Diversity in higher education encompasses aspects such as race, ethnicity, culture, religion, gender, sexual orientation and socio-economic class (Sanger 2020:3). An inclusive learning environment should be created to address all students’ diverse needs. In the African context, the dominance of Eurocentric knowledge systems in curricula marginalises indigenous knowledge and fails to reflect African learners’ experiences (Gwaravanda & Ndofirepi 2021:1,3). Decolonising academic programmes is essential to acknowledge multiple perspectives without trivialising historical injustices (Le Grange 2016:5–6). Although affirmative action policies have improved access for under-represented groups, challenges remain (Coleman & Ndebele 2010:23). Affirmative action alone is insufficient to address the deep-rooted structural inequalities that drive educational disparities (Trujillo et al. 2017:7,18). Recent South African scholarship similarly underscores that transformation cannot be reduced to demographic change but must include epistemic, institutional and cultural shifts in higher education (CHE 2022:12–14). In describing the academic project, Jansen (2018:5) advocates for the importance of open-mindedness, resistance to imposed ideologies and active encouragement of different viewpoints.

University leadership plays a central role in advancing diversity and inclusion by integrating strategic planning, budget allocation and governance structures (Kezar et al. 2008:74,78,85). More diverse leadership teams promote equitable decision-making and enhance institutional performance by bringing varied perspectives to governance and policy development (Ashikali, Groenwald & Kuipers 2021:498,500). At the same time, teaching practices ought to accommodate different learning styles and ensure that all students feel represented in the curriculum (Schuelka 2018:10).

Socio-economic status affects an individual’s likelihood of participating in higher education (Wanti et al. 2022:280). While high-income households are generally in a better financial position to support their children’s education (Kromydas 2017:6), working-class students face significant financial barriers (Ioakimidis & Papakonstantinou 2017:1761). Financial exclusion is compounded by intersecting factors, such as gender, ethnicity, geographic location and language status (Wanti et al. 2022:280). Although financial aid programmes have expanded, many students’ needs remain unmet, and poverty continues to hinder access and success in higher education (Maree 2016:9). The CHE (2020:11) emphasises that financial exclusion intersects with structural inequities in ways that perpetuate racialised patterns of access and success, despite significant expansions in National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) funding.

To improve representation, higher education policies must prioritise clear financial aid information, budgeting skills and pre-entry support to ensure that students understand the costs associated with university education (McCoy et al. 2010:90). Public policy in South Africa has undergone significant changes to reform the higher education system with the expansion of the NSFAS and the introduction of the NSFAS Student Loan Scheme (Department of Higher Education and Training [DHET] 2024). The number of university students receiving NSFAS funding has increased considerably from 179 000 in 2015 to over 504 000 in 2020, representing a growth rate of 181%.

Globally, multilingualism is receiving increased attention in light of the growing number of students who are proficient in multiple languages (Cenoz & Gorter 2010:2). A challenge in multilingual education is to ensure that all student languages are accommodated effectively, which requires a strong institutional commitment to language planning and policy development. Additionally, teaching staff must adopt a more positive attitude towards multilingualism to foster a more inclusive academic environment (Cenoz & Gorter 2010:8–9).

Following a recent amendment to the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, the country now recognises 12 official languages (RSA 1996:section 6). However, language remains a significant barrier to higher education access and success, particularly for students from historically marginalised groups. Burke (2020:201) argues that language challenges extend beyond enrolment, affecting students’ ability to participate fully in tertiary education. Once admitted, many students struggle with language competency, particularly where English serves as the primary medium of instruction (Le Cordeur 2013:5). Student success is hindered when learncers have not mastered the academic language required to express theoretical knowledge (Boughey & McKenna 2021:65). Despite the adoption of multilingualism policies, implementation remains inconsistent (Le Cordeur 2013:12). As DHET (2020:11) argues, language policies are deeply tied to the politics of identity and transformation in South Africa, and their uneven implementation reflects broader structural tensions within the system.

