 |
Media Release
HIGHER EDUCATION REVIEW
OVERVIEW PAPER LAUNCHED
26 April 2002, MIN 55/02
The Higher Education sector is at an important crossroads.
Fourteen years after the last major reforms, it is time to take
stock of where we are, where we want to go and how we intend to get
there. We must have the maturity as a nation to now consider our
policy options for the future.
In line with my recent announcement of a year long review
process, I am pleased today to release the first of a series of
discussion papers.
This first paper, Higher Education at the Crossroads: an
overview, is intended to stimulate discussion and debate. Though
the issues canvassed in this (and indeed in subsequent papers) do
not represent government policy, they will hopefully generate a
much-needed discussion about the issues and policy choices facing
Australia’s university sector. These ‘conversations’ we will
have as a community will culminate at year’s end with a forum to
consider all the issues raised and the subsequent development of a
package of policy measures for consideration by Government.
This paper does not dictate the solutions, rather it asks the
questions that we as a nation need to ponder if we are to build a
stronger higher education sector. Some of the specific issues the
paper considers are:
Higher education policy framework – how can we improve
the current policy framework to ensure Australia’s higher
education system is strategically positioned into the future?
Learning experiences and outcomes – is there a need for
greater flexibility in approaches, modes and settings for
learning?
Regional engagement – what level of contribution should
regional universities make to capacity building in their local
communities and how should this contribution be supported?
Efficiency and effectiveness – how can universities be
assisted to enhance their operations?
Governance and management – how has the sector changed
since the 1995 Hoare Review of university management identified
shortcomings in the governance and management of universities?
Workplace relations – how do we overcome the rigidity of
university structures and attain the workplace flexibility
necessary to meet the changing needs of students and the community
and enable our universities to be internationally competitive?
Financing – what is the best mix of public funding
mechanisms to promote a high quality and responsive higher
education sector? How do we assist universities to take advantage
of the opportunities that exist for further increases in earned
income?
Specialisation – how can we encourage further
specialisation amongst Australia’s universities to ensure the
best possible use of public resources, and collaboration rather
than competition?
How can institutions focus on their strengths in teaching and/or
research to build world-class expertise and achieve excellence?
Bureaucratic red tape – how do we address the claims
that Australian higher education institutions are currently
burdened by excessive bureaucratic controls, unreasonable
compliance costs and an insufficiently rationalised performance
monitoring system?
These are only some of the issues canvassed in the paper. More of
the overview’s key points are attached.
I urge everyone with an interest in the future direction of
higher education to read the paper and respond to it. Submissions
will be welcomed.
Following this phase, more detailed discussion papers will be
issued in the lead up to consultations with stakeholders and
interested parties.
I have appointed a Reference Group to guide me through
consideration of the complex issues raised during the consultation
process. This Reference Group has been drawn from a variety of
groups within the university and business sectors and the broader
community. Please see attachment for the Reference Group members.
I hope that this issues paper encourages us to challenge the
mindset on what form our university system should take into the
future. For example, what defines a university? What do universities
do? How do their roles differ? Where does our university sector see
itself 20 years from now?
Much has already been done to strengthen our higher education
system, however, significant challenges remain. I commend this
issues paper to the Australian community. I ask you to consider how
we as a nation will address the issues it raises to ensure that we
have the best higher education sector possible – one that provides
the very best service to our children, our communities and to
Australia as a whole.
The paper is available from the Department of Education, Science
and Training website at:
http://www.dest.gov.au/crossroads
A brief précis of the paper is attached, copies of the full
report are also available by contacting Emma Heales in my Canberra
Office on 02 6277 7460.
For further information:
| Dr Nelson’s Office: |
Ross Hampton |
0419 484 095 |
| DEST: |
Jane Smith |
02 6240 9531 |
HIGHER EDUCATION AT THE CROSSROADS: AN OVERVIEW PAPER
KEY POINTS
‘Empires of the Mind’
Higher education fulfils significant functions in our society.
It values learning throughout life. It promotes the pursuit,
preservation and transmission of knowledge. It extols the value
of research, both ‘curiosity-driven’ and ‘use-inspired’.
