After reviewing relevant literature on socio-economic status (SES) and the ways in
which it is used for higher education institutional research and policy, a detailed data
analysis of Victoria University student data was undertaken. Between 10,000 and
15,000 domestic student addresses were 'geocoded' to Australian Bureau of
Statistics (ABS) collection district level. A survey of individual re-enrolling 2001
students that included Western-DETYA (Department of Employment, Training &
Youth Affairs) parental occupation and education data was analysed also. The most
important findings were: (1) The debate for practical reasons tends to focus on area
versus individual measures, but SES is a richer and more complex subject and must
be acknowledged as such. (2) It is apparent that VU's student catchment is on
average of lower SES than the Melbourne average, using various area measures of
SES, including the DETYA-Martin indicators. (3) There is only a very small
difference between average area SES measures at the collection district and the
postcode level. In practical terms this means that the postcode method is adequate,
as well as being cheaper and more efficiently obtained, for analyses at an aggregated
(or average) level. (4) Individual surveys of students do not prima facie add to the
quality of aggregated institution level SES results delivered by area analyses. This
again suggests that the postcode method is best for practical reasons