Recruitment in higher education is not a neutral administrative function but a key mechanism through which institutions advance structural transformation and promote social justice, as it determines who gains access to opportunities for economic growth, innovation and societal leadership (Ajani 2024:218; Jansen 2018:1). In higher education, this includes strategic student recruitment, which can be used to ensure greater inclusivity and accessibility. Many tertiary institutions in South Africa have already transformed their recruitment and selection policies to improve access to quality education (Vandeyar 2010:914). Yet, as Jansen (2017:16) points out, recruitment strategies must be critically evaluated in terms of whether they genuinely advance equity or simply reproduce existing patterns of privilege within the sector.

Marketing is an essential part of student recruitment, allowing institutions to share information about the available qualifications and support to align with students’ needs (Bapat & Gankar 2020:1860). Understanding students’ decision-making processes can enhance targeted recruitment efforts (Wiese, Van Heerden & Jordaan 2010:151). Engaging with students from diverse backgrounds offers institutions insight into students’ needs, experiences and challenges, enabling the development of a strong, credible and inclusive institutional message that attracts diverse applicants (Hannan 2021:52).

Rickard et al. (2018:43) highlight the growing need for student-oriented strategies that consider students’ diverse backgrounds, including their education, income generation, family commitments and career aspirations. Jansen (2018:2) laments that ‘the majority of youth now entering university are poor and have weak academic backgrounds’, placing universities under pressure to address both social poverty needs and additional academic support. Badat (2010:29,17,29) also emphasises the importance of quality academic development programmes that support students, particularly those from historically disadvantaged backgrounds. Initiatives such as individualised mentorship, coaching, as well as summer bridging programmes have been shown to enhance academic performance and credit accumulation (United States Department of Education 2016:3).

To help students engage with university structures from the outset and successfully transition to university life, Rickard et al. (2018:48) identify four key areas of support: academic assistance; help with enrolment and admissions-related anxiety; guidance in connecting, courses and learning pathways and assistance in navigating online learning systems and schedules. Both academic and professional support services staff play a crucial role in guiding students through complex university processes (Rickard et al. 2018:41).

Including and empowering marginalised communities plays a crucial part in enhancing agricultural production. Addressing systemic inequalities, particularly those relating to race and gender, is essential (Suttie & Benfica 2016:7–8). Women constitute 43% of the global agricultural workforce (FAO 2011:35), and when given equal access to resources, they often achieve higher crop yields than their male counterparts. Closing the gender gap in farm production and wages could contribute to a 1% increase in global gross domestic product and reduce global food insecurity rates by approximately 2% (FAO 2023:162). To fully realise these benefits, it is essential to understand and address the specific barriers that women in agriculture face. Targeted interventions and policies, particularly those focused on agricultural education and training, can help empower women and foster a more inclusive and productive agricultural sector. In South Africa, agricultural colleges such as EATI are located at the intersection of higher education transformation and rural development. Scholars have argued that higher education must address not only technical skills but also structural inequalities that prevent access and maintain historical patterns of exclusion (Boughey & McKenna 2021:80; Cloete 2015).

Taken together, the literature demonstrates that transformation in higher education must be understood as a multidimensional and systemic process, encompassing demographic change, financial access, language inclusivity, curriculum reform and governance practices. While much has been achieved, South African scholarship warns against fragmented or surface-level approaches, emphasising the need for deeper structural transformation that links higher education to broader societal goals while critically interrogating enduring colonial assumptions about knowledge and institutional purpose (Boughey & McKenna 2021:96; Soudien 2025:4). This study investigates the systemic and contextual factors shaping enrolment decisions in agricultural higher education, thereby contributing to a more nuanced understanding of the barriers that continue to constrain equitable access.

Prospective students who have completed Grade 12 and meet the minimum admission requirements may apply for admission to EATI. The initial screening process identifies all applicants who adhere to the admission criteria (EATI 2017a:6). Because of limited capacity, the selection committee assesses applications on a competitive basis to identify the most promising applicants (EATI 2022:4). Applicants offered placement are notified via email (EATI 2022:12) and are given a specified time within which to respond to secure their place by paying a non-refundable deposit (EATI 2022:12). Failure to do so could result in withdrawal of the offer (EATI 2022:12).

