Tertiary Education Reforms Long Overdue

Hon Heather Roy, ACT Deputy Leader
Friday, March 5 2010

Like thousands of other parents around the country I've delivered my university aged children to their respective universities in the past couple of weeks. With 'O Week' over for another year, and everyone settling in to new halls of residence or flats, the academic year is well underway. Students beginning or returning to tertiary education have done so with a warning from the Government to take their studies seriously, or risk losing their student loan.

New Zealand makes a significant investment into ensuring that students are able to access tertiary education - 41.5 percent of the tertiary education budget goes into student loans and allowances, compared to the average 17.6 percent spent by other nations in the OECD.

This investment has seen the number of students at universities, polytechnics, colleges of education, wananga and Private Training Establishments skyrocket. Ministry of Education figures show that the number of 'Domestic' students - New Zealand citizens, permanent residents or refugees - enrolled in tertiary education grew more than 380,000 in just 10 years, from around 57,000 in 1998 to 439,867 in 2008.

The Government, however, has identified "increasingly urgent problems" within the sector and hinted at looming reforms. One of these problems is that of performance. According to media reports, only half the country's domestic students who began a bachelor's degree in 2004 actually completed their studies within five years. Another problem identified is that many courses - especially those below degree level - display similarly high dropout rates or do not provide students with the skills they need to gain paid employment.

It is, of course, taxpayers' money that funds the government component of tertiary education. This means that the Government has an obligation to ensure it gets value for the investment put in. With many courses not delivering on expectations, and some students not achieving adequately, this is clearly not happening.

Indications of how these problems will be addressed were outlined in the Government's Tertiary Education Strategy 2010-15, released at the end of last year. Each university is funded by the Government for a specific number of students. The Strategy made it clear that there is no extra money to go round - while universities will be able to take more students, they will not be funded for them. 'Extras' will have to pay full fees, rather than the current approximate 30 percent contribution from the State. The Strategy also states that funding will be linked to performance and there was something of a media furore at the beginning to the year around this issue.

In my opinion these moves not only make sense - they are long overdue. For instance: while the majority of students are hard-working and diligent, there are those who don't reach the required standard to pass their course (for whatever reason) or who remain in tertiary education for many years rather than entering the workforce.

New Zealand is not alone in this debate. A government-commissioned review of post-graduate education is currently underway in the UK. Recent commentary around who should and shouldn't be able to provide UK post-graduate courses - some, for example, are calling for the funding of PhDs to be focussed on research-intensive institutions - has been criticised by opponents as trying to engineer a 'two-tier system' of tertiary education. Like here, the debate revolves around performance and value for taxpayer investment.

Here in New Zealand, Tertiary Education Minister Steven Joyce has made it clear that the details of the looming reforms are yet to be worked out. But the Government has already indicated that a first step to creating greater efficiency within our tertiary education institutions will be to look into students' academic performance when they apply for student loans and/or allowances. By targeting students in this way, the Government is attempting to ensure value for money of the investment of taxpayers' generosity.

Some universities have claimed that they will have to turn thousands of students away due to under-performance, because of under-funding by Government. My response to that is: "how fair is it that tertiary providers have, for some time, allowed failing students to stay on?" Failing individual papers, perhaps, but entire courses?

Like schools, tertiary education providers should be striving for excellence. If students are failing, it could be for a number of reasons - for example: academic thresholds for entry may be too low, some students may not be capable of achieving the necessary grades, or courses may not be well taught. Whatever the reason, the issue of performance standards needs to be addressed. It would seem obvious that tertiary institutions have an ethical obligation to assess students' ability and provide quality education. If they are not meeting this ethical obligation why should the taxpayer foot the bill?

Ultimately, the Government seeks to ensure that more New Zealanders are achieving at higher levels of tertiary education - a goal that cannot be achieved without taking positive action to create better outcomes for students through quality, relevant courses.

This approach, coupled with ensuring that Government funding is directed towards those who will utilise it most appropriately, will benefit taxpayers and society in general as the job market will ultimately benefit from people with relevant and appropriate skills.

Lest We Forget - The (So-Called) Girls War (March 5 1830)
In 1830 at the Bay of Islands an incident led to Nga Puhi expeditions against the southern iwi. Known as the 'Girls War', it all began when Captain WD Brind of a whaling vessel anchored off Kororareka (later Russell) took two Maori girls as wives. He tired of them after a while and took two other, younger girls - sisters - and discarded the first pair.

Soon afterwards the four girls were bathing on the beach at Kororareka, and began fighting amongst themselves while their mothers looked on. The mother of the first two girls rushed into the water and nearly drowned the other two.

This relatively minor incident led to an exchange of threats between the girls' iwi. Northern Nga Puhi (under the leadership of Ururoa) clashed with southern Nga Puhi (led by Kiwikiwi) on March 5, 1830. The following day an accidental discharge of a musket left a woman of the invading party dead and fighting erupted in which many were killed and wounded. Missionaries Samuel Marsden and Henry Williams became involved as intermediaries, trying to avert conflict, and played a role in the peace negotiations that left Kororareka in the control of northern Nga Puhi. Control of the town continued to be contested over the next seven years.

ENDS

© Scoop Media