Are we shooting ourselves in the foot?

[Sydneyfan]

I was reading the Uni student newspaper the other day which can often be a interesting read with some interesting topics albeit more often than not heavily slanted by the writer's bias (either to the left or right), so you often have to take what they write with a grain of salt. But, they had an interesting article on the state of Higher Education in Australia and how this could affect Australia's society and productivity in the future.

The talks a little about the history of Higher Education in Australia since the Whitlam Era where university tuition was free through to present where increasingly universities are squeezing out students from lower socio-economic backgrounds through higher fees and cutbacks in financial assistance schemes for students.

Although, it would be unmanageable to return entirely to the Whitlam Era where universities were essentially free and opened the door to higher education for thousands of people, especially people from working-class backgrounds and women, who previously would have been unable to attend university due to its costs.

Increasingly, there has been a shift in universities away from the State and move towards an entreprenuerial, corporate model where, universities like any corporations aim to maximise products and increase revenues. The end result is often detrimental for students with the termination of lesser attended, unprofitable schools and faculties within the university, which although may not have produced direct financial rewards to universities are nevertheless still valid. The move towards higher fees and the emergence of upfront fees are pushing out capable and intelligent students who cannot afford university, while rich, mediocre students are rewarded if they can pay up. Rewarding mediocrity is not what we want for our future is it?

The reduction in spending on research and development in Australia is baffling to me, in Australia we have a great opportunity to take hold in this emerging Information Era but, Government is not giving innovation the capital it needs to develop within our shores. You always seem to hear of an Australian inventing a world class product but having to move ashore to receive the funding they require to further develop it.

The brain drain from Australia which was reduced to a trickle during the 80s for the most part is starting to take hold again as our youngest and brightest increasingly have to move overseas to take advantage of further opportunities and renumerations ashore. Of course, Australia's a small country and there's always going to be some movement of the bright to larger markets to fulfill their potential but you'd think we'd be doing our utmost to halt the movement ashore. Sure, many of these Australians may move back to establish families later in life but shouldn't we endeavour to make it possible for them to have all the opportunities here so they don't feel the need as much to move overseas.

Do you think that our current policies in regards to further education are short-sighted and could have detrimental effects on Australian society in future as the ever widening divide between rich and poor continues? Are shooting ourselves in the foot by rewarding mediocry while thousands of bright people slip through the gap because they're unable to afford university?

What's your thoughts?

[Porthos]

There are a lot of jobs that require degrees that don't require smart people. Similarly there are jobs that require smart people that don't require degrees. When we say we want the bright people to stay here, its a misnomer. What we really want is the rich people to stay here, as they are the ones contributing to our economy.

Academics aren't going to keep Australia afloat, but cunning sods with business skills and entrepreneurial spirit will. They often aren't classically `bright'.

The current policies towards higher education don't seem likely to make much difference either way...but encouraging investment in Australian ideas, tax breaks for such, etc....that would make a difference.

[Theoden]

I tend to agree with you Porthos. In reality the main reason for having a degree is that it opens up a lot more windows of opportunity than not having one. To many of us we only utilise a small fraction of what we learnt at Uni.
There are also a huge amount of people that are good at learning wrote that have degrees but no 'nouse', and a lot of very smart people that found education boring, rebelled etc that have no formal qualifications but are really 'on the button'.
The whole education system needs a revamp. We still use 100 year old educational models in our society despite the huge advances in technology. We seriously need to consider home based education via PC with tutors on line and available in clinics to address problem issues. That way a child can learn at their own pace. It also means university educational levels may be reached by some at 25 and others at 12 without an in class stigma relating to development. Of course social interaction is important too but I see playgroups, sportsgroups being regularin such a system too.

[The Hitman]

On a visit to Monash, our student guide took us to an area where they deal with student welfare. The student who runs the student welfare told us of a tactic Monash (and many) uni's use to squeeze out those enrolled.

The uni's over-enroll courses to collect the money, and then select a few kids to get really tough on. At any opportunity they will kick you out of the uni, but still get to keep the money. Apparently they have a quota of these to fill, which leaves many students out in the cold.

The Hitman

P.S. I would love to see the Greens policy for tertiary education come to fruition - it would save me a bucketload next year. ;)

[sbagman]

This is a topic which I am closely involved with: loss of funding to Australian Universities, the "brain drain", the encroachment of industry on education.

Thanks to continual funding cuts to R&D in this country, there is no future for Australian researchers here. If you get a PhD and want to find rewarding employment, it isn't hear. So until the government decides to invest in higher education, Australia's best are still flooding out of the country and contributing to mainly the US but also Europe's intellectual wealth.

And I'm joining them.

[Porthos]

Um. R&D isn't higher education. Its business. The government need to give breaks to companies that use Australia to perform R&D.

Funding higher education more (thus making more PhDs) isn't going to put more money into R&D. Its just going to make more PhDs that go overseas because the government has put money into education rather than employment.

