blame.

Australia's coal exports were worth almost $70 billion in 2018-19, with Japan, China and South Korea the major destinations.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here