Submission to Victorian Government Forum: Review of Higher Education

Submission to Victorian Government

Priority Issues in Higher Education

July 2002

Submission to Victorian Government forum: Review of Higher Education

Introduction

RMIT University welcomes this opportunity to provide comment to the Minister for Postcompulsory Education and Training regarding priority issues in Victorian higher education.

Our response to Higher Education at the Crossroads is attached and provides a general statement of RMIT’s position in relation to the Commonwealth Government’s Review of Higher Education. It also identifies what RMIT believes are key priorities for the Commonwealth Government in supporting and adding value to the work of Australian universities.

This submission to the Victorian Government builds on our Crossroads response, and focuses on issues that we believe to be of particular relevance to the quality and provision of higher education, research and development in Victoria.

It focuses primarily on

• The role of universities, and the nature of their contribution to social and economic development

• Building participation at undergraduate and postgraduate levels, and the need for a sustainable revenue base to support this participation

• Building partnerships between universities and their communities, particularly in regional Australia

• Improving the interface between vocational education and training and higher education

• Developing good governance systems

The role of universities

A key issue arising from the Review is the role played by universities in building a knowledge intensive economy and a cohesive, prosperous society.

Universities form a crucial part of the infrastructure which underpins social, economic and cultural development. While a strong national system of higher education provision is essential to positioning Australia in a competitive global environment, the linkages between universities and their communities at a regional and state level are more important than ever. This is partly because it is these partnerships that provide the basis for our national strength and consequently our global competitiveness.

More importantly, it is because universities can support communities in responding to the challenges of globalisation by assisting with adaptive change: for example, through provision of timely and relevant research and education and training programs; and by brokering exchanges between communities.

Such a role depends on meaningful engagement which respects multiple expertises. For example, the RICE program (RMIT International Community Exchange) has involved hundreds of RMIT students from approximately 45 countries engaging in visits and exchange programs in Western Victoria, ranging from youth conferences, joint research work, international students in schools, field studies and work experience placements. Such programmes are mutually beneficial, highly valued and reflect one model of an internationalised, urban university working in partnership with regional communities.

Therefore, Commonwealth and State Governments must act in effective partnership to ensure the quality and viability of Australia’s higher education system. This is a far more important policy goal than the achievement of one or two `world-class universities’ (however measured), especially if the latter process were to divert resources away from universities that currently provide important services to rural and regional Australia.

Another question arising from the Review relates to the nature of the role played by universities. It is true, as the Crossroads Discussion Paper argues, that universities do not have a monopoly on knowledge production and certification of knowledge acquisition, but they do have a unique and important contribution to make to the knowledge economy, and deserve public support in fulfilling that role.

The Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-First Century described the role of universities as uniting all the functions associated with knowledge – research, innovation, education and international cooperation – for the purpose of developing society as a whole. [1] As Michael Gibbons puts it, universities must become engines of development for people, institutions (including government) and for democracy in general.[2] The criteria set out in the National Protocols for Higher Education Approval Processes (MCEETYA, 2000) provide a useful reference point for understanding how universities achieve that role. According to these criteria, universities demonstrate:

• teaching and learning that engage with advanced knowledge and inquiry
• a culture of sustained scholarship extending from that which informs inquiry and basic teaching and learning, to the creation of new knowledge through research, and original creative endeavour;
• commitment of teachers, researchers, course designers and assessors to free inquiry and the systematic advancement of knowledge.

These characteristics reflect the fact that universities provide a wider range of disciplines than do private providers, and therefore encourage multidisciplinary research that allows for the hybridisation of new knowledge across discipline boundaries. These disciplines may emerge as important in the future, despite present lack of market recognition: therefore, universities’ commitment to a diversity of knowledges and scholarships is essential to their capacity to address society’s long-term needs. The National Protocols also reflect universities’ contribution to innovation - the generation of new ideas, and their take-up by people - through the co-location of teaching, research and scholarship, which results in the production and transfer of new skills and knowledge through the research/teaching interface.

Any policy which, directly or indirectly, reduces the capacity of Victorian universities to undertake research will have a direct impact on the quality of the learning environment and the attractiveness of these institutions for domestic and international students. This would have a consequent negative impact on the cultural and economic development of Victoria.

Therefore, RMIT recommends that the Victorian Government oppose any funding mechanism which results, directly or indirectly, in the creation of `teaching only’ universities.