[sbagman]

Originally posted by Porthos
Um. R&D isn't higher education. Its business. The government need to give breaks to companies that use Australia to perform R&D.

Funding higher education more (thus making more PhDs) isn't going to put more money into R&D. Its just going to make more PhDs that go overseas because the government has put money into education rather than employment.

Incorrect. The vast majority of R&D done in the US, science's powerhouse, is by poorly paid postdocs and PhDs. These people work in the academic system. Funding comes either from the government, industry investment into universities (as what happens where I am working) or from another third party.

I am not advocating production of more PhDs. I am advocating producing LESS and making sure these people have somewhere to move on to. There are few new academic posts being produced, yet Australia produces 10,000 PhDs per year. So they have nowhere to go, so they leave. So Australia is putting money into highly trained, highly specialised people who work for some other country's benefit.

Postdoctoral fellowships, more career opportunities for PhDs, and refining links between industry and academia should be the government's approach in my humble opinion. And less PhD students.

[Sydneyfan]

My brother's just started off his Ph.D in Biochemistry, the other night they had a get together for the Biochem Ph.D students which my brother invited me to come along to. It was a shame in a way to look at the 50 odd intelligent students and know that realistically up to half or even more will not plying their knowledge and expertise in Australia in 5 years time.

Hopefully, the Government will soon realise that investing more in Education is worthwhile and produces long term benefits in the future.

[Porthos]

Originally posted by sbagman
Incorrect. The vast majority of R&D done in the US, science's powerhouse, is by poorly paid postdocs and PhDs. These people work in the academic system. Funding comes either from the government, industry investment into universities (as what happens where I am working) or from another third party.Industry investment into universities is the primary source of funding for R&D at colleges in the US, isn't it? Point taken.

I am not advocating production of more PhDs. I am advocating producing LESS and making sure these people have somewhere to move on to. There are few new academic posts being produced, yet Australia produces 10,000 PhDs per year. So they have nowhere to go, so they leave. So Australia is putting money into highly trained, highly specialised people who work for some other country's benefit.Agreed.

Postdoctoral fellowships, more career opportunities for PhDs, and refining links between industry and academia should be the government's approach in my humble opinion. And less PhD students. Agreed. If this is what you meant, the only quibble I had was with terming this encouragement of R&D investment as funding Higher Education, because funding Higher Education is what the government will tell you they're doing now :D

[sbagman]

Originally posted by Porthos
Industry investment into universities is the primary source of funding for R&D at colleges in the US, isn't it? Point taken.


Actually the US government invests pantloads more into academic R&D than anyone else, which is why they're the best.

[Porthos]

Just out of interest, is a fair whack of that through the military?

[sbagman]

Originally posted by Porthos
Just out of interest, is a fair whack of that through the military?

No.

[Porthos]

Interesting. So what departments is it coming from? Do they have specific stuff that they pay to get researched, or is it money without a tag attached?

[sbagman]

There are all different sources. NIH for health stuff, NCI (Cancer), ARC (basic research) and plenty of others...

[Porthos]

Do the government keep the rights/patents/intellectual property to any discoveries made? Or is it just money spent and gone?

[sbagman]

Originally posted by Porthos
Do the government keep the rights/patents/intellectual property to any discoveries made? Or is it just money spent and gone?

I'd say it would be similar to here in that is would go to the institution where the research is performed. But I'm not an expert on the American system.

[Porthos]

Cool, thanks for that info.

[Tim_in_Philly]

Some of the above is true but flat comparisons between the US and Australia can be misleading. On a per capita basis government funding of research in the two countries isn't very different. What the US has is a dramatically greater amount of private R&D funding which is why Australia lags in the comparison. However, what comes with that is the system where all the big, high profile universities are private (Harvard, Yale, Princeton, MIT....) and charge accordingly. It is not unusual to leave one of these colleges with a $150k USD debt after completing study there. I have friends who are in their late 30s who are still paying off college loans.
Big corporates spend a lot on R&D there - Sun, IBM, AT&T, Xerox, Microsoft, Glaxo,... all spend a lot on raw R&D to improve products for sale in their competitive domestic market of 300m people. An R&D edge helps if you are one of 10 competitors - here in Australia the local market is usually cornered by one or two companies and the need for a R&D edge is less pronounced and so attracts less corporate dollars. R&D is focused onexports where the number of competitors is greater - it is no surprise that agriculture and mining technology (and R&D) is outstanding in Australia on a world scale.
The problem is fixable but on the higher education front you have to free up the universities to manage their own funds and funding arrangements - if Sydney Uni wants to go private and offer fee only degrees then let it. I see Macquarie University full of shiny new buildings and no staff because capital expenditure and running expenses are kept totally separate. Let them build one less building and use the money to employ more staff. I see the NTEU forcing everyone into levels and salary bands which prevent good staff from being paid more, and quality people being attracted from private industry because that would somehow upset the fairness of it all.
If Brendan Nelson is serious about Higher Education and R&D then we need a waterfront-style shake-up of the whole sector (minus the dogs and balaclavas).