The Elsenburg campus, which is located some 13 km outside Stellenbosch, has limited student accommodation. Students who reside more than 60 km from campus are prioritised for residence placement (EATI 2018:7). Some residence spots are reserved for first-year students as well as returning students who have excelled academically (EATI 2018:7). The EATI makes available a limited number of bursaries each year, while bursary assistance is also available from the national DALRRD. These bursaries primarily support students with financial need (EATI 2017b:2). The EATI and DALRRD bursaries include accommodation in an EATI residence only. The NSFAS-funded students are covered for accommodation in either an EATI residence or NSFAS-accredited private housing (Dauncey n.d.).

Elsenburg Agricultural Training Institute is a multilingual institution that promotes the use of the three official languages of the Western Cape, namely English, Afrikaans and isiXhosa (WCDoA 2016:5). The Institute’s language policy upholds constitutional principles, affording students, lecturers and members of the public their choice-of-language privileges within the scope defined by the Western Cape Provincial Languages Act 13 of 1998 as well as the Western Cape Government’s 2005 Language Policy (WCDoA 2016:4). The default language of instruction is typically English, which serves as the common language of understanding (WCDoA 2016:5). Writing tasks, assignments, tests and examinations are available in English and Afrikaans only.

The Extended Programme supports students who demonstrate potential but do not yet meet the full academic requirements. In the Extended Programme, first-year modules are split over 2 years to ease the transition into tertiary study. Students must pass all year one modules to continue with their studies. The prescribed modules are specifically designed to ease the transition from secondary and tertiary education. Only first-year EATI students may apply. The EATI also offers peer tutorial programmes to help students master complex learning material, as well as independent counselling and advisory services for first-year students (EATI 2017a:9,10,19).

Ethical clearance for this study was obtained from the Social, Behavioural and Education Research Ethics Committee of Stellenbosch University, project number: 28303, on 05 September 2023. In addition, permission was granted by the Head of Department of the WCDoA to use student enrolment data of the EATI for this study. Respondent contact details were kept confidential, and no personal identifiers were collected to ensure participant anonymity.

In 2017, the definition of the student equity target group at EATI was changed from BCI (black, coloured and Indian) applicants to PDIs, which includes all designated groups as well as white females (WCDoA 2018:152). Altogether, 4659 applications were received from the PDI pool between the 2016 and 2022 academic years (Table 1). A total of 1547 applicants were conditionally accepted (Table 3), of whom 509 ultimately registered (Table 4). In comparison, 2630 applications were received from non-PDI applicants for the same period (Table 2). A total of 1094 applicants were conditionally accepted (Table 2), of whom 640 ultimately registered (Table 3). The consistent gap in actual enrolments points to structural barriers that disproportionately affect PDIs, raising questions about institutional culture and broader systemic inequalities.

Figure 2 illustrates applications received from PDIs and non-PDIs, respectively, from 2016 through 2022 and shows an increase in EATI’s programmes. From 2018, applications from PDIs started growing significantly, while non-PDI applications remained constant, perhaps indicating that the latter group had already reached a stable demand for places at EATI. This trend reflects EATI’s growing visibility among PDIs, but it also highlights persistent disparities in translating applications into actual enrolments.

Figure 3 illustrates that conditional acceptances for PDIs increased sharply between 2016 and 2019, coinciding with EATI’s deliberate diversity strategies. However, the subsequent stabilisation suggests that institutional initiatives created entry opportunities but did not fully dismantle barriers that limit successful transition to enrolment.

The number of PDI and non-PDI first-year students who eventually registered for the 2016–2022 academic years is shown in Figure 4. Apart from 2018, the number of registered students remained constant for both groups, with PDI registrations lower than their non-PDI peers. This indicates that admission alone does not ensure access. The persistent drop suggests that the admission process may function more as a symbolic gesture of inclusion than a guarantee of equitable participation. It also raises questions of whether conditional offers are equitably accompanied by the resources and guidance necessary to translate access into enrolment.

Further evaluation of the PDI data revealed that the intake of black, coloured and Indian students specifically (i.e. the PDI pool excluding white females) was considered considerably lower than other groups. Of the 3926 applications from BCI candidates for the 2016 to 2022 academic years, 1085 were accepted, of whom only 352 registered. In comparison, of the 3363 applications from non-BCI candidates (i.e. white males, white females and international students) for the 2016 to 2022 academic years, 1556 were accepted, of whom 797 registered.

