|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
Higher Education Review ProcessVarieties of Excellence: Diversity, Specialisation and Regional Engagement6. diverse and specialised course offeringsa. current trends in course offerings179 Australia’s 37 publicly funded universities2 offer courses with between 17 and 64 out of 79 ‘narrow’ fields of education in 2001.3 Most universities offered more than half of these fields. Offerings within the larger States were quite comprehensive with universities in New South Wales collectively offering 76 fields, Victoria 74, Queensland 77, Western Australia 63 and South Australia 66 fields. States with two or fewer universities tended to have more modest field offerings. There were 46 offered in the Australian Capital Territory, 43 in the Northern Territory and 37 in Tasmania. 2 Excluding Bond University and the University of Notre Dame. 3 narrow field of education of a course indicates the emphasis of the course, not specific subjects within the course. Most of the data in the analysis in this section are taken from the Higher Education Statistics Collection, 2001. The data can be found in tables published on the Review website at
the
Department of Education, Science and Training Website
180 There is breadth in, and perhaps duplication, in field offerings at a national level. The field ‘business and management’ is offered at each of the 37 universities, ‘studies in human society’ (eg. history, anthropology) and ‘behavioural science’ are offered at 36 universities. The breadth of field offerings at the State level is in some cases extensive. Every university in New South Wales offers ‘computer science’, ‘teacher education’, ‘accounting’, ‘business and management’, ‘sales and marketing’, ‘banking, finance and related fields’, ‘studies in human society’, ‘law’, ‘communication and media studies’ and ‘performing arts’. Similar examples of complete field coverage are evident in other States, but they are not always for the same fields. Victoria’s eight universities all offered nine particular fields, but only one was common to the New South Wales list indicated above. 181 Some institutional specialisation nationally and within regions is evident for some fields. For example, ‘veterinary studies’ is offered at only five universities nationwide (within four States), ‘optical science’ at three universities (three States) and ‘forestry studies’ at five universities (four States and one Territory). There are twenty fields of education offered at ten or fewer universities from the list of 79 possibilities. These twenty fields are characterised by low enrolments, with the greater enrolments being in ‘pharmacy’ with 3 807 students. 182 There are, however, a number of fields with similarly small enrolments, which continue to be offered by many universities, some within very close proximity to each other. ‘Mathematical sciences’ with 2 983 field enrolments was offered at 33 of the 37 universities, ‘political science and policy studies’ with 2 860 students was offered by 27 universities, ‘earth sciences’ with 2 419 was offered at 26 universities, ‘philosophy and religious studies’ with 1 642 students at 21 universities, ‘chemical sciences’ with 2 037 enrolments at 31 universities, ‘physics and astronomy’ with 1 849 students at 28 universities. 183 Most of the more popular fields of education are offered at most universities, but there are signs of national and regional concentrations of students in some States and within some fields. For example, there is a clear within-State concentration of ‘rehabilitation therapies’ students at one institution in each of NSW, Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia. Yet, even in this instance, 12 other universities in these States offer the field to smaller student populations. 184 Other popular fields show within-State concentrations of students in fields in two institutions. For example, ‘architecture and urban environment’ has single concentrations in Queensland and NSW, and dual concentrations in Victoria, Western Australia and South Australia. Nevertheless, the field is still being offered by the other 13 institutions in these five States. In some cases a dual concentration occurs with universities geographically distant from one another, for example, ‘biological sciences’ is concentrated at the University of Queensland and at James Cook University within Queensland, but in most other cases, the dual concentration occurs at universities within very close proximity to one another. 185 Despite tendencies towards isomorphism between universities, some clear field-based concentrations are apparent. They occur in all of the older universities, but they are not monopolised by them. Institutions continue to offer fields when there are clear concentrations in that field at other universities in close proximity. 186 There are a large number of courses with very small enrolments. Twenty per cent of units have fewer than five students. Some 4 200 units have just one student. 187 From a national and regional perspective, field of education offerings by universities have evolved into a mixture of comprehensiveness and specialisation, without any overarching rationale or strategic direction. There appears to be a strong argument for more strategic course provision in higher education in Australia. comprehensiveness and duplication
