#2014HES

#2014HES

Dr. Leesa Wheelahan

Radical restructuring of tertiary education in Australia: the impact on colleges

Leesa Wheelahan

Argument

• Radical experiment in Australia • No signposts • Lessons so far? Market = dodginess, more

regulation & stratification • One tertiary education market

with different segments & different logics • Marketisation leading to

deinstitutionalisation of TAFE

Australia has 2 sectors of tertiary education

Understanding VET policy in Australia • Thomas Hobbes

(1651) the life of man in the state of nature is “solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short”

Range of policies (vary by state)

• Student voucher up to Certificate III • Higher level VET qualifications through income

contingent loans • Whole fields of education not funded • Variable funding rate (like widgets) • Remove ‘full service provider’ funding • Take back TAFE’s assets & lease on a

competitive basis & to private providers

Shares of publicly funded EFT students

TAFE Private providers 2009 2013 % 2009 2013 %

Victoria 77.6 45.3 9.5 12.3 47.5 621.5 South Aus 71.4 51.3 28.4 26.8 47.9 219.5 NSW 88.5 87.1 -2.2 8.1 10.1 22.6 QLD 75.8 65.1 -11.5 23.7 34 47.7 West Aus 83.7 77.7 1.8 14.7 20.8 54.9 Australia 81.2 63.3 2.0 14.6 32.8 194.8

Quality & confidence?

• “THREE out of four training colleges have given students substandard training or questionable assessments, the industry regulator has revealed”

• Natasha Bita, The Oz, 7 & 10 Nov 2014

• ASQA “…has in the past three months audited one in four of Australia’s 289 training colleges offering childcare, and judged 80 per cent to be substandard.”

Circular argument

• Market not working? Tweak the market! • Can’t break into this logic

Less regulation?

• New VET standards – 8 standards, at least 58 sub-standards,

at least 62 subsections of the sub-standards, & 4 schedules attached to standard 1

• Each state regulates who gets money • ACPET to set up it own stronger standards • Market in regulators? Why not? US does

Difference in market settings in VET & HE – or why it is a race to the bottom in VET

VET HE Providers Education doesn’t have to

be main purpose Education must be main purpose

No. of providers About 5000 About 173 Nature of market Price Positional goods Product Must be the same Different, but

isomorphic Costs for entry Low High Quality framework Laughable Rigorous Institutional influence

Low High – part of social elites

Public funding For private providers Who knows? Funding certainty No! The widget model Yes – sort of IC loans Partially implemented Fully implemented 14

Burton Clark – 3 markets in HE

• Consumer markets – Competition – tuition fees, wares & goods – Consumer choice (government may shape)

• Labour markets – Competition for faculty, administrators etc

• Institutional markets – ‘markets where enterprises interact with one