Australian Journal of Adult Learning - Volume 65 - Number 1 - April 2025

Oct 15, 2026

Upload by Elsa

COVID-19 reshaped higher education while intensifying debates on social equity. This article reintroduces Larsen and Emmett’s typology of social equity discourses and examines how these discourses appear during the pandemic, affecting decisions and the experience of marginalised adult learners. It also considers impacts on educators’ well-being and on tensions among competing, often conflicting, equity narratives, offering a framework for reflection and action to improve post-pandemic teaching.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages18

Reading Time45 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction

Social equity and marginalised students in higher education

Discourses as paradigms and ideologies

Larsen and Emmett typology of social equity discourses

Impact of COVID-19 on equity discourses

Australian Journal of Adult Learning Volume 65, Number 1, April 2025 COVID-19 and social equity in higher education: Applying a typology of social equity discourses to a complex situation Ana Larsen CQUniversity Susan Emmett Federation University &29,'􀀐􀀔􀀜 KDV KDG DQ HQRUPRXV LPSDFW RQ KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ globally and has heralded times of rapid and often confounding change. Academics struggle to maintain their life balance and well-being alongside championing equity in higher education and providing a student-centred pedagogy of care which is much needed in these times. This article reintroduces the typology of social equity discourses as de¿ned by /arsen and (mmett 􀀋􀀕􀀓􀀕􀀔􀀌 and highlights how these discourses arepresent during a pandemic. The typology of social equity discourses provides educators with away to understand the post-pandemic world of higher education, the motivation behind the decisions being made around us, how we might ¿t into this environment and reduce the turmoil caused by competing and conÀicting discourses and best serve the adult learners we strive to educate. The typology is a valuable tool for selfreÀection, understanding and action. %y equipping educators with an understanding of the social equity discourses it is hoped that we can 86 Ana Larsen and Susan Emmett refocus our energy on increasing equity and delivering high quality teaching, equipping our graduates to become critical thinkers and the leaders of tomorrow. Keywords􀀝 &29,'-􀀔􀀜, online learning, social equity, discourse, marginalised students, higher education Introduction There was once talk of returning to normal after the COVID-19 pandemic, but we are beginning to see that this global pandemic will FRQWLQXH WR LPSDFW XV DOO IRU \HDUV WR FRPH 􀀋$ULVWRYQLN HW DO􀀑􀀏 􀀕􀀓􀀕􀀓􀀞 Peters et al., 2020) . Vaccination rates climb and new variants ofthe YLUXV DSSHDU􀀞 WKH RQO\ FRQVWDQW LV FKDQJH DQG XQFHUWDLQW\ ZKLFK OHDGVWR DQ[LHW\􀀑 0XFK KDV EHHQ ZULWWHQ RQ WKH LPSDFW RIWKH SDQGHPLF􀀞 regarding the emergency move to online teaching (Hodges et al., 2020), WKH ¿QDQFLDO LPSDFWV RQ XQLYHUVLWLHV 􀀋3HWHUV HW DO􀀑􀀏 􀀕􀀓􀀕􀀓􀀌 DQG RI FRXUVH how all these factors impact mental health and wellbeing of both VWXGHQWV DQG VWD̆ 􀀋6FKOHVVHOPDQ HW DO􀀑􀀏 􀀕􀀓􀀕􀀓􀀌􀀑 Buried somewhere within all the concerns surrounding the pandemic is a continued concern for social equity in higher education, some would argue a resurgence of calls for equity. Increasing participation among underrepresented social groups has been a focus of policy and practice in economically advanced nations for decades (Bradley et al., 2008) . The social groups targeted vary between countries, but the premise is WKH VDPH􀀞 XQGHUUHSUHVHQWHG JURXSV H[SHULHQFH EDUULHUV WR DFFHVVLQJ DQG participating in higher education (UNESCO, 2021) while governments and universities attempt to correct this inequity. In the Australian context, the targeted equity groups are Indigenous Australians, students with a disability, women in certain areas of study such as Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM), NonEnglish-Speaking background (NESB), low Socio-Economic Status (SES), and regional and remote students (Dawkins, 1988). Collectively these students are referred to as marginalised students in this piece as other terms such as at risk, disadvantaged and underrepresented VWXGHQWV PD\ EH YLHZHG DV GH¿FLW WHUPV􀀑 It is important to understand the discourses, sometimes referred to as paradigms, ideologies or philosophies, surrounding social equity COVID-19 and social equity in higher education: 87 Applying a typology of social equity discourses to a complex situation in higher education. Discourses are broadly characterised by Goodley (2017) as ‘regulated systems of statements, ideas and practices representing particular forms of knowledge that we use to shape the subjective sense ofwho we and others are’(p. 126) . That includes the various motivations for expanding the higher education system 􀀋PDVVL¿FDWLRQ􀀌 DQ

FAQs

What typology of social equity discourses does the article use?

The article reintroduces Larsen and Emmett’s typology, consisting of four discernible discourses: meritocratic, economic, human potential, and social justice.

How does the article connect COVID-19 to social equity in higher education?

It examines how the pandemic influences the visibility and operation of the four equity discourses, shaping motivations behind decisions and the experience of marginalised students and educators.

Why is understanding social equity discourses described as useful for educators?

The typology is presented as a tool for self-reflection and action, helping educators and policymakers recognize differences among discourses and better align personal values with institutional policy.

Oct 15, 2026

Upload by Elsa