188 The result of the trend towards comprehensiveness of course provision has been considerable duplication, particularly if the framework for analysis incorporates a treatment of the States and Territories as discrete regional units with particular higher education needs. There are of course other ways of looking at patterns of course provision, but given the federated nature of Australia and the division of constitutional responsibilities, there is an argument for provision within a State or Territory as a major organising principle. 189 Concerns about the proliferation and duplication of some courses have been raised by a number of submissions. Swinburne University of Technology called for a more co-ordinated approach to course provision, particularly in terms of regional development, arguing that:
190 The Australian Institute of Food Science and Technology expressed alarm at “the proliferation of courses in the area of food science, food technology, nutrition or variants of this basic theme” (Submission 208, p.2). The Institute argued that there needed to be changes “to the current free market system where universities are the sole arbiters of what subjects/course they offer” (p.2). 191 A Queensland journalist, Elizabeth Meryment, identified the proliferation of journalism as a problem:
192 The dean of commerce and economics at UNSW, Professor Greg Whittred argued that:
193 The proliferation of courses has been seen by some to be the result of post-Dawkins institutions attempting to emulate established universities. However, as mentioned previously, ‘old universities’ have contributed substantially to the growth by adopting courses pioneered by the ‘new’ universities. Putnis and Axford argued that the pre-Dawkins institutions broadened their range of courses and “cherry-picked” elements of programmes by ‘new universities’, particularly in areas such as information and communication technology and communications and media:
rationalisation and collaboration
194 Many submissions conveyed the message that rationalisation was necessary:
195 There were some attempts to limit duplication at the time of the creation of the Unified National System by rationalising the number of institutions offering courses with expensive infrastructure needs, such as medicine and veterinary science. In recent years, many institutions have engaged in strategic planning that has resulted in varying degrees of rationalisation of courses. The Victorian Auditor General reported that his review of the higher education literature “indicates that the majority of Australian universities have rationalised their subject offerings over the past 5 years” (2002, p.60). 196 The University of Melbourne, for example, has “initiated a significant reduction in the number of undergraduate subjects since 1996” (Victorian Auditor General, 2002, p.60). The motivation for this was:
197 Some professional associations exercise a degree of control over the provision of courses that lead to membership of their profession. CPA Australia noted that they have been “active in ensuring that there has not been a proliferation of programs of widely varying standard by managing the accreditation process” (Submission 244, p.4). The Review of Engineering Education conducted in 1996 recommended that each of the 36 universities offering a first-degree engineering programme consider its viability. The Australian Council of Engineering Deans claimed that “this has been done, and today that number stands at 33, covering about 20 fields of engineering out of about 50 recognised internationally” (Submission 56, p.2). They observed that:
198 Rationalisation has resulted in some collaboration in course provision. The observation by Phillips Curran in relation to South Australia that “alliances between the three universities are arguably weaker in relation to teaching, although there are some specific examples of shared courses and rationalisation of programs with small enrolments”, has validity across the sector (2001, p.60). 199 The University of New England (UNE) noted its decision to cease offering Modern Greek by distance education, transferring it to the University of New South Wales (UNSW), which offered Modern Greek in an on-campus course. Conversely, Italian is now offered by UNE to UNSW students. UNE supported “collaboration between universities to increase student choice and to eliminate non-viable courses or units” (Submission 26, p.1). 200 Concerns have been expressed that whilst there are funding mechanisms to facilitate research collaboration, there are no such mechanisms to foster collaboration in teaching.
