Higher Education Review Process

Varieties of Excellence: Diversity, Specialisation and Regional Engagement

executive summary

This paper canvasses the development of a policy framework for Australian higher education in which an overt goal is to further develop a diverse and specialised sector, responsive both to student demand and to the public interest. Submissions to the Review are used to frame and illustrate the discussion.

Diversification could be manifested in a variety of ways, including in the structure, mission, course offerings and partnerships developed by universities. It would require a system in which complementarity is achieved through collaboration and partnership between institutions, based upon negotiation and responsive to government incentives.

There is already diversity in the Australian higher education sector but there is also significant duplication. At present, all 37 publicly funded universities deliver ‘business and management’ courses. In New South Wales, every university offers ‘accounting’, ‘sales and marketing’, ‘law’ and ‘communication and media studies’. There is similar coverage of these and other fields of study in other States. At the same time, 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. Clearly some of this is warranted. However, duplication and low enrolment may represent inefficient use of public funds. The paper examines ways such issues could be addressed.

Further diversity could be achieved through greater specialisation. The paper suggests there is scope for differentiation between institutions in the Australian higher education sector not only in terms of course offerings, but also in terms of selective excellence in teaching, scholarship, research and community service. 

It is strongly argued that there is scope for varieties of excellence in the sector, based on differentiated and strategic specialisation. This would allow greater responsiveness to the demands of students and needs of industry. It would also ensure that those important academic disciplines that make less direct utilitarian contributions to meeting labour market needs, but which are recognised as significant contributors to the higher education of a cultured and civilised democratic society, can continue to be offered. Rationalisation would allow the preservation of ‘declining’ fields of study in the national or regional interest. 

The paper focuses on two types of diversity – systemic and programmatic. Whilst there is significant diversity in the stated missions of universities, it is argued that there is limited systemic diversity. Indeed, there is a surprising degree of homogeneity in the types and structures of Australian universities, with almost all institutions aspiring to and conforming to the norm of a comprehensive, research-intensive, campus-based university. A number of possibilities for systemic differentiation and specialisation are discussed, including institutions that could focus on undergraduate course offerings; undergraduate and selected postgraduate offerings; research; international offerings; or particular discipline areas.

There is no suggestion of a return to a simple, bifurcated model of ‘research’ and ‘teaching’ institutions. Rather, the paper explores options for a wide variety of specialisations along a spectrum of institutional diversity, within which each university can develop its ‘selective excellence’. The paper is founded upon a conviction that a truly ‘unified national system’ of higher education needs differentiation, diversity and varieties of specialisation - not binary division. Nor is there any suggestion that those who might teach at ‘undergraduate’ universities should not engage in scholarship. Rather the argument, foreshadowed in Striving for Quality: Learning, Teaching and Scholarship, is that scholarship may, within a diverse higher education system, be reflected in teaching expertise, professional engagement and artistic practice, as well as in published research. 

From a national and regional perspective, education offerings by universities have evolved without any overarching rationale or strategic direction. The key challenge is the extent to which government intervention can ensure that in an environment of healthy competition between universities, increased diversity and specialisation will lead to collaborative partnerships and strategic alliances. These must be not only to each institution’s mutual advantage, but even more importantly, to the benefit of national interests, support of regional communities and responsive to industry needs.

Framed by submissions to the Review, a number of questions are proposed to guide the achievement of more diverse course provision: 

• To what extent can greater diversity be achieved while increasing specialisation and reducing duplication? 

• Should the analysis and organisation of course provision take place within an overarching framework of national needs? 

• To what extent should enabling programmes be offered in institutions within a State or Territory (including specialised institutions)?

• Should disciplines with low student demand but determined to be of value for the nation, be rationalised to ensure their continued availability? 

• In moving towards greater programmatic diversity, should Australian students be more prepared to move to gain on-campus access to their course of choice?

• In what ways should all universities recognise that they are part of national and regional networks of higher education institutions?

It is envisaged that varieties of excellence will result from the development of diverse and specialised partnerships between universities. Recognition by higher education institutions of their role in social, economic and cultural development should lead to a focus on enhanced community engagement. Collaboration between institutions and a range of other stakeholders, including other educational institutions, industry and business, professional associations, government funded research agencies, and local communities, is essential. The paper discusses five of the possible areas for productive collaborative relationships for higher education institutions – partnerships in community service, with industry and business, with professional associations, other higher education institutions and with regional communities. 

Three models are discussed for the promotion, encouragement and facilitation of rationalisation, specialisation and collaboration. The paper also identifies a number of possible options for the facilitation of further diversity and specialisation, each involving different levels of government intervention. Drawn from submissions to the Review, the possibilities range from centralised planning and regulation of institutional missions to deregulation of the higher education market to allow institutions to identify and secure their own position in the market.

Return to the Top of the Page

Any comments or queries should be sent to: highered@dest.gov.au
This page was last updated on Monday, 04 August 2008

Department of Education, Science and Training
Copyright © Commonwealth of Australia
DEST Web Site Privacy Statement
Disclaimer