It enables personal intellectual autonomy and development. It
provides skills formation and educational qualifications to
prepare individuals for the workforce. It helps position
Australia internationally. (para 2)
The Government has emphasised that not all Australians may
wish to undertake higher education. Acquisition of
competency-based vocational and trade skills are an equally
appropriate choice for young Australians developing their
abilities for the labour market. However, for increasing numbers
of Australians, universities are perceived as the most
appropriate way to invest in their future. (para 3)
The Government sees the purpose of higher education as much
greater than preparing students for jobs. It regards higher
education as contributing to the fulfilment of human and
societal potential, the advancement of knowledge and social and
economic progress. (para 4)
Higher education policy framework
There are a number of challenges facing Australia’s higher
education system. The policy framework that shapes the system
stands in need of review. (paras 73, 83)
Australians have inherited an economic and cultural legacy
built largely on the exploitation of natural resources in
agrarian, land and labour intensive industries. But each day
brings evidence of change that foreshadows a future as much
based in knowledge as those industries so historically critical
to our past. (preface)
The kind of Australia in which the next generation will live,
to a large extent will depend on Australia’s institutions of
higher learning – universities. That which will most influence
and inform our future, is not what we know – but what we don’t.
(preface)
Learning experiences and outcomes
There needs to be a renewed focus on learning in higher
education institutions. There is a need for greater flexibility
in approaches, modes and settings for learning. Notions of ‘learning
productivity’ may be appropriate to frame a more proactive and
outcomes-based approach to teaching and learning. (para 94)
The current ‘packaging’ of learning in higher education
tends to be restricted. There is opportunity for teaching and
learning to be individually paced. Innovative course structures
may reduce the period of income foregone while studying. (paras
95, 105)
The typically tight structure of course requirements could
also be made more flexible. There may be scope for a customised
portfolio approach that recognises modules of learning completed
through different providers at different times. (para 96)
The recurring question of academic standards must be
addressed. Questions have been raised about whether the current
quality assurance framework is sufficiently rigorous to assess
the quality and standards of educational outcomes. (para 100)
Access on an equitable basis
Despite past efforts, there are still important issues relating
to how to improve access to higher education by people from low
socio-economic backgrounds, indigenous students, students with a
disability and students from rural and isolated areas. (para 102)
Institutional specialisation
The current ‘one-size-fits-all’ funding arrangements tend
to normalise institutions and provide few incentives to
encourage innovation and differentiation. (para 75)
Australian higher education institutions need to focus on
their strengths in teaching and research to build their
competitiveness internationally. Notwithstanding recent reforms,
Australia is at best just keeping pace internationally. (paras
114,115)
Institutions have largely converged to a predictable spread of
teaching, research and research training at the risk of
compromising quality and excellence. There may be scope for the
development and enhancement of variations of excellence in our
higher education institutions – eg. excellence in research;
excellence in teaching; excellence in partnerships and
collaborations; excellence in internationalisation. (paras 117,
119)
At the same time calls have increased for Australia to develop
a few top quality ‘world-class’ universities. We need
to consider whether this is an appropriate goal, whether it is
achievable and how it might be achieved. (paras 115, 119)
Regional engagement
Universities are generally expected, and particularly those in
regional areas, to perform a community service role but they are
not funded explicitly for this purpose. (para 74)
Regional engagement needs to become an integral part of what
regional universities/campuses do. Engagement could comprehend a
new compact of mutual obligation, involving active partnerships
between institutions, their staff, students, government,
industry, employers and the community. (para 111, 113)
Efficiency and effectiveness
There are some perceived inadequacies in the internal operations
of universities. These include variable teaching loads of staff,
non-productive research, inflated course offerings, cumbersome
administrative systems and process inefficiencies. (para 121)
Universities need to take hard decisions to increase their
output and to reduce the costs of their inputs while maintaining
quality. (para 122)
There is scope for better management of university course
offerings and the associated issues of staff and capital
utilisation efficiencies. (para 128, 130)
Attention needs to be given to the use of capital assets. There
are substantial investments tied up in fixed capital assets of
universities. Most universities are fully operational for only 150
days a year. There could be further exploration of leveraging
university assets. There is also scope for efficiency gains and
collaboration in ‘back office’ administration. (paras 130,
131)
Governance and management
In 1995 the Hoare Review of University Management identified
shortcomings in the governance and management of universities.