201 The Australian Federation of Modern Language Teachers Associations provided a similar analysis:
202 Possibly mindful of the recommendations for collaboration in course provision from the Phillips Curran review, the University of South Australia posited a funding approach for rationalisation and collaboration:
203 Other universities also argued that there are considerable costs involved in rationalisation of courses and subjects. Edith Cowan University outlined its efforts to reduce the number of small undergraduate units, but argued that “there are costs associated with change, particularly given the fact that academic staff cannot easily be re-assigned to new academic responsibilities that are distant from their own discipline or specialisation” (Submission 225, p.4). 204 The Commonwealth has provided assistance for course rationalisation through the Higher Education Innovation Programme, which was established in 1995. Priorities for the fund between 1997-99 included “structural readjustment within and between institutions to improve operational efficiencies or to rationalise course offerings” (HEIP Guidelines, 1997). UNE and UNSW, for example, received funding from HEIP to cover the costs associated with transferring Modern Greek to UNSW to be offered by distance mode. 205 Naturally, the rationalisation of course provision cannot take place without careful consideration about the implications of any consolidation. The Australian University Alumni Council warned that rationalisation “if carried to excess in the name of efficiency, leads to the ‘choose any colour as long as it is black’ attitude to production, one which is incompatible with the pursuit of knowledge and innovation” (Submission 73, p.3). b. principles for programmatic diversity206 If programmatic diversity is a desirable characteristic of the Australian higher education system, what issues would need to be addressed? The following are suggested:
greater specialisation207 Diversity in course provision may be achieved by each institution accepting some level of specialisation. Karmel argued that “specialisation among institutions is likely to produce a range of courses and services that is more effective in meeting needs and more efficient in the use of resources” (1998, p.47). 208 Institutions could perhaps adopt the process of ‘selective excellence’ as a way of deciding on areas of specialisation. There was support from a number of universities for a focus on strengths in course provision:
209 Institutions in regional Australia could consider specialising in course provision that directly served the needs of their local community, as suggested by Miles:
210 In developing a niche market and reputation for excellence in particular courses, an institution has the scope to attract students, as Deakin University has demonstrated in their aquaculture specialisation:
211 Many US institutions have used selective excellence to rationalise programmes, offering those in which they have particular expertise, and reducing the number with low student demand. The latter criterion should be tempered in Australia, however, by a consideration of national needs, as will be discussed in a later section. 212 Some submissions cautioned against excessive or non-strategic specialisation, particularly in relation to campuses in regional Australia. The University of Tasmania acknowledged the value of course rationalisation but warned that “there are a number of core programs that are critical to a community and any analysis must take account of the broader effects on the economy and the support infrastructure within that community” (Submission 153, p.4). BHERT similarly has argued that it is necessary to strike a “balance between constructive diversity and the potential for overspecialisation – for example, it would be undesirable for regional universities to fail to provide a reasonable range of services to their own communities” (2001a, p.8). 213 The Regional Advisory Board of La Trobe University, Bendigo, claimed that “regional higher education institutions should provide to regional communities as full a range of teaching, research and research training services as can be achieved within realistic budgetary limits” (Submission 110, p.1). The Australian Council of Professions put a case for maintaining professional courses in some regional institutions which may otherwise appear unviable to “fulfil a local need extending beyond immediate educational purposes” through “support from and collaboration with local professional communities”(Submission 285, p.4). 214 Some argue that the vagaries of student and workforce demand have the potential to affect institutions that veered towards ‘over-specialisation’. Maling and Keepes observed that “if an institution concentrated on only few major fields it would be susceptible to sudden and substantial shifts in student demand” (1998, p.33). The Australian Medical Council applauded the notion of specialisation but feared “over-specialisation within basic medical education in Australia” (Submission 43, p.4). analysis of course provision on a State/Territory basis and in terms of national needs215 Course provision could be determined within a framework of national and State and Territory needs in any move towards greater specialisation. It would be necessary to maintain a course presence, and in some areas course strengths, in areas of national need. Such areas may be a response to economic and labour force needs and/or reflect social and cultural priorities. PriceWaterhouseCoopers reported that:
They argue that there is fault on both sides – that universities need to consult with business on the development of curricula, and that business has a responsibility to effectively define its needs and requirements. 216 The AVCC acknowledged the role of the Commonwealth in determining such national priorities:
217 There was some support in submissions for organising course provision on a State-basis. The Queensland University of Technology argued that “there is plenty of scope for streamlining offerings on a state and national level” (Submission 96, p.17). The former Vice-Chancellor of the University of Adelaide, Professor Cliff Blake, is reported as saying that the three Adelaide universities should eliminate duplication of courses:
218 A consideration of selective excellence coupled with an evaluation of State needs may lead to the scenario advocated by the University of New England:
enabling subjects219 The frailty of some ‘enabling’ fields of study was raised by a number of submissions. Strong arguments were put for maintaining their presence in most institutions. 220 In the sciences, these were identified as “mathematics, statistics and the core ‘building block’ disciplines of physics, chemistry and biology” (Academy of Science, Submission 249, p.5). The Australian Council of Deans of Science argued that:
221 The case for mathematics was put by the Australian Mathematical Sciences Council:
222 The University of Southern Queensland’s Faculty of Sciences argued that withdrawal by some institutions from key enabling areas such as mathematics “represent a failure to understand the internal needs and dynamics of universities and the professional needs of our staff, who service diverse disciplines” (Submission 24, p.12). They concluded that “every university needs, as part of its core, a high quality mathematics department” (Submission 24, Appendix 3). courses with low student demand but high national need223 Many submissions addressed the status of courses that served specific national or regional needs, but suffered from declining or low student demand. The Australian and New Zealand Association for the Advancement of Science called for “a national approach…to ensure that essential disciplines are maintained” (Submission 207, p.1). It accepted that every university should not support every single discipline, but “within a national system there is a need to identify which disciplines are essential for the long term future and ensure that each is represented in at least one institution in the country” (Submission 207, p.4). 224 There is no doubt that there should be some provision within States and Territories of such courses. However, it may be argued there is little need for every institution to offer such a course. There may be, however, some courses which given their specificity to a particular region or State or Territory, would not be duplicated in other States and Territories. 225 Submissions noted that collaboration between institutions would be essential to rationalise declining but important fields of study. QUT argued that:
226 Other options for reducing duplication while maintaining some presence in a region could include “joint teaching of second and third year units, or sole provider agreements (subject to satisfying public interest requirements of competition policy)” (Murdoch University, Submission 166, p.5). In relation to Asian languages, the Asian Studies Association of Australia recommended the establishment of a Council for Maximizing Australia’s Asia Skills and Knowledge that could:
227 The Group of Eight Deans of Arts, argued that collaborative arrangements for small subjects are costly to manage, and recommended that the Government establish:
228 An option already utilised by Northern Territory University is the services of Open Universities Australia (OLA). At present OLA offers over 600 flexibly packaged study units and some institutions could offer students low enrolment subjects through OLA (see Submission 18). student choice and mobility229 A move to greater specialisation would mean that some institutions may not provide some courses. The implication for students, particularly students in non-metropolitan areas, could be that there may not be a university offering every course of choice within easy access. 230 The Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations (CAPA) argued that it was “fundamentally inequitable” that “rural students in regional universities should only have access to a narrow breadth of study options of direct relevance to the regional economy” (Submission 231, p.4). 231 Unlike students in other western countries, relatively few Australian students move cities to undertake higher education. Approximately 38 per cent of non-metropolitan but just four per cent of metropolitan students aged less than twenty years moved to commence higher education for the first time in 1999 (Blakers et al, 2002). 232 While access (proximity) to a campus influences student migration decisions, subject choice and academic ability are more important factors in explaining students’ decisions to move (Blakers et al, 2002). The percentage of Australian students who moved to commence study in 1999 was 11 per cent, which is relatively low by international standards. For example, in the United States, 26 per cent of first year students in four-year degree-granting institutions attended institutions outside their home jurisdiction in 1998 (NCES, 2002). Around 75 per cent of university entrants move to study in the United Kingdom (Audas and Dolton, 1999). 233 The advocacy of increased specialisation has generated considerable debate about the nature of higher education provision in rural and regional areas. The University of Tasmania claimed that:
234 It has been shown that students from metropolitan areas experience higher participation rates in higher education than their non-metropolitan counterparts. Stevenson et al (2000) found that although some of the variation between metropolitan and non-metropolitan participation can be explained by proximity to university campuses, more of the variation is explained by socio-economic indicators. This suggests that the answer to regional participation inequities is not only through the establishment of campuses (Stevenson et al, 2000). 235 Several regional institutions argued that a strong force against rationalisation of courses in their areas would be the strength of community expectations for local availability of comprehensive course offerings. The University of New England reported that in 1998 it decided to phase out two engineering courses that had small student intakes.
