The Future in Review.
BEWARE - the federal government is planning to increase student fees, cut courses at most universities, sack staff and turn our universities into degree factories. Sounds pretty scary hey? Well read on, get informed and get active in the fight for a quality public education system.
Dr Brendan Nelson the Federal Minster for Education, Science and Training is currently conducting a ministerial 'review' into higher education. From the outset Nelson has made it clear that there will be absolutely no increase in public funding of universities. Not only is it problematic that universities will be forced to raise student fees and seek further corporate sponsorship, but the fact that increasing public funding is not even being considered in this supposed 'review' makes it clear that it is no more than a farcical process aimed at legitimising the federal governments intentions for higher education. The governments intentions are becoming increasing clear. Students will be expected to pretty much pay for their entire education, staff numbers will by further reduced, the range of courses offered at each university will be severely limited and orientated towards profitability and the needs of business. Put simply the federal government plans to create a higher education system that simply churns out thousands of graduates with a narrow range of vocational skills from institutions that are nothing more than degree factories
Detailed below are some of the main changes being proposed by the federal government.
User pays = Loser pays
Having ruled out any increase in public funding for higher education the federal governments has instead proposed further shifting the cost of higher education onto students. A number of 'models' have been proposed - all of them would have devastating effects on students.
- Replacing HECS with a new loans scheme [similar to the new postgraduate education loans scheme] that will allow universities to charge market rate fees to undergraduates and mean that students are paying close to the entire cost of their education. Put simply instead of leaving with a $25,000 HECS debt student would graduate with debt of around $75,000.
- Charging a 'super-HECS' on top of existing HECS arrangements [increasing HECS for high demand degrees]
- Scrapping the 25% limit on the number of full fee paying domestic undergraduates that universities can enroll.
- Charging a commercial rate of interest on HECS and PELS debts [it is estimated that this will increase debt levels by 30%]
- Putting a limit on completion time for degrees [failing topics may mean that students who wish to complete their degrees will be forced into paying full market fees rather than HECS for their repeat topics]
Under these proposals fees for most students will increase massively. Students at some universities are already paying facing fees of over $100,000 for their initial degree. Australian students are already making a far bigger contribution to the running of universities than almost anywhere in the developed world. In many European countries students get a free university education. In the USA the students are expected to contribute about 19% of running costs of public universities. At Canadian universities the rate is 17%. Students at Australian universities now contribute 36.2%.
Student fees, even with a loans scheme, are a major issue. It affects who gets to university. Many potential students are deterred by the prospect of taking on huge debts. User pays has led to a decline in access by working class, indigenous and rural students. It also has a major impact on what you will do after you graduate. Already the typical graduate faces repaying their study debts until their late thirties and about 1/3 of women will still have a debt at the age of 65. Setting up a government loans scheme will create a lifetime of debt for all but the very rich. Recent studies of a similar scheme in place in New Zealand found that banks take study debts into account when considering graduates� applications for home loans. Not surprisingly home ownership by Generation Xers has fallen 10% compared with the previous baby boomers (who were not hit with study debt).
Narrowing your choice
The federal government is arguing that it is inefficient for universities to run the wide range of courses currently on offer. The proposal by Nelson for 'specialisation' is code language for eliminating courses and subjects with smaller enrollments. This will hit many disciplines that may not be the flavour of the month but have important social roles like mathematics, philosophy and the languages. Specialisation also involves taking resources away from smaller, newer universities and transferring them to sandstone universities. Students in regional and small universities will not have the choice of subjects and courses currently available because these universities will be forced to 'specialise'.
Nelson has been keen to focus debate on courses with small numbers because he knows that the reality for most students is that our classes are much too large and overcrowded. Most students report frequent occasions when they are forced to sit on the floor of lecture rooms and tutorials have over 40 p eople in them This is backed up international studies that show our class sizes are much bigger than most European and North American universities.
The government is also looking at considerably narrowing the number of universities engaged in a comprehensive range of research and research training [i.e., postgraduates]. Suburban universities, universities of technology, regional universities and the newer universities will all face a marked decline in the diversity of their research activity Many universities will only be able to get research funding for specialised niches and in particular doing research for particular regional industries. This will reduce student choice for postgraduate study. It also poses a major challenge to the quality of their scholarly activity and their status.
Universities that are no longer engaged in a comprehensive range of research will end up being regarded as second class cousins of 'real' universities. A quality higher education system requires students at all universities to have the opportunity to engage in scholarship and inquiry across a wide range of disciplines. If the federal government gets away with separating teaching and research it will undermine the scholarly culture of many universities. In some cases universities will end up becoming feeder campuses churning out undergraduates who will have to compete to win postgraduate research spots at an elite universities. In the worst case scenario some campuses will end up turning to a TAFE-like role.
The purposes of a degree
Universities should be more than just degree factories churning out thousands of graduates with a narrow range of vocational skills. The 'review' talks about education as a means to advance knowledge and understanding, enable effective participation in society and to create "a democratic, civilised society". Heartwarming stuff, really. However, if the federal government is successful in implementing their agenda which is clearly evident in this 'review', our education will look roughly like this:
- higher student fees, with elite institutions charging anywhere up to and more than $28,000 per year [current rate for a Veterinary Science degree at Sydney University];
- short, accelerated vocational degrees with very little flexibility for students to go at their own pace;
- replacement of a lot of face-to-face learning with distance education and online learning courses;
- academics on contracts instead of tenure, facing increased workloads and decreased research ability;
- vast differences in quality from university to university, based on money, rather than a universal provision of quality degrees;
- students working longer hours to survive financially (already students have to work an average of 15 hours per week, with 10% of students missing classes �frequently� due to work)
- vastly reduced participation of students from working class and indigenous backgrounds.
Australian universities are in the process of going from a small, elite system of education to a mass system of education. We have gone from 19 universities and 46 Colleges of Advanced Education in 1987 to 38 public universities in 2002; from 393,734 students in 1987 to close to 700,000 today. If we are committed to a mass university education system then we need to address issues of commercialisation, student fees, narrow faddish degrees designed to take advantage of students� economic insecurity, and student living conditions. The problem isn�t a 'review' per se. The problem is that this review does not support a mass education system � it wants to sell degrees to those who can afford them, not create a quality education system.
The ideology of user-pays completely fails to recognise the fact that education benefits all people, not just the recipients; therefore the cost should be borne by the whole of society. Where would we be without teachers or nurses? How would society function without engineers or scientists? Fully publicly funded education could very easily and should be achieved through a system of progressive taxation [read: increasing corporate taxes] A fully publicly funded system of education allows for all people to gain access, not just those from an already privileged position in our society. So, potentially public education could break down traditional gender and class barriers and provide the building blocks for a more just and equitable society.
We as students need to take this 'review' very seriously. If the government get their way higher education as we know it will no longer exist. Students together with university staff and concerned community members have to power to stop the governments agenda.
