DEST Issues Paper - December  2004

 

 

Rationalising Responsibility for Higher Education in Australia. (December 20, 2004)

The University of California (UC) consists of nine campuses servicing over 200,000 students. In addition the California State University (CSU) maintains 23 campuses and currently enrols some 410,000 students. The University of California’s missions are designated to be teaching, research and public service, while the primary function of California State University is the provision of undergraduate instruction, applied research and community service. The legislation proclaiming the two systems also stipulates that UC is to provide space for the top 12.5 percent of graduating high school seniors wishing to attend while CSU provides space for the top one-third of graduating high school seniors wishing to attend.

    The third segment of the Californian higher education system consists of the 109 two-year California Community Colleges (overseen by the Colleges' Chancellor) which service some 2.9 million students. They are somewhat similar to Australia's TAFEs; they offer academic and vocational education at the lower division level for both recent high school graduates and those returning to school. They are required to admit any California resident with a high school diploma or the equivalent. On completing the two year course students wishing to attend either UC or CSU who are judged to be of sufficient standard will be accepted to complete a bachelor's degree.

 

    Shortly after the re-election of the Federal Coalition the Minister for Education, Science and Training, Brendan Nelson, announced that he would look into the feasibility of removing full responsibility for the publicly funded universities to the Commonwealth Government. Today Dr Nelson took the first concrete step toward publicly examining the matter by promulgating an 8,900 word "Issues Paper", Rationalising Responsibility for Higher Education in Australia to be followed in February by a more extensive discussion paper.

 

Predicably both the Federal Labor opposition as well as the Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee (AVCC) have met Dr Nelson's initial salvo with scepticism. The Sydney Morning Herald reports, "Labor's acting leader and education spokeswoman Jenny Macklin said the federal government was overlooking the biggest problem facing universities - fees. 'The problem is that the Howard government has forced up fees over the last eight years by on average 100 per cent and, of course, students are about to face another 25 per cent fee hike from next year,' she told ABC radio." Apparently critical issues of decaying universities' infrastructure and reductions in staff quality and numbers don't rate much of a mention by either major party.

 

Then the AVCC's chief executive John Mullarvey told the Herald "The AVCC is not convinced of the merits of a one size fits all approach to higher education. We do not want uniformity; we want and need a diverse university system."

 

Since Dr Nelson has already given strong indications that he views sympathetically "teaching only universities" to blend into the higher education mix, the AVCC comment appears to be somewhat wide of the mark. It mightn't go amiss to remember that the State of California's publicly funded system is tripartite but teaching only "universities" don't form a part.

 

Dr Nelson, in the Preface to the Issues Paper, talks the talk of reason but it should be gauged within the context of the graphic shown below.

PREFACE
As a country of 20 million people, Australia’s future will increasingly rely on ideas, innovation and technology.

    The nation’s universities will play a critically important role in driving that future.
    The only benchmarks that will count increasingly are international ones. Meeting and exceeding the world’s best standards of quality demands the nation’s leaders examine the regulatory arrangements governing our universities.
    This preliminary paper seeks to introduce an informed discussion of the potential benefits and risks of transferring primary legislative responsibility for universities from the states to the commonwealth.

    If this is to ultimately occur it should be the product of consultation. The Australian Government neither can – nor should – coerce other governments in this regard. However, Australia faces different horizons from those of the two previous centuries. As such we have a responsibility to the future to carefully examine the regulatory framework within which Australian universities compete with the rest of the world.

What makes Dr Nelson's approach appear to be tainted is perhaps best shown by a chart provided in the Issues Paper itself.

 

 

Credit DEST

 

By taking over full control of Australia's public universities is the Federal Coalition Government attempting to move toward the ultimate privatisation of the nation's universities? About a third of the way into Dr Nelson's paper he notes and not for the first time:

The thirty nine publicly funded universities and higher education institutions together had total assets of around $30 billion with land and buildings reported to be valued at around $16 billion at the end of 2003. Other physical assets such as property, plant and equipment were around $4 billion and library assets were valued at $2 billion. The sector had net assets of $23 billion and cash and investments of $5.6 billion that accounted for 19% of total assets or 25% of net assets. Cash and investments were more than 9 times the sector borrowings of $0.6 billion.

It does have something of the odour of a sales pitch.

 

Ceding responsibility and control for the public universities to the Federal Government oughtn't to be anathema per se. Currently the German university system whereby the Länder and the Federal German Government share responsibility is causing concern. It is slowing the upgrading of the universities to bring them to be more intellectually and research competitive.

 

According to The Sydney Morning Herald, "A consultative group would be set up and a national forum held early next year to hear views on the proposal, Dr Nelson said."

 

Nevertheless, it is the Australian Federal Coalition's screwing of the universities over the past eight years that engenders the suspicion of ulterior motives.