Higher education reforms now under way have missed the main point, according to a national organisation of professional associations.
Professions Australia, which represents more than 200 000 Australian professionals, believes that our higher education system should ensure that there is a supply of qualified professionals to serve the community across Australia.
“If we have this objective,” said Professions Australia President, Barry Grear, “it should make us focus sharply on outcomes – on how the education system impacts upon the community.”
“Yet, the current debate on higher education has focused too sharply on the ‘input’ side – financing, fees, allocation of places and related issues – to the detriment of outcomes.”
“This was the case with the Crossroads review conducted by Minister Nelson and it is still the case with the Budget package, Backing Australia’s Future.”
“While these exercises have been under way, we have seen evidence in the community of shortages of engineers, IT professionals, physiotherapists, podiatrists, veterinarians, and other professionals,” Mr Grear said.
“The Budget package has made some attempt to address shortages of nurses and teachers, and there are a number of other praiseworthy elements in the package, but much more needs to be done if these current and likely future shortages are to be dealt with.”
“Part of the problem is that community views, both nationally and at the level of individual universities, are not being fed into higher education decision-making. There is a dialogue between the Minister and the universities but other stakeholders have to this point been mostly excluded.”
“Professions Australia proposes that university-community consultative councils be set up at the national level and at the level of individual universities to make sure that information about needs is fed into key decisions. We need to make sure that the community in the future is being served by sufficient numbers of competent professionals.”
Professions Australia’s member associations represent accountants, architects, audiologists, computer professionals, dentists, engineers, pharmacists, quantity surveyors and veterinarians. A number of other associations are in the process of joining the organisation.
Attached is a summary of Professions Australia’s submission to the current Senate Committee inquiry into higher education funding. The complete submission is at http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/eet_ctte/highed2003/submissions/sublist.htm (No. 396).
Contact: Dr David Stephens, Policy Consultant, 02 6257 6100 or 0413 867 972.
11 September 2003
Senate Education References Committee: Inquiry into higher education funding Summary of Professions Australia submission, August 2003Professions Australia (PA) believes that the basic objective of professional education should be to ensure a supply of qualified professionals to serve the community across Australia. This objective focuses sharply on outcomes – how the education system impacts upon the community.
The current debate on higher education has focused too sharply on the ‘input’ side – financing, fees, allocation of places and related issues – to the detriment of outcomes.
Diversity of university mission (a key aim of the Government’s package) does not guarantee good outcomes. Diversity means catering for the differing needs of the individual communities that universities serve and for the developing needs of the nation.
There is an unspoken assumption in Crossroads and Our universities: Backing Australia’s future that tertiary education is too important to the nation to be left to universities. It is also too important to the nation and to individual communities to be left to government, or to government and universities.
Community influence needs to be institutionalised to ensure community needs for graduates in particular professions are taken into account in higher education decision-making. The same applies at the national level.
This can be done through the proposed Commonwealth Grants Scheme (CGS). PA proposes that university-community consultative councils (U-CCCs) be set up at the national level and at the level of individual universities to feed into CGS decisions.
U-CCCs would channel the views of professional bodies, community groups, state and local governments, and other stakeholders into decision-making about the mix of courses and the funding of universities.
PA proposes that community consultation requirements be written into university corporate governance principles and that effective community consultation be made a condition for increases in funding per student place.
There is an evident need for greater community input into higher education decisions. There are already examples, particularly in ‘small enrolment’ professional courses, where the equitable supply of professionals across Australia is under threat. The PA submission presents evidence from a number of professions.
PA also fears that HECS deregulation may lead to competition between universities on the basis of ‘brand imaging’, predatory pricing to drive smaller universities out of some professional streams, and course mixes that do not reflect community needs. PA doubts that price signals alone, such as holding down HECS premiums on nursing and teaching, will channel students into ‘national priority’ streams.
PA believes that improving student: staff ratios can greatly improve the capacity of universities to produce adequately qualified professionals, along with mentoring and accreditation through professional associations. Mentoring also supports the inculcation of appropriate ethical standards in professional graduates.
There is scope for collaboration between institutions, provided it is done to produce better outcomes and not just to save money.