opening page ornament

The Australian Centre for Student Equity and Success acknowledges Indigenous peoples across Australia as the Traditional Owners of the lands on which the nation’s campuses are situated. With a history spanning more than 60,000 years as the original educators, Indigenous peoples hold a unique place in our nation. We recognise the importance of their knowledge and culture, and reflect the principles of participation, equity, and cultural respect in our work. We pay our respects to Elders past, present, and future, and consider it an honour to learn from our Indigenous colleagues, partners, and friends.

Enter website
Back to Publications
You are reading: Mode of attendance in Australian higher education from 2021 to 2023

The ACSES Data Insights Series

The Australian Centre for Student Equity and Success (ACSES) is an evidence-based research and public policy centre based at Curtin University and funded by the Australian Government Department of Education (the Department). ACSES is committed to providing the higher education sector with tangible proof of what works to improve the quality and impact of student equity practices in higher education.

The ACSES Data Insights Series reports on equity student participation and outcomes in Australian higher education. It focuses on trends among identified equity groups in domestic undergraduate enrolments in Australia, including, but not limited to:

  • Low socio-economic status (SES) students
  • Students with Disability
  • First Nations (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) Australian students
  • Regional students
  • Remote students

How to access the full report

The report is displayed here in full text and is also available for download in MS Word [3 MB] and PDF [5 MB] format.

Data Explanatory Notes

All student data reported in this document are sourced from customised data requests to the Australian Government Department of Education[1] and the Social Research Centre[2]. Data on enrolment shares are taken from the Department’s TCSI data collection, and data on student experience are taken from the Quality Indicators for Learning and Teaching (QILT) Student Experience Survey.

In preparing this report:

  • Mode of attendance is defined as either external (off-campus, online), internal (on-campus, classroom based), and multi-modal (a mix of external and internal study).[3]
  • For the purposes of aggregation and presentation of results, cell counts of less than 5 for enrolment shares were replaced with the value “2”.
  • Some longitudinal analysis is provided, but the focus is on the most recent data available, which is for 2023.
  • Analysis includes both Table A and Table B universities as defined under the Higher Education Support Act 2003[4].
  • The identification of students from low SES, regional, and remote backgrounds is based on their first address.
  • “Equity students” refers to students who belong to at least one of the key equity groups presented in this report, namely, students with disability, First Nations Australian students, and students from low SES, regional, and remote areas[5].
  • “Non-equity students” refers to students who do not belong to any of the key equity groups described above.

Mode of attendance in Australian higher education

  • In Australian higher education, students engage in study through one of three modes of attendance:
    • Internal – where learning occurs on campus in traditional classroom or face-to-face settings.
    • External – also referred to as off-campus or online learning, where students complete their studies remotely.
    • Multi-modal – a hybrid approach that combines elements of both internal and external study, offering students a mix of in-person and online learning experiences.
  • External study offers significant flexibility, allowing students to study from any location and manage competing demands, such as employment or caring responsibilities.
  • Students from equity groups are more likely to enrol in external (off-campus) study, likely due to its flexibility and accessibility[6]. However, there are notable challenges associated with external study, such as lower retention rates, reduced engagement with peers, limited access to campus-based support services, and a greater risk of social and academic isolation[7].
  • The availability and uptake of external study options vary considerably across universities. While some universities offer limited external attendance options, others offer extensive online offerings, often in partnership with third-party providers, such as Open Universities Australia (OUA) or Online Education Services (OES).
  • During the COVID-19 pandemic, almost all Australian higher education courses shifted temporarily to online delivery.
  • In this report, we present the mode of attendance of domestic undergraduate students over the past three years, covering the period during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Mode of attendance for all undergraduate domestic students has been relatively stable

From 2021 to 2023, internal enrolment shares increased from 49.3% to 50.2%, external enrolment increased from 22.3% to 23.1%, and multi-modal enrolment decreased from 28.4% to 26.8%.

Figure 1: Mode of attendance of domestic undergraduate students between 2021 and 2023 enrolled at Table A and B universities.

Figure 1: Mode of attendance of domestic undergraduate students between 2021 and 2023 enrolled at Table A and B universities. Over the three years, internal enrolment holds the greatest share of enrolment (around 50%), followed by multi-modal enrolment (around 27%) and then external enrolment (around 23%).