[SydneyBomber]

Originally posted by Sydneyfan

Increasingly, there has been a shift in universities away from the State and move towards an entreprenuerial, corporate model where, universities like any corporations aim to maximise products and increase revenues. The end result is often detrimental for students with the termination of lesser attended, unprofitable schools and faculties within the university, which although may not have produced direct financial rewards to universities are nevertheless still valid

Take a bow University of Technology Sydney.
:mad:

Their organisation has turned into a complete disgrace, and I cannot wait to get out.

If they wish to provide a 'corporate model' for education - they must then be held accountable and provide an appropriate level of service to their 'clients'.

THIS IS NOT HAPPENING!

The $$$ keep rolling in for sub-standard courses, woefully out of touch lecturers, poor student facilities - the list goes on and on.

As a post grad part time student (studying nights), I am made to feel like a 'nuisance' when classes are scheduled, and as if it is my fault I choose to work full time and study. This is despite the fact that I pay FULL FEES for my course (approx $1500 per individual subject), compared to school leavers on HECS.

Not to mention the manner in which the International Students are embraced with open arms as long as they have their chequebooks ready - at the expense of local students paying with HECS.

I could seriously rant all night about some of the bad experiences I've had at this place over the last 3 years, but I'll spare you the melodrama.

For Sydney based people thinking about uni - stay away from UTS!

[Sydneyfan]

Originally posted by SydneyBomber


For Sydney based people thinking about uni - stay away from UTS!

Good advice! Too late for me though unfortunately, I'm doing a part-time postgrad course there too! :p

I still aren't certain whether I truly am getting value for money though, I've only got 3 contact hours a week this semster, worked out I'm paying about $30 per hour for it too! The facilities are uninspiring, most of the lecturers have been ok though, I'm studying in a different course to my undergraduate so most things taught a fairly new to me so I can't judge yet whether they are useful or not. There seems to be quite good resources and networks for the undergrads but so for the postgrads.

It seems like we get the minimal requirements. I just started my course there last year and have only got two subjects left, 1 this semester, 1 next, then I'm outta there!

[SydneyBomber]

Originally posted by Sydneyfan


Good advice! Too late for me though unfortunately, I'm doing a part-time postgrad course there too! :p


Which faculty? Course?

I'm in IT. (God that sounds ****y - sounds kinda like some sad ass in a bar sidling up to girls with a drink saying.... "I'm in IT - I'm rich!")
:p

[Sydneyfan]

Originally posted by SydneyBomber


Which faculty? Course?

I'm in IT. (God that sounds ****y - sounds kinda like some sad ass in a bar sidling up to girls with a drink saying.... "I'm in IT - I'm rich!")
:p
:D

I'm in the Humanities/Social Sciences faculty doing a Grad Dip. in Electronic Information Management.

[Docker_Brat]

Unfortunately Universities are geared toward only accepting the cream of society - thick and rich.

[Bloodstained Angel]

Im in much the same kinda game myself SydneyFan except I ended up in it via Librarianship.

Interesting to read your comments regarding UTS. I did my Graduate stuff in Adelaide in the late 80's at the Uni of SA (or SA Inst of Tech back then).

Unforunately it was much the same back then too - no money, crap facilities, out of date equipment, mediocre and un-inspiring staff, inadequate curriculums. And at the end of the day it didn't really end up teaching me very much at all !

I think the problems you speak of appear to endemic in the Academic culture. 'Corporate model' or no corporate model, I think people just have to concentrate on delivering a decnt, relevant, and value for money qualification.

cheers

[Sydneyfan]

BsA,

The course at UTS has been adequate though my main gripe would be probably be the lack of contact hours for the subjects, each subject just having 1 hour lecture and 2 hour tutorials. We seem to brush over everything, including some subjects which could do with a bit further examination. Most of the staff have been good since quite a few of them were part-time lecturers working in the field they're teaching, so they're pretty passionate about their subject, which makes learning more interesting and easier!

Another interesting thing has been the amount of group assignments which we have in our cirriculum, I know that it's important to have group assignments because in the workforce you'll often be working on deadlines with a group of people, and it's important to get further experience on team work. Though one of my subjects last semester comprised of 3 assessments all of which were group assignments, which makes it difficult for everyone to meet up because of work commitments etc.

Apart from that, it's quite good, though UTS itself is a pretty cold, bland sort of place and most of the lecture rooms are getting older so they aren't as fresh as some of the ones at unis such as UNSW.

[Bloodstained Angel]

yeah I know the place quite well as I helped out with some Knowledge Management courses down there about 2 years ago.

Compared to some other 60's campuses, UTS ain't so bad I guess. At least its in the city and more or less concentrated in a single tower block.

Other 'new university' places like UNSW, Macquarie or Monash are pretty bleak, grey places to go. The worst is easily Flinders University of SA though - god I've been to prisons with cheerier atomspheres than that cold concrete dump.

cheers