Some commentators have suggested that little has changed since
that review. (para 135)
Universities need to ensure that their governing bodies have the
necessary organisational skills and business acumen to fulfil
their responsibilities. (para 137)
There is scope for improving policies and processes for
selection, induction, training, and succession planning for senior
management. (para 138)
Workplace relations
Some progress has been made in recent years towards workplace
flexibility but not enough. There is a need for improved
management of staff productivity. Traditional academic cultures
and industrial structures can operate together to restrict the
ability of universities to make the most of new opportunities
and to meet the changing needs of students and the community. (para
143, 141)
It needs to be examined whether rigidities in university
staffing structures lead to continuation of a supply-side
approach to educational offerings rather than one responsive to
student demand. (para 139)
Revenue diversification
Overall revenue for Australian universities has significantly
increased, by $3.8 billion or 70 per cent, between 1991 and
2000. This reflects a substantial diversification of their
revenue sources. (para 144)
Industry support for university research and teaching offers
considerable potential for revenue supplementation, as does the
commercialisation of university activity. The challenge will be
to reconcile the traditions of academic integrity and freedom
with the more profit driven demands of the commercial world. (para
155)
Financing
The adequacy of public funding is relative to the scale and
cost-effectiveness of the system, the public/private mix of
institutions and the share of costs between general taxpayers and
students. (para 160)
A plurality of financing approaches is appropriate for the
balanced development of a diversified system. The total approach
must have overall coherence with regard to policy intentions and
incentives. An appropriate balance needs to be reached between
public and private contributions to the costs of higher education.
(para 189)
Whatever the option chosen, there is a need for an integrated
package which allows individual institutions greater flexibility.
(para 192)
Bureaucratic red tape
Higher education institutions should be publicly accountable
for their activities and performance because they are the
recipients of public and private investment. Monitoring and
regulation are essential to meet the spirit and substance of
that public accountability. (para 193)
However, claims must be addressed that Australian higher
education institutions are currently burdened by excessive
bureaucratic controls, unreasonable compliance costs and that
the systems monitoring their behaviour and performance are not
sufficiently rationalised. (para 193)
Systems of reporting and regulation could be streamlined and
the compliance costs for universities reduced. (para 196)
HIGHER EDUCATION REVIEW REFERENCE GROUP
| Chair |
|
| Dr Brendan Nelson |
– Minister for Education,
Science and Training |
| Convenor |
|
| Dr Peter Shergold |
– Secretary, Department of
Education, Science and Training |
| |
|
| Professor Deryck Schreuder |
- Vice-Chancellor, The
University of Western Australia |
| Professor Kerry Cox |
- Vice-Chancellor, University of
Ballarat |
| Professor Alan Gilbert |
- Vice-Chancellor, The
University of Melbourne |
| Professor Dennis Gibson |
- Vice-Chancellor,
Queensland University of Technology |
| Professor Jan Reid |
- Vice-Chancellor, University of
Western Sydney |
| Professor John Hay |
- Vice-Chancellor, The
University of Queensland |
| Professor Denise Bradley |
- Vice-Chancellor, University of
South Australia |
| Mr Robert Champion de Crespigny |
- Chancellor, Adelaide
University |
| Dr John Keniry |
- Immediate Past President, ACCI
and Chairman, Ridley Corporation |
| Ms Heather Ridout |
– Deputy Chief Executive and
Executive Director, Public Policy and Communications,
Australian Industry Group |
| Dr John Schubert |
- President, Business Council of
Australia (or his nominee) |
| Mrs May O’Brien |
- Chair, Aboriginal Education
and Training Council, WA |
| Professor Iain McCalman |
- President, Australian Academy
of the Humanities |
| Emeritus Professor John Beaton |
- Executive Director, Academy of
Social Sciences of Australia |
| Professor Chris Fell |
- President, Federation of
Australian Scientific and Technological Societies (FASTS) |
| Mr James Moody |
- Young Australian of the Year
2001 (Science and Technology) |
| Ms Madeleine Wooley |
- Director Adelaide Institute of
TAFE and Deputy Chair, TAFE Directors Australia |
| Professor Vicki Sara |
- CEO, Australian Research
Council |
| Dr Claire Baxter |
- Director, Business Liaison
Office, The University of Sydney and Vice-Chair, Knowledge
Commercialisation Australasia |
| Mr Peter Mason |
- Finance Committee, The
University of New South Wales and Chairman, Investment Banking
Group, JP Morgan |
|