2. Building participation

To be successful, Australia must invest in human capital, innovate in existing industries and embrace new industries. This means increasing opportunities for participation in tertiary education, and particularly in higher education. 18% of Australians now have a bachelor’s degree or higher. This is well short of the target set by the UK Government of 50% of its population aged 18-30 participating in higher education by 2010, and the AVCC’s target of 60% of the Australian adult population participating in higher education by 2020.

Such growth will not be achieved under current policy settings. The Report of the Knowledge Nation Taskforce (2001) notes a decline in the rate of growth in higher education participation in Australia (especially relative to other OECD nations) and an actual fall in the numbers of domestic university students of 0.5% (c, 3,200) between 1999 and 2000. Victoria has one of the highest levels of unmet demand in Australia (36% compared to a national level of 24%). This is largely a result of the disproportionate impact on Victorian universities caused by cuts on Commonwealth Government operating grant forward estimates between 1997 and 2000. The formula governing the allocation of these places reflects population growth in key demographic groups, rather than participation rates or demand. In an environment driven by the demand for lifelong learning, strategies to increase participation should reflect the imperatives of the knowledge economy and new modes of delivery, rather than simply being tied to population demographics.

Increasing participation should be accompanied by measures to increase quality. University graduates, with high-level, transferable generic capabilities coupled with discipline specific knowledge and skills, directly contribute to social and economic development at a state and national level. Therefore, increased participation must be funded at a level which will maintain quality and diversity.

Therefore, it is imperative that the Commonwealth Government, in partnership with the States, develop an agreed strategy for increasing participation in higher education over the next twenty years. Such a strategy should reflect increasing demand and be framed around targets for participation, and ensure a sustainable revenue stream to support this participation.

Such a strategy should not be dependent on increasing the burden of cost to students. Firstly, public universities are important public infrastructure, contributing to the public benefit through the development of human and social capital. The latter entails building communities of learning, effective partnerships between education providers and industry, and pathways between education sectors. Therefore, it is the responsibility of Government, not students and other private interests, to maintain their viability. Secondly, cost is already emerging as a significant deterrent to participation in rural and regional Australia, especially when students are required to leave home to attend university. Across the board, the absence of adequate living support for students has caused an increase in the hours students spend in part-time employment, and indications are that this is negatively affecting their success.[3]

2.2 New models for investment in postgraduate participation

Victoria has also been hit hard by the reduction of funded postgraduate load under the Research Training Scheme. Nationally, funded load will fall from 25,000 to 21,500. At a time when other nations are investing in research education and training, it makes no sense for Australia to reduce opportunities for postgraduate research.

RMIT enrols a large number of postgraduate research students who are employed full-time in professional practice. These students report that their engagement with research education enriches and informs their professional practice, and assists in the development of important capabilities such as critical thinking.[4] However, the development of such practical synergies between employment and postgraduate research are hampered by Commonwealth Government funding mechanisms which reward conventional research output and the speed with which students complete their course.

Commonwealth and State governments should consider models for funding postgraduate research which encourage and support the relationships between employment, professional practice and postgraduate research.

Commonwealth and State governments should consider the introduction of Australian Postgraduate Awards targeted to regional partnerships, which could be taken up at any university offering opportunities for collaborative postgraduate research training focused don the needs of regional Australia.

3. Supporting partnerships between universities and their regions

Universities support regional development through engagement with communities in their state, in their country and internationally. In Victoria, RMIT directly supports regional development by:

• providing learning opportunities for people in regional and rural Australia and therefore contributing to the supply of skilled professionals (for example, the RMIT nursing program based in Hamilton, Victoria);
• developing intellectual and physical infrastructure which supports the sustainability and growth of local industry and communities; through partnerships with other education providers and industry (eg RMIT’s development of a business incubator in Hamilton, and its development of a Centre for TAFE Research and Education in partnership with East Gippsland Institute of TAFE).
• research and development which contribute directly to regional development and sustainable communities (eg RMIT’s Gippsland Lakes Research Program, which is multidisciplinary in nature and is contributing to the development of sustainable agriculture and tourism industries, and its establishment of a Centre for Rural and Regional Development in Hamilton to conduct and broker major research activities)

In addition, universities indirectly support regional sustainability through the creation of employment opportunities and spin-offs associated with their presence in regional Australia. This is borne out by the findings of a study undertaken by the Public Sector Research Centre at the University of NSW, which found that expenditure on education had the biggest multiplier effect in regional Australia of any area of public spending, generating 38 jobs for every million dollars invested. [5]

RMIT recognises that the value of universities’ contribution to regional development rests largely on the degree to which it is based on genuine partnerships between universities and their communities. In relation to its engagement with communities in East Gippsland, the Western District and the northern metropolitan corridor of Melbourne, RMIT seeks to achieve such partnerships by

• Listening and responding to the needs and aspirations of these communities
• Working with each community in a way that adds value to what is already provided; including forging partnerships with local industry and other providers of education and research
• Where possible utilising local expertise and infrastructure, and tapping into local support; both financial and in-kind
• Making the expertise and resources of an urban, internationalised university available to people in these communities

This model of partnership is not dependent on `bricks and mortar’ but rather utilises `new economy’ tools (such as information and communications technology) as well as face-to-face engagement to generate outcomes that benefit both the university and the communities it serves.

