Push for Graduate School Universities (2 Viewers)

[Generator]

Push for graduate school universities

Samantha Maiden
November 23, 2005


BRENDAN Nelson has outlined a second wave of higher education reforms that would encourage students to do generalist first degrees at outer-suburban and regional campuses before entering elite graduate schools at the nation's sandstone universities.

The Education Minister predicted that under the US-style graduate school model, there would be fewer undergraduate degree places at the prestige research-intensive universities.

But regional and outersuburban campuses specialising in teaching would get more taxpayer-funded university places.

Universities would also secure more freedom to offer full-fee degrees not subsidised by taxpayers, with Dr Nelson canvassing debate on lifting the current 35 per cent cap on the number of full-fee degree places.

His new reform blueprint, already being pushed by sandstone institutions such as Melbourne University, aims to boost international recognition of Australian degrees and help graduates get jobs overseas.

But it would force more students to pay for full-fee postgraduate degrees. A full-fee degree in medicine at Melbourne University already costs up to $200,000.

The graduate school approach would force students to complete a three-year generalist degree in subjects including science or arts at a teaching-intensive university before entering graduate programs at sandstone universities in medicine or law.

Mirroring the blueprint recently unveiled by Melbourne University vice-chancellor Glyn Davis, a student might complete an undergraduate program at the University of South Australia before progressing to a University of Adelaide graduate program.

"If you want to think about a US analogy, we're becoming more like the University of California, Berkeley, which is a public university but generates its own income," Professor Davis said.

The tiered university model represents a further unravelling of the Dawkins reforms of the 1980s, which levelled the higher education sector by granting university status to colleges of education.

In an interview with The Australian, Dr Nelson warned universities that have failed to attract students they should reconsider their pricing and consider cut-price deals on some degrees.

For the first time, he revealed that hundreds of university places remained unfilled after campus authorities refused to drop entry scores any lower.

"Volume, too often, has been at the expense of quality," Dr Nelson said.

"As far as the future is concerned, we need to move towards an environment where there is much less regulation applied to our research-intensive universities. They should have a smaller undergraduate load. They have to ask themselves whether world-class quality is compatible with large undergraduate enrolments.

"And I think the focus of public resourcing should, for teaching as opposed to research, be focused on our outer-suburban and regional universities."

Dr Nelson pledged that his proposal would not result in a reduction in taxpayer-subsidised HECS places. Describing some entry scores as low as 33 out of 100 as "unacceptable", he said entry standards had dropped too low as universities faced a drop in demand for university places and a strong jobs market.

"Across Victorian universities are students who secured a government sponsored university place with an entry score of 55per cent or less," he said. "You've got to say to yourself, just how many more university places do you want or need?"

Warning that Australia must continue the reform process to compete with China and international universities, Dr Nelson said more deregulation was needed.

Two years ago, Dr Nelson introduced the biggest shake-up of the sector since the Dawkins reforms, allowing universities to set their own HECS fees with a cap of 25 per cent on increases.

The Nelson changes allowed universities to enrol full-fee students in up to 35 per cent of places in any course. Dr Nelson said he was prepared to canvass debate on removing the fees cap.

USA, all the way.

 

[Frigid]

generalist = high school.

 

[Ziff]

I don't necessarily think there is anything wrong with the American model except the exorbitant fees. If we had both "tiers" under the HECS scheme then there would not be any issue.

Both, at the time of making my choice in degree and in retrospect, I think I would have preferred to have done Arts first then Law. I would have preferred to have done more arts subjects, but for various reasons chose combined arts/law. I think for others the reforms to the higher education system may cause them to choose the combined route after realising that graduate law means having to pay a shitload once their FEE-HELP runs out.

Particularly in medicine would 3yrs in a "Lib Arts" type degree followed by 4 years in medicine be appropriate. I'd much rather be treated by a doctor who is committed to doing medicine and has real world experience rather than a 99.95 HSC student fresh out of high school who is dropped into medicine with little real world experience and perhaps little real motivation to do medicine.

 

[Benny1103]

Personally, I do not like the idea of being "forced" to do subjects which are completely pointless, stupid and irrelevant to the field that I wish to enter after graduating. I also do not understand what is with people who (whether or not they like to admit) continually imply that 99.95 achievers who undertake a medicine course have no motivation to study it.

I assume that most 70 year olds have a fair bit of life experience. Why not get them to study medicine?

I guess that as usual, there will be people who are easily manipulated into thinking that the American education system is great. So go ahead and support a system where your education will be further restricted by rules which "force" you to take irrelevant "generalist" subjects.

 

[Xayma]

I don't necessarily think there is anything wrong with the American model except the exorbitant fees. If we had both "tiers" under the HECS scheme then there would not be any issue.

The fees aren't that bad actually if you stick to the public system although that really is only useful in your home state.

What was interesting is until recently their student loans often grew slower then HECS.

I don't like the idea of cut-price degrees. "So why are a teacher? Like kids?"* "Nah, hate the little fuckers, but it was 50% off at uni, got to love those sales."

*Not implying teaching is an unwanted degree or anything just had to pick a degree.

