|
September 18, 2003
The Australian Financial Review carries a report that the Howard Government is willing to "make further concessions on its shake-up of higher education as it faces the tough task of pushing the historic reforms through a hostile Senate." The reforms provide new concessions for smaller and regional institutions, disadvantaged students and over-enrolled facilities to counter these institutions being disadvantaged by deregulation. Expect more modest concessions.
But the basic thrust of the reform remains in place despite these sweetners. This is:
"...to provide universities with the ability to reduce their reliance on government money and embark on more commercial ventures to boost revenue. Universities will be encouraged to operate more like businesses, maximising the lucrative benefits offered by the overseas student market and boosting the potential for greater private-sector collaboration because of improved transparency."
Business is all for the Nelson reforms. It says that these will align the universities with the emerging needs of the economy; are the key to innovation; will ensure the survival of high education sector; and enable the higher education sector to have the capacity to compete globally. Big business sees the universities as corporations and education as an industry. Hence the key drivers are competition, efficiency and entrepreneurialship.
Reform is needed. The universities are in poor shape after years of doign more with less. This is especially so in South Australia which can be considered a disadvantaged region.
Though reform is needed the Nelson proposals mean that it is consumers who will have to fill the funding hole left by the unwillingness of either major party to dramatically increase the public funding of universities. The Labor Party's offer of $2.4 billion in public funding will still leave the universities short of cash. Hence the look around for easy money; and allowing the universities the flexibility to raise money themselves so they have the resources to improve their facilities and teaching.
So which consumers are going to provide the easy money? Australians? There is resistance to 30% increase in course fees that can be funded by loans:--apart from courses in medicine, law and business that lead to well paying jobs. It means being saddled with debt for those unable to afford to pay upfront. So consumers largely means international students. They are easy money.
So the key thrust of the reforms is freeing up universities to increase their revenue through increasing student fees. It will work for the big prestige universities, such as Melbourne and Sydney, but not for Flinders in South Australia. Flinders will be unable to charge the 30% increase since its students will be a unable to afford to pay. So it will start a downward slide into a cheap second-rate, publicly funded regional university.
The old divide has been reinvented.
|
You wrote: "So the key thrust of the reforms is freeing up universities to increase their revenue through increasing student fees."
I couldn't disagree more.
In order to reform the university system, whether in Australia or anywhere else, you have to actually study what's wrong with the system, not just throw money at it. For a wry look at some things wrong with the university system, check out my page at http://academicgame.blogspot.com. For example, look at the entry entitled "Hiring Foucault," although each entry tackles a different aspect of the problem.