Public campaigns were mounted against the changes to Modern Greek and Italian at UNE which it argued “highlighted once again that neither students, nor staff, nor the public are willing to support rationalisations in a regional university” (Submission 26, p.16). 236 The Queensland State Government argued that:
237 The call for rationalisation of courses and increased specialisation does not mean that regional universities would not provide a range of courses. Prospective students in proximity to campuses in regional Australia could continue to have significant choice in course provision. It need not necessarily mean that regional campuses only provide courses in areas of direct relevance to their region. However, given the numbers of institutions in regional areas, prospective students in these areas would be less likely than students in most capital cities, to have their preferred choice of course at their closest institution, particularly postgraduate courses. However, the principle of specialisation would necessitate a consideration of the specific needs of the regional community and courses should be offered to service these specific needs. 238 Some have argued that an expectation of greater student mobility would require a reconsideration of student support in living allowances and/or scholarships. BHERT acknowledged that “the costs to rural and isolated students may also be significant, especially in the costs of travel and living away from home” (2001b, p.3). The Institution of Engineers submitted that:
239 One proposal to facilitate greater student mobility has been a call for the establishment of a national student registration centre:
c. possible options240 How could greater rationalisation, specialisation and collaboration in course provision be achieved? A number of submissions argued for some sort of national planning and coordination of course provision, claiming that the ‘market’ approach of allowing institutions to make their own choices in these matters has not resulted in ‘rational’ course provision. The submissions have proposed a number of possible options, some of which are briefly discussed. 241 However, in considering possible options for rationalisation it needs to be acknowledged that universities are autonomous institutions with legislative power to accredit their own courses and programmes. Any option should be framed by the need for an approach that promotes, encourages and provides incentives for rationalisation, specialisation and collaboration, rather than setting up a model of regulation or intervention, or adding to reporting or monitoring requirements. 242 A central body could be created to promote, encourage and facilitate rationalisation and collaboration with respect to existing and future higher education course provision. In the binary system, the process used to accredit courses offered by colleges of advanced education varied from State to State, but they were generally required to “demonstrate need for new courses” and “to show that the need was not already met by courses available at the local universities” (Maling and Keepes, 1998, p.30). Maling and Keepes argued that this system:
243 A central body could establish a similar process for future higher education courses, undertake regular regional and national needs audits, and then respond by providing incentives for appropriate rationalisations of course provision in close consultation with the sector and community. The use of labour force forecasting would need to be tempered by the caution that it has “not been a reliable mechanism for matching supply and demand in the educational arena” (Meek & Wood, 1998, p.153). Such a body could also act as a broker to facilitate collaborations in course provision. 244 Given the need for course provision to address national and regional needs, another option suggested is a body jointly convened by the States and Territories and Commonwealth. This body could promote and facilitate the rationalisation of course provision and act as a broker between the higher education institutions to facilitate course collaboration. 245 It could be a single body or there could be separate bodies for each of the States and Territories. The Royal Australian Chemical Institute suggested the creation of “Regional Councils” which would promote a higher level of cooperation than is possible between institutions (Submission 229, p.5). 246 Sharpham went further and suggested a State-based approach to planning and co-ordination of course provision:
247 Alternatively, the higher education sector through a representative body such as the AVCC could lead its own process of promotion and encouragement of course rationalisation, specialisation and collaboration. The Government might consider incentives to encourage the process, at least for a transition period. some possible responses248 A number of possible options have been raised in relation to the issues in this section. While not an exhaustive list, these questions have been included for consideration and discussion:
|
|||
|
Any comments or
queries should be sent to:
highered@dest.gov.au
Department of Education, Science and Training
|
