|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
Higher Education Review ProcessVarieties of Excellence: Diversity, Specialisation and Regional Engagement4. rhetoric and reality of diversity and specialisationa. the status quo
67 The debate in Australia about the extent of diversity in the higher education system is characterised by claims by many institutions that there is considerable diversity, and counterclaims by others based on evidence of convergence and homogeneity. 68 There is no denying that there is considerable diversity in the Australian higher education system in some areas, just as there is in all higher education systems:
69 The mission statements of universities may be interpreted to reveal a degree of diversity in their focus and orientation. Almost ten years ago, the Committee for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (CQAHE) observed after its first round of quality reviews that there was “a significant amount of diversity within Australia’s higher education system” as reflected in the missions and objectives of institutions. However, it went on to note that “there is a significant degree of similarity in the mission and objectives of those universities which share a similar background, history and stage of development” (CQAHE, 1994, p.10). 70 These similarities, created largely by virtue of historical context, can be captured in the various groupings of Australian universities that have been attempted. Marginson developed the categories of Sandstones; Redbricks; Unitechs; Gumtrees and New Universities (1999, p.17). He argued that whilst the “Australian system is formally a unitary one based on a single university sector with institutions broadly similar in function…the system is nevertheless differentiated into distinguishable groupings with distinctive characters and roles” (1998, p.82). 71 Another grouping was suggested in Higher Education at the Crossroads, according to the three key phases for the establishment of Australia’s publicly funded universities. The ten ‘older’ universities were established between 1851 and 1958; the nine ‘middle’ universities were established between 1964 and 1975; and the eighteen ‘newer’ universities were established between 1987 and 1996. 72 The universities have themselves recognised ‘natural’ allegiances and alliances in strategic groups that reflect their shared histories and missions. The establishment of The Group of Eight, the Australian Technology Network, and most recently the New Generation Universities reflect a level of self-identified differentiation in the sector. 73 Attachment D of Higher Education at the Crossroads provides further support for the conclusion that there is considerable diversity in the Australian higher education sector. The revenue of Australian universities1 range from $23.5 million to $674 million with a mean of $250 million. Australian universities consist of from one to eleven campuses. There is considerable diversity in student load at each university, with a range from 2 052 EFTSU at University of the Sunshine Coast to 33 545 EFTSU at Monash University. 1. These calculations exclude the University of Notre Dame. 74 There is considerable diversity between universities in numbers of part-time and external students. Universities enrolling the largest numbers of part-time students tend to be non-metropolitan based, for example, the University of Southern Queensland (68 per cent of students) and Charles Sturt University (68 per cent). While five universities did not have any students enrolled externally, 77 per cent of University of New England students were enrolled externally (DETYA, 2001). The University of Southern Queensland, Charles Sturt University, Southern Cross University and Deakin University also had more than 40 per cent of their students enrolled externally. 75 Twenty per cent of Australia’s university students are postgraduates. Nine of the ten older universities have 19 per cent or more postgraduate students in their student population. The university with the second highest proportion is the University of Technology, Sydney with 31 per cent. With the exception of the recently established University of the Sunshine Coast, all universities have at least 12 per cent of their student population comprised of postgraduates. The universal offering of postgraduate courses and the building of comparable proportions of postgraduate students marks a point of considerable homogeneity between the universities. 76 The composition of each university’s population in terms of Indigenous students, students from rural and isolated areas and students from low socio-economic backgrounds is very diverse and tends to reflect university catchment areas. Indigenous composition varies from 0.1 per cent to 4.9 per cent. The participation of Indigenous people in higher education is discussed in detail in a separate issues paper to inform the Review. 77 Students from rural and isolated areas comprise majority proportions at six universities with sizable regional campuses (five of these are newer universities), while proportions drop below five per cent in three metropolitan based universities. The proportions of students from low SES backgrounds in universities varies from 3.1 per cent to 42.5 per cent. 78 There is also considerable variation in the extent to which universities offer education to overseas students, particularly in terms of the numbers of students and whether they engage with students in offshore or onshore campuses or through online learning. 79 These data demonstrate that there is considerable diversity in the Australian higher education sector in certain areas. Accompanying the evidence of difference is the rhetoric expounded by universities, testifying to the diversity of the system through their individual claims to uniqueness. Marginson argued that university marketing departments make particular use of such techniques, claiming “their institution is unique – while at the same time assuring prospective students that their institution can do everything that its competitors do, only better!” (1998, p.12). 80 However, there is also evidence that Australian universities demonstrate diversity which is “‘phenotypic’ rather than ‘genotypic’: variations within a species rather than differences between species of institution” (Kemmis et al, 1999, p.15). What is the species? It may be argued that the species in Australia is the large, research-intensive, campus-based institution offering a comprehensive suite of undergraduate and postgraduate courses. 81 This hypothesis is borne out by the numerous commentators who have observed that the Australian higher education system is not diverse, and that institutions are convergent in their behaviour resulting in a homogenous rather than diverse sector. The Australian Financial Review offered an observation earlier this year, that:
82 Melbourne University Private argued in their submission that:
83 The West Review acknowledged that there was a degree of diversity in Australia’s universities, but concluded that:
84 The scientific term ‘isomorphism’ (Marginson & Considine, 2000, p.183) and the notion of ‘academic drift’ (Riesman, 1958) have been adopted to describe the tendency of institutions or courses to imitate the behaviour of other institutions or courses. The result is convergence in institutional mission and goals and a homogenising effect in relation to a range of institutional activities (see Putnis & Axford, Submission 21, p.9; Marginson & Considine, 2000, p.183). 85 Kemmis et al pointed to university mission statements as reflecting conformity:
86 Marginson contended that there is limited systemic and programmatic diversity in the Australian system:
87 Meek and Wood agreed in their assessment of the lack of differentiation of the structure and practice of universities:
88 Phelan pointed to the similarities between universities in terms of enrolment levels, salary structures and the offering of a “full suite of courses in a wide range of disciplines” (2002, Submission 16, p.2). He went on to state that:
89 A number of scholars have noted that Australian institutions aspire to a model of the university that dictates offering a ‘comprehensive’ suite of courses. Marginson argued that:
90 Moodie mooted a broader conception of ‘higher education’ as used in Canada and the US and then observed that:
91 Unlike higher education institutions in some other countries, all Australian universities maintain a focus on research and postgraduate research students. This may be seen in part as a reflection of academic norms and the high status given to research performance. In relation to a review of the Irish higher education system, Skilbeck observed the “ascendancy of research as a defining characteristic of a high status institution” (2001, p.90). Skilbeck goes on to observe that “there is still no general acceptance in these countries [Australian and United Kingdom] of a categorisation of research-intensive/and essentially non-research intensive” (2001, p.92). If research is perceived to be the function that attracts the highest status as an institution, it should be no surprise that all Australian institutions strive for such status. 92 It is important to recognise that some level of homogeneity between institutions and within the sector is to be valued. In their second round of assessments of the quality of teaching and learning in Australian universities in the early nineties, the CQAHE noted the improvement in quality of teaching and learning in the sector. It observed “there is now less differentiation between institutions in the area of teaching and learning than was found in the first round” (CQAHE, 1995, p.13). 93 Marginson provided a caution against an over-emphasis on diversity to this effect:
94 This view was supported in Deakin University’s submission:
95 It is acknowledged that the sector is diverse in some areas, and that there have been some institutional efforts to focus on strategic strengths and develop specialisations. However, what is proposed is that it may be desirable for the sector to become more diverse. There is considerable potential for greater diversity through strategic specialisation and differentiation. b. drivers towards homogeneity96 What factors have contributed to producing a system and institutions that are converging in their behaviours rather than maximising the potential for diversity? public perceptions97 It is possible that public perceptions have driven institutional behaviour in a convergent direction. Kemmis et al argued that:
98 They maintained that a preoccupation with an ‘ideal’ of a university, supported by both the public and academic community has prevented the development of different kinds of higher education institutions and encouraged conforming behaviour by higher education institutions. 99 The powerful influence of status and prestige on public and academic perceptions was captured some forty years ago in Gardner’s comments about the US higher education system:
academic drift100 ‘Academic drift’ has been argued by some to be the cause of convergence in the Australian higher education sector and many sectors in other countries. Originally, ‘academic drift’ was conceived as the tendency of less prestigious higher education institutions to copy the role and mission of ‘prestigious’ institutions, with the result that a system loses its diversity of institutional forms and converges into a single organisational model (Riesman, 1958). In the Australian context, it is argued that the ‘newer’ universities have demonstrated a tendency to emulate the established institutions, and as suggested in the previous chapter, it is questionable whether they had any choice but to take such a direction. 101 In the process of emulation, academic staff in the newer institutions adopted the traditional notions of academic work, some of which were discussed in a previous issues paper, Striving for Quality: Learning, Teaching and Scholarship. Neave reflected on the capacity of such norms to drive behaviour and practice:
102 Karmel described the tendency for copying and resulting duplication in courses in terms of the principle of “anything you can do, I can do better” (1998, p.50). 103 Conversely, Putnis and Axford argued that it was the ‘old’ universities that copied the ‘new’ universities in their “cherry-picking” of courses such as communication and media studies (Submission 21, p.11). Meek and Wood claimed that this should be no surprise because “if one institution offers a new innovative course that attracts high enrolments, other institutions engage in imitative behaviour” in an attempt to emulate its success (1998, p.150). funding approaches104 Some have expressed the view that it has been the funding approaches in Australia that have driven institutions towards conformity rather than differentiation. This phenomenon has not been confined to Australia, being also observed in other countries. In the UK context, the Dearing Committee noted that:
105 In relation to the Australian context, Meek and O’Neill observed that:
Marginson concurred, in his conclusion that “Canberra has administered a ‘one size fits all’ approach, and has supported standardised governance and common definitions of academic work” (1999, p.22). 106 There were claims in submissions that the current funding model, particularly the use of the relative funding model, fosters competition rather than collaboration. The Institution of Engineers argued that:
107 Deakin University submitted that:
108 Queensland University of Technology argued that:
109 Marginson argued that a deregulated funding model would not guarantee greater diversity. He has stated that “in a market, emulation, rather than originality, is the quicker route to legitimacy and to a limited kind of success” (1999, p.16). Any development of a niche market by an institution would be limited within an acceptable “band of risk”, as would any “far-reaching innovations in education and research” (1999, p.16). international students110 Another possible driver for homogeneity could be the growth in the international student market and the influence of the demands of international students. Meek and Wood proposed that “the recruitment of overseas students has had a homogenising effect at the systems level due to overseas students interest in only a narrow band of courses” (1998, p.156). 111 In 2000, 50 per cent of overseas higher education students were enrolled in ‘business, administration and economics’ courses and 11 per cent were enrolled in ‘computer science and information systems’ courses. However, as the intake of students has diversified, so has the range of courses in demand. While students from Asia appear to prefer ‘business and information technology’ courses, students from the United States show different preferences, with 51 per cent of these students enrolled in ‘non-specific and non-award’ and 17 per cent enrolled in ‘arts, humanities and social sciences’ courses (AEI, 2001). This may reflect the trend of American students studying in Australia as part of a semester or year ‘study abroad’ programme.
|
|||
|
Any comments or
queries should be sent to:
highered@dest.gov.au
Department of Education, Science and Training
|
