Higher Education Reforms - some rambling

Today is a big day in higher education in Australia.  Some pretty massive reforms have been (finally!) tabled in Federal Parliament, setting the stage for fee deregulation, changes to government funding (well, cuts to government funding) and a few other bits and pieces.  How much actually makes it through the Senate is yet to be decided, but I think there is a few interesting things to note and ponder about these changes.  And please excuse the stream of consciousness nature of this entry – toddler tantrums and recovering from illness has hampered my ability to build narrative.

The Group of Eight universities are definitely in support of fee deregulation, not surprisingly given that they are the ones likely to reap the most benefit from that.  Universities Australia (UA) is also on board – although there are certainly some university Vice-Chancellors who are less than impressed – particularly Professor Stephen Parker at University of Canberra.  I guess in some ways being a member of UA is like being a member of a political party – the majority rules!  But the logic and rationale behind fee deregulation coming from the Federal Minister for Education – Christopher Pyne - is a little bit around about.  In a nutshell, Pyne has said that fee deregulation will set the universities up to be competitive on the world stage – but really what he is saying is the Commonwealth has and will  continue to cut university funding, so if universities want to diversify their sources of funding, they need to increase their fees.  I am not sure how ones makes the argument that in order to ensure quality provision of education you need to cut funding, but that is what Pyne is doing.

Also important is the way the reforms proposed today (see the explanatory memo here) will impact on the way Australia’s higher education system is shaped.  I have always thought that many universities in Australia struggle to define what it is the “are”.  The very nature of our system is that everyone tries to do everything, with varying degrees of success.  These reforms may encourage some of those universities struggling with an identity to create something – and really hone in on their strengths.  I think this is what we should be aiming for, universities that are the best at what they do – rather than having a top 20 university in the world.

And finally, how does this affect international education in Australia?  Given the importance of international education to the Australian economy, I am surprised how little this aspect has featured in the debates around these reforms.  Will fee increases for domestic students only highlight to international students how much they are subsidising their domestic counterparts?  Will private colleges reduce international marketing, given their access to Commonwealth Supported Places for (more cheaply recruited) domestic students?  Will the potentially shedding of student numbers from Group of Eight universities (as foreshadowed by ANU Vice-Chancellor Prof. Ian Young) lead to fewer places at these universities for international students?  And perhaps most importantly, will these changes lead to a higher quality education for domestic and international students alike?

Some questions to make you think.  Now, back to the tantrums!