A total of 352 (31%) BCI students registered at EATI between 2016 and 2022, while 797 (69%) students from other groups (white males, white females and international students) registered during the same period (see Table 5). Other students include white males, white females and international students. The large gap in enrolment shows that systemic barriers, rather than individual shortcomings, prevent equal participation in higher education. This observation highlights the limited efficacy of equity-focused admissions policies when they are not complemented by strategies addressing student uptake, student retention, financial accessibility and inclusive institutional practices.

Figure 5 illustrates the number of applications, admissions and registrations for BCI and non-BCI students, respectively, from 2016 through 2022.

In terms of gender and racial distribution (Table 6), EATI enrolment rates among white males decreased from 61% in 2016 to 49% in 2018 but substantially recovered to approximately 50% and remained stable from 2019 onwards. Black male enrolments at EATI dropped from 7% in 2016 to 3% in 2019, with a gradual increase seen from 2020. Female student enrolments gradually increased from 21% in 2016 to 30% in 2022. However, male enrolments remain disproportionately higher than female enrolments, with a male-to-female ratio of 70:30. In addition, uptake by Indian students is very low. These figures point to gendered and racialised access patterns, raising questions about how effectively current strategies promote transformation in line with national higher education policy goals.

The EATI has increased access for PDIs through strategies such as the granting of bursaries and the introduction of a new Student Information System (SIS). Yet the secondary analysis shows that these interventions have not sufficiently disrupted entrenched inequalities, particularly for BCI students, suggesting that access without structural change does little to advance genuine transformation. This pattern supports broader findings that admissions alone do not ensure equitable participation (Burke 2020; Jansen 2017) and reflect the systemic impact of affordability constraints noted by Maree (2016) and Wanti et al. (2022). The evidence also complements Reynolds and Moyo’s (2024) observation that financial aid, transport and housing intersect to constrain access for poor and rural students. Although bursaries exist at EATI, their limited reach highlights that bursary-based interventions are insufficient on their own, thereby challenging earlier assumptions (Badat 2010) that financial assistance can secure transformation.

As mentioned, of the 143 complete responses, 91 were from respondents who ended up enrolling at EATI, while 52 were from applicants who ultimately did not enrol. In terms of their demographic profile, female respondents dominated both groups (non-enrolled: 69%; enrolled: 66%). Non-enrolled participants were predominantly black (50%), while enrolled respondents included higher proportions of white (32%) and coloured (27%) students.

For respondents who were admitted to the EATI but opted not to enrol, 29% spoke Afrikaans as a home language, 25% English, 21% Xhosa, 10% Zulu and 15% spoke other languages, which include Ndebele, Southern Sesotho, Northern Sesotho, Tswana, Swati and Tsonga. Among respondents admitted to the EATI who opted to enrol, 42% spoke Afrikaans as a home language, 22% English, 25% Xhosa, 8% Zulu and 3% other languages. This seems to be contrary to EATI’s current language policy, in terms of which the default language of instruction is mainly English. This suggests a tension between policy and practice, where Afrikaans remains dominant despite formal commitments to inclusivity.

Family involvement in agriculture differed significantly between those who enrolled at EATI and those who did not. Non-enrolled respondents reported greater family involvement in agriculture (60%) than those who enrolled (39%). In terms of non-enrolled participants’ education status, 74% went on to pursue tertiary education elsewhere, and 62% were attending college or university at the time. While EATI was the first choice of 74% of enrolled students, only 25% of non-enrolled students preferred the institute. Collectively, these findings suggest that while family involvement in agriculture may provide exposure and familiarity with the sector, it does not automatically translate into enrolment at EATI. Decisions to enrol appear to be influenced by a combination of institutional preferences, perceived programme suitability and broader educational aspirations. Contrary to assumptions in the agricultural education literature that prior exposure facilitates access (Suttie & Benfica 2016), this study shows that systemic and institutional barriers outweigh background familiarity, suggesting that enrolment decisions are shaped more by structural inequalities than by sectoral ties.

The findings from the questionnaire are organised into three themes, namely factors contributing to non-enrolment, factors that support the decision to enrol and suggestions relating to the admissions process at the EATI.