Group
of Eight Rails at Overreaching Governmental Micromanagement. (November
1, 2010)|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News & Views item - November 2010 |
Group
of Eight Rails at Overreaching Governmental Micromanagement. (November
1, 2010)
The Group of Eight universities today stepped up its attack on what it sees as the federal government's "very intrusive arrangements" regarding "its approach to higher education regulation", although at this stage the chairman has restricted his immediate condemnation to the "threshold issue" of the powers of the TEQSA.
The Chair of the Go8, University of Western Australia's Professor Alan Robson, issued the following statement:
The legislation establishing the Government’s new tertiary education regulator (TEQSA) has been drafted in a closed manner with rather limited consultation with universities and other interest groups.
It would appear as though the Government is trying to
ram this legislation through even though Labor committed to evidence-based
policy formulation and a respect for university autonomy, academic freedom
and mission differences among institutions in its pre-election statements in
2007 and 2010.
The tightly balanced federal parliament should demand
higher standards of the Government’s policy process.
Universities have yet to see Labor’s pre-election
commitments reflected in government practices. Indeed, there has been a
disconcerting lack of transparency in the public policy processes relating
to higher education standards and quality.
The Go8’s latest policy paper,
The Accountability for Quality Agenda in Higher Education
[235 pages]released today, raises over 100
questions which are awaiting answers from the Government. But the Government
has no open process for addressing such questions.
A threshold issue is whether TEQSA should have the
legal power to set standards. How can legislation be prepared without any
prior discussion of the meaning of standards, their coverage and ownership?
The Go8 agrees with the Government that consistency
in provider registration and re-registration requirements is essential to
avoid rogue providers from setting up and continuing to operate.
However, requiring national consistency in
institutional practices, educational quality and graduate attainment, is at
odds with the realities of Australian higher education and future needs.
I have written to the Minister proposing that at the very least a comprehensive discussion paper be prepared before the legislation is introduced to the Parliament.
__________________________________________________
To give some feeling for the overall content of the Group of Eight's policy paper its table of contents is reproduced below.
|
|
|
|