However, the development of such partnerships is hampered by lack of financial support from the Commonwealth Government. Historically, DEST has defined regional engagement in terms of regional universities, and funding support has been allocated on the basis of physical, campus-specific infrastructure in regional Australia. This severely disadvantages universities that are actively engaging in partnership activity that does not rely on highly-developed campus infrastructure. For example, RMIT landscape architecture students won an award for best student project, with outstanding community consultation noted, for their landscape design of the RMIT Hamilton site[6]. However this project entailed substantial costs in travel and use of university resources, and was only possible as it was funded as a full cost consultancy by RMIT. It is difficult for urban universities to maintain this active engagement of students with regional Australia without access to targeted infrastructure support.

In order to successfully engage in such partnerships, which benefit students, staff and communities, DEST should provide funding support for regional provision that recognizes the value of such activities. Funding for regional higher education provision should not be restricted to `regional universities’, however defined: rather it should recognize and support outcome-based activity.

Victoria has contributed significant support to RMIT’s regional engagement through the Regional Infrastructure Development Fund, but in order to be sustainable in the long term this partnership needs to be extended to the Commonwealth Government.

In the past, regional university activity has not figured strongly in the Commonwealth Government’s regional development strategy, although it has long been high on the agenda of State and Territory Governments. RMIT is pleased to note that this is changing, with the Department of Transport and Regional Services engaging more actively in the development of policies and models of best practice to improve partnerships between universities and their regions.

Therefore, it is important that the Commonwealth:

• take a `whole of government’ approach to supporting and fostering partnerships between universities and their regions;
• develop funding mechanisms that support partnerships that do not rest on `bricks and mortar’ campus development but nonetheless deliver real outcomes to regional Australia: for example, a regional higher education innovation partnerships scheme administered jointly by DOTRS and DEST that supports outcome-based activities.

Improving the VET/Higher Education Interface

In its response to Crossroads, RMIT suggests a number of practical strategies that, while recognising the distinctive contributions of Vocational Education and Training and Higher Education, would support more effective linkages and articulation between the two. The success of these strategies relies on State and Commonwealth government cooperation. They include:

• A systematic approach to mapping and promoting pathways between VET and higher education, to ensure that students and potential students have up-to-date information about learning options available to them
• Recognition and support for the role played by TAFE institutions in filling the gap between university-based research and development and taking products and processes into the marketplace; through, for example, support for `Centres of Excellence’ in targeted areas
• Developing funding and reporting models for dual sector institutions which address the problems created by different funding and reporting regimes, and which enhance their capacity to offer high quality education and research services and opportunities for articulation.

Governance

As stated in our submission to Crossroads, RMIT supports the principle that university governance structures should be effective, transparent, democratic and accountable, while addressing the need for sound business management and good corporate citizenship. RMIT does not support any reduction in stakeholder participation in university governance.

RMIT recognises the stake of Commonwealth and State governments in the effective operations of public universities, which is reflected in the roles both levels of Government play in determining structures for university governance and accountability. However, public universities experience tensions and impediments as a result of different regulatory and reporting requirements, some of which overlap. This is exacerbated in the case of dual sector institutions, which are required to meet two completely different sets of auditing and accountability requirements.

There are also tensions arising from different policy priorities at State and Commonwealth levels. For example, while universities are being actively encouraged by the Commonwealth to increase commercial outcomes from their activities, State auditor-generals have been strongly critical of their attempts to do so. While this is understandable, given the different positions from which each level of government is operating, it is nonetheless extremely difficult for universities to achieve the outcomes desired by both parties.

Therefore, it would be useful for State and Commonwealth Governments to develop an agreed approach (through MCEETYA) to the commercialisation of university activities and products which preserves the public interest, is consistent with universities’ legislation, and delivers good commercial outcomes.

1

[1] Jacques Delors (Chair), Learning: the Treasure Within, UNESCO 1996.

[2] Michael Gibbons, Engagement as a Core Value for the University: A Consultation Document, Association of Commonwealth Universities, April 2001.