Lower internal enrolment shares for equity students

Between 2021 and 2023, the internal enrolment shares for all student equity groups were lower than the internal enrolment shares for all students. Students with disability had the highest level of internal enrolments (which increased from 2022 to 2023), while students from regional and remote areas had the lowest internal enrolment shares.

Figure 2: Internal enrolment shares for all domestic undergraduate student equity groups between 2021 and 2023 at Table A and B universities.

Figure 2: Internal enrolment shares for all domestic undergraduate student equity groups between 2021 and 2023 at Table A and B universities. Overall, student equity groups had lower internal enrolment shares than all students. Out of the student equity groups, students with disability had the highest internal enrolment share (over 50%) while regional and remote students had the lowest internal enrolment shares (around 37%). Low SES students were approximately 42%, while First Nations Australian students were approximately 40%. There was a sharp increase in internal enrolment for all students and students with disability in 2023, increasing by about 5 percentage points.

Higher external enrolment shares for equity students

Over the past three years, all equity groups had greater external (off-campus) student enrolments compared to all students. Among the equity groups, First Nations Australian students and students from regional and remote areas had the highest external enrolment, while students with disability had the lowest levels of external enrolment.

Figure 3: External (off-campus) enrolment shares for equity groups between 2021 and 2023 at Table A and B universities.

Figure 3: External (off-campus) enrolment shares for equity groups between 2021 and 2023 at Table A and B universities. Student equity groups overall had a higher external enrolment rate than all students. Students from regional and remote areas as well as First Nations Australian students had the highest external enrolment share at approximately 32%. Students with disability and all students had the lowest external enrolment at approximately 20%. Low SES students were in the middle at approximately 30%.

Similar multi-modal enrolment shares for equity students

Multi-modal student enrolment shares were stable over the past three years, with minimal differences between equity student groups. Students with disability showed the largest decrease from 29.2% in 2021 to 25.9% in 2023.

Figure 4: Multi-modal enrolment shares for equity groups between 2021 to 2023 at Table A and B universities.

Figure 4: Multi-modal enrolment shares for equity groups between 2021 to 2023 at Table A and B universities. Multi-modal enrolment is extremely similar over the different student equity groups, with students from regional and remote areas having the highest multi-modal enrolment. Shares for all groups were al between 25% and 31%.

Positive correlation between participation shares and external enrolment shares of First Nations Australian students

Figure 5: Relationship between institutional participation shares and external student enrolment shares for First Nations Australian students at Table A and B universities.

Figure 5: Relationship between institutional participation shares and external student enrolment shares for First Nations Australian students at Table A and B universities. There is a moderately strong positive correlation of 0.45 between the participation shares of First Nations Australian students and the external enrolment share of First Nations Australian students, with many institutions sitting at approximately a external enrolment share of 15% and a participation share between 0 and 3%.

No correlation between participation shares and external enrolment shares of students with disability

Figure 6: Relationship between institutional participation shares and external student enrolment shares for students with disability at Table A and Table B universities.

Figure 6: Relationship between institutional participation shares and external student enrolment shares for students with disability at Table A and Table B universities. Graph shows a random scatter of points, and It is clear that there is no correlation between the participation shares and external enrolment shares of students with disability, resulting in a correlation coefficient of 0.02.

Positive correlation between participation shares and external enrolment shares of students from low SES areas

Figure 7: Relationship between institutional participation shares and external student enrolment shares for students from low SES areas at Table A and B universities.

Figure 7: Relationship between institutional participation shares and external student enrolment shares for students from low SES areas at Table A and B universities. There is a moderately strong positive correlation between participation share and external student enrolment rate of students from low SES areas with a correlation coefficient of 0.56.

Positive correlation between participation share and external enrolment share of students from regional and remote areas

Figure 8: Relationship between institutional participation rate and external student enrolment for regional and remote students at Table A and B universities.

Figure 8: Relationship between institutional participation rate and external student enrolment for regional and remote students at Table A and B universities. There is a positive correlation between the participation share and external enrolment share of students from regional and remote areas with a correlation coefficient of 0.44.

All Group of Eight universities had very low external enrolment shares

Figure 9: External student enrolment for each equity group within the Group of Eight universities. The black cross and black line represent the external enrolment share for all students within the university, and the equity group shares are presented as coloured. shapes.