 

[Frigid]

Particularly in medicine would 3yrs in a "Lib Arts" type degree followed by 4 years in medicine be appropriate. I'd much rather be treated by a doctor who is committed to doing medicine and has real world experience rather than a 99.95 HSC student...

how is an Arts degree "real world experience"? hell, you might as well say it's better for people to study a trade, or become a paramedic, before they even begin a medical degree so they have "real world experience".

i personally have nothing against an arts degree. i want to do arts/law myself (but i've done too much commerce to start over). what i fail to see is why it behoves everyone to do a lib arts degree before they can do whatever they want to do.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

I think people are reacting a little fast to criticise this...
Personally I feel making people do an arts degree for a few years before taking on a more advanced course could be very good.

 

[Generator]

I believe that Ziff was referring to a broader education rather than one actually based in the real world. It's a sensible notion, to tell the truth, especially when you consider the fact that a university is meant to offer an environment for higher learning, not just vocational training.

 

[Sarah]

Well well, i was wondering how long it would take someone to bring up this issue.

Anyway, here are some articles published in The Age (online) last week concerning the University of Melbourne and its strategic plan.

Top Uni to adopt US system

Hall of learning prepare to sacrifice

Monash won't follow Melbourne Uni lead

 

[Generator]

More on the issue - US-style universities proposal divides educators

 

[Frigid]

university is meant to offer an environment for higher learning, not just vocational training.

yours is a normative view.

from what i can see, a lot of universities have become university inc.

 

[gerhard]

the same place you get the money to pay for your current undergraduate degree.

hecs/austudy

 

[Minai]

Either this, or universities would split into vocational uni's and prestige-research uni's

 

[+Po1ntDeXt3r+]

I believe that Ziff was referring to a broader education rather than one actually based in the real world. It's a sensible notion, to tell the truth, especially when you consider the fact that a university is meant to offer an environment for higher learning, not just vocational training.

till they teach medicine at tafe... we cant afford a 8 yr course

5-6 yr courses are hardly holding up the system we are importing doctors as a result..
medicine is a vocational course.. in a sense especially later on and if u lower the amount of places..increase the cos or.. extend the training more.. ull get less doctors.. we are at critical levels.. and they are gettin paid peanuts..

and to Ziff.. Lib Arts in reality makes little to no difference.. on a plus note.. since they know even less science.. they can admit fault more clearly..

Food for thought.. it takes medicine (5-6) + Post grad YRs (2-3) + Fellowship training (3-6)
ok.. minimum is about 10 yrs (GP) [can do it in 9 if ure rushing] to 16 yrs (some surgical or physician courses) to train.. sure u can make grad courses..

but then ppl tat want to do med will do wat they do in the US.. 2 yrs accelerated sciences..

Problem is the system for medicine isnt broke... and this will make it worse..
different name, same shit.

Also 99.95 will really only guarantee a place in Melb Med. Nowhere else.

 

[Ziff]

Liberal Arts in the US/USYD style which involves languages, arts and science components.

 

[Benny1103]

Gerhard, If HECS can cover everything then why were so many people complaining about the price increase for courses this year? I mean, HECs still covers it right? The point is that not everyone has daddy to fund life's little pleasures for them. Oh daddy, please cough up a few thousand dollars so that I can learn an obscure foreign language which no one speaks. It will compliment my Engineering degree very well because it is totally irrelevant to my course.

People should be permitted to take whatever courses are relevant to their career aspirations. We shouldn't be forced to waste tens of thousands on dollars on pointless courses before we are given permission to take the course that we actually wish to do. How would you like it if you were made to do 4 years of physics even though you were pursuing a career in law?

 

[+Po1ntDeXt3r+]

Liberal Arts in the US/USYD style which involves languages, arts and science components.

and not a single communication course there either..
(yes language.. but if u have no idea how to approach a person.. French will not help... and I have done languages/maths/philosophy in uni too)

I mean again.. u can talk/discuss ancient history and delve into the classics.. but wow.. u took 1/2- 1/4 load of Anatomy/Physiology/Pathology/Pharmacology (cos if u took more it would be more like a science degree) that's goin to kill you since
in 1st yr of USYD Med.. its practical (clinical) application of knowledge

US schools counter this.. but still its they arent great.. a 6 yrs Aust student is as likely (possibly more) to pass the USMLE (medical licensing exam) as a 7 yr US student.

I think broad education are fine.. but for those that choose it...

 

[sikeveo]

err alvin, you have to remember you are working while you study. Sometimes you portray med as something so hard and pointless to study. Have some optimism.

 

[Frigid]

I think broad education are fine.. but for those that choose it...

i concur with my friend on this point, and i think the same is the crux of the argument against a compulsory liberal arts education.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

I think broad education are fine.. but for those that choose it...

If they do not choose it then they will be probably looked down on anyway, the reason for doing this is that our current system is (according to other countries *cough* usa *cough*) not producing well qualified graduates.

Gerhard, If HECS can cover everything then why were so many people complaining about the price increase for courses this year? I mean, HECs still covers it right? The point is that not everyone has daddy to fund life's little pleasures for them. Oh daddy, please cough up a few thousand dollars so that I can learn an obscure foreign language which no one speaks. It will compliment my Engineering degree very well because it is totally irrelevant to my course.

But university shouldn't just be about getting a vocational education.

As for why people complain about price increases... it's because more than likely they will end up having to pay this, but only once they are working... In all honesty it isn't that bad, the way it works is that once you are earning a whole bunch of money then you should pay at least some of your money back for society's investment in you..