Figure 9: External student enrolment for each equity group within the Group of Eight universities. The black cross and black line represent the external enrolment share for all students within the university, and the equity group shares are presented as coloured shapes. All institutions in the Group of Eight had extremely low external enrolment shares in 2023, where all student equity groups of all institutions have an external enrolment share below 12%.

Australian Technology Network universities showed substantial variation in external enrolment shares across institutions, with all equity groups generally having higher external enrolment

Figure 10: External enrolment shares for each equity group within the Australian Technology Network universities. The black cross and black line represent the external enrolment share for all students within the university, and the equity group shares are presented as coloured shapes.

Figure 10: External enrolment shares for each equity group within the Australian Technology Network universities. The black cross and black line represent the external enrolment share for all students within the university, and the equity group shares are presented as coloured shapes. There is significant variation in institutional external enrolment. Curtin, Deakin and UniSA have higher external enrolments than the others. Student equity groups had higher external enrolment shares than 'all students'. Specifically, First Nations Australian and regional and remote students had higher external enrolment shares than the other student equity groups.

Innovative Research Universities had similar levels of external enrolment, with equity groups having higher external enrolment

Figure 11: External enrolment shares for each equity group within the Innovative Research Universities. The black cross and black line represent the external enrolment share for all students within the university, and the equity group shares are presented as coloured shapes.

Figure 11: External enrolment shares for each equity group within the Innovative Research Universities. The black cross and black line represent the external enrolment share for all students within the university, and the equity group shares are presented as coloured shapes. Institutions generally had similar external enrolment shares in the Innovative Research Universities, apart from University of Canberra which was essentially 0. For all other universities, student equity groups generally had greater external enrolment shares when compared to all students.

Within the Regional University Network, there was substantial variation in external enrolment shares across universities

Figure 12: External enrolment shares for each equity group within the Regional University Network. The black cross and black line represent the external enrolment share for all students within the university, and the equity group shares are presented as coloured shapes.

Figure 12: External enrolment shares for each equity group within the Regional University Network. The black cross and black line represent the external enrolment share for all students within the university, and the equity group shares are presented as coloured shapes. There was substantial variation across the institutions in the RUN. Overall, all students tended to be the middle of the student equity group external enrolment rate. Across the RUN institutions, First Nations Australian students had the highest external enrolment rate.

Across the non-aligned universities, there was large variation in external enrolment shares

Figure 13: External enrolment shares for each equity group for non-aligned institutions. The black cross and black line represent the external enrolment share for all students within the university, and the equity group shares are presented as coloured shapes.

Figure 13: External enrolment shares for each equity group for non-aligned institutions. The black cross and black line represent the external enrolment share for all students within the university, and the equity group shares are presented as coloured shapes. Across non-aligned and Table B universities, there was a great amount of variation of external enrolment rates, where some institutions had no external enrolment (i.e. ACU, Bond, UNDA, Wollongong), while Torrens had 75% external enrolment. Students from equity groups generally had higher shares of external enrolment, but there was no clear pattern for specific equity groups.

Lower negative impact of finances on study for equity students studying externally

Figure 14: Share of students who stated that their financial circumstances have negatively affected their study, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023.

Figure 14: Share of students who stated that their financial circumstances have negatively affected their study, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023. Equity students studying externally reported a lower negative financial impact on study (about 1 to 6 percentage points lower), except for students with disability (3 percentage points higher).

Negative impact of living arrangements on study varies across equity students studying externally

Figure 15: Share of students who stated that their living arrangements have negatively affected their study, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023.

Figure 15: Share of students who stated that their living arrangements have negatively affected their study, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023. There was some variation between the equity groups. First Nations Australian students, students with disability and remote students had a greater share of external students report a negative impact of living arrangements on study, whereas low SES students and regional students had a smaller share of external students report a negative impact of living arrangements on study.

Negative impact of paid work on study is greater for all students studying externally

Figure 16: Share of students who stated that their paid work had negatively affected their study, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023.

Figure 16: Share of students who stated that their paid work had negatively affected their study, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023. Across all student equity groups, the negative impact of paid work arrangements on study is greater for students studying externally, with 40% of external students reporting their paid work negatively affected their study and approximately 50% of internal/multi-modal students reporting the negative impact of paid work on their study.

Lower sense of belonging for all students studying externally

Figure 17: Share of students who stated they have a sense of belonging to their institution, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023.

Figure 17: Share of students who stated they have a sense of belonging to their institution, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023. There was a reported lower sense of belonging for all students studying externally, ranging from about 3 to 6 percentage points lower than internal/multi-modal students.

Share of students who considered leaving their institution varies across equity students studying externally

Figure 18: Share of students who stated they seriously considered leaving their institution, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023.

Figure 18: Share of students who stated they seriously considered leaving their institution, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023. The share of students who stated they considered leaving varied across equity groups. The largest difference was students with disability, where external students were about 2.5 percentage points more likely to consider leaving compared to internal/multi-modal students.

Slightly lower satisfaction with skills development for all students studying externally

Figure 19: Share of students who stated they were satisfied with skills development, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023.

Figure 19: Share of students who stated they were satisfied with skills development, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023. While the share of satisfaction is quite similar between internal/multi-modal and external students, all equity groups show a greater share of internal/multi-modal students stating they were satisfied with skills development. Across all equity groups, a share of approximately 81% of internal/multi-modal students were satisfied with skills development compared to the approximate share of 79% for external students.

Substantially lower satisfaction with peer engagement for all students studying externally

Figure 20: Share of students who stated they were satisfied with peer engagement, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023.

Figure 20: Share of students who stated they were satisfied with peer engagement, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023. There was considerably lower satisfaction with peer engagement reported by external students. For all equity groups, approximately 20% of external students reported satisfaction with peer engagement, whereas approximately 60% of internal/multi-modal students reported satisfaction with peer engagement.

Lower share of students studying externally feel free to express their views

Figure 21: Share of students who stated they were free to express their views, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023.

Figure 21: Share of students who stated they were free to express their views, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023. Across all equity groups, external students reported a lower share for those feeling free to express their views. Approximately 74% of internal/multi-modal students felt free to express their views, compared to approximately 68% for external students.

Share of students free from discrimination varies across student groups studying externally

Figure 22: Share of students who stated they were free from discrimination, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023.

Figure 22: Share of students who stated they were free from discrimination, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023. While results varied, both internal/multi-modal and external students reported similar shares of being free from discrimination. Overall, external students reported a slightly lower share of being free from discrimination.

Lower share of students studying externally were satisfied with their freedom of expression

Figure 23: Share of students who stated they were satisfied with their freedom of expression, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023.

Figure 23: Share of students who stated they were satisfied with their freedom of expression, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023. A lower share of students studying externally were satisfied with the freedom of expression. Overall, equity students and non-equity students reported very similar shares.

Higher share of students studying externally were satisfied with the quality of their entire educational experience

Figure 24: Share of students who stated they were satisfied with the quality of their entire educational experience, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023.

Figure 24: Share of students who stated they were satisfied with the quality of their entire educational experience, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023. A higher share of students studying externally were satisfied with the quality of the entire educational experience (about 80%) compared to internal/multi-modal students (about 76%).

Higher share of students studying externally were satisfied with the quality of teaching

Figure 25: Share of students who stated they were satisfied with quality of teaching, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023.

Figure 25: Share of students who stated they were satisfied with quality of teaching, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023. Across all equity groups, a slightly higher share of external students were satisfied with the quality of teaching at their institution.

Share of students satisfied with learning resources varies across student groups studying externally

Figure 26: Share of students who stated they were satisfied with learning resources, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023.

Figure 26: Share of students who stated they were satisfied with learning resources, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023. The equity groups reported very similar satisfaction with learning resources between internal/multi-modal and external students.

Higher share of students studying externally were satisfied with student support and services

Figure 27: Share of students who stated they were satisfied with student support and services, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023.

Figure 27: Share of students who stated they were satisfied with student support and services, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023. For all equity groups, a higher share of students studying externally were satisfied with their institution's student support and services. The largest difference was for students with disability, where 72.3% of external students were satisfied, compared to 65.3% of internal/multi-modal students.

Slightly higher share of students studying externally were satisfied with teaching quality and engagement

Figure 28: Share of students who stated they were satisfied with teaching quality and engagement, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023.

Figure 28: Share of students who stated they were satisfied with teaching quality and engagement, QILT Student Experience Survey, 2023. Across all student equity groups, a slightly greater share of students (about 1 percentage point) showed satisfaction for teaching quality and engagement.

 

Acknowledgements

This report was prepared by the Data Program of the Australian Centre for Student Equity and Success (ACSES) at Curtin University.

The authors would like to acknowledge the staff at ACSES for their comments and assistance in the production of this publication and extend thanks to the Australian Government Department of Education for the provision of student equity data.

The report may be cited as: ACSES Data Program. (2025). Mode of attendance in Australian higher education from 2021 to 2023. Australian Centre for Student Equity and Success (ACSES), Perth: Curtin University.

This report focuses on changes in mode of attendance among domestic undergraduate students over the past three years, with a focus on the 2023 period. For further information on retention, participation, success, six- and nine-year cohort completion — please see the ACSES Student Equity Data Interactive Tool.

Copyright ownership of this material resides with Curtin University.

ISBN – 978-0-6454877-7-0

[1] Australian Government Department of Education (2024). Equity Group Statistics, Private Request (October 2024). Canberra: Department of Education.

[2] Social Research Centre (2025). Equity Group Statistics, Private Request (April 2025).

[3] https://www.tcsisupport.gov.au/element/329

[4] https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2004A01234/latest/downloads

[5] https://www.acses.edu.au/publication/student-equity-data-guide-defining-equity-groups/

[6] Stone, C. (2022). 38(6). From the margins to the mainstream: The online learning rethink and its implications for enhancing student equity.  Australasian Journal of Educational Technology Stone, C. (2022). From the margins to the mainstream: The online learning rethink and its implications for enhancing student equity. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 38(6), 151–165. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.8136

[7] O’Shea, S., May, J., Stone, C., Delahunty, J. (2024). The Online Student Experience: New Challenges for Engagement and Support. In: First-in-Family Students, University Experience and Family Life. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-34451-0_6

Download the full report:
ACSES Quote icon
ACSES-Data-Insights-Mode-of-Attendance-Sep25.pdf
5 MB
ACSES Quote icon
ACSES-Data-Insights-Mode-of-Attendance-Sep25.docx
3 MB
Resources Data Insight Series
Download the full report
Mode of attendance in Australian higher education from 2021 to 2023
ACSES, 2025
Featured publications
Indigenous university pathways, WIL and the strengthening of aspirations: Robbie’s journey as a learner
Garth Stahl, Sarah McDonald, Jennifer Stokes​ , 2023
A case study documenting the transition of one Indigenous student, Robbie, from an underprivileged school located in the Western suburbs of Sydney to an urban Australian university.
Indigenous
Journal articles
Equity Policy Options: Parity Targets, Final Report
ACSES​ , 2024
This report outlines policy options in relation to parity targets for four priority equity groups in Australian higher education – students from low SES backgrounds, First Nations Australian students, students with disability, and students from regional and remote Australia.
Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander
Disability
Investigating the relationships between First-in-Family status, equity groups, and university access
2025
A Small Grants Research Program final report. The study compared the university enrolment patterns of First-in-Family (FiF) students, defined as students without university-educated parents, with that of non-FiF students.
First in Family
Research Reports
The Intersection of Geography, Topography and Mindset
Susan Webb, Reshmi Lahiri-Roy, Elizabeth Knight, Paul Koshy ​ , 2024
A Nuanced Understanding of Regional, Rural and Remote Students’ Tertiary Participation in Australia.
Equity Practitioners
Regional, rural and remote
More publications
Indigenous university pathways, WIL and the strengthening of aspirations: Robbie’s journey as a learner
A case study documenting the transition of one Indigenous student, Robbie, from an underprivileged school located in the Western suburbs of Sydney to an urban Australian university.
Indigenous
Journal articles
Equity Policy Options: Parity Targets, Final Report
This report outlines policy options in relation to parity targets for four priority equity groups in Australian higher education – students from low SES backgrounds, First Nations Australian students, students with disability, and students from regional and remote Australia.
Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander
Disability
Indigenous
Low SES
Low socioeconomic status
Regional, rural and remote
Regional and remote
Investigating the relationships between First-in-Family status, equity groups, and university access
Tomasz Zając​ , The University of Queensland (UQ)​
A Small Grants Research Program final report. The study compared the university enrolment patterns of First-in-Family (FiF) students, defined as students without university-educated parents, with that of non-FiF students.
First in Family
Research Reports
The Intersection of Geography, Topography and Mindset
A Nuanced Understanding of Regional, Rural and Remote Students’ Tertiary Participation in Australia.
Equity Practitioners
Regional, rural and remote
Regional and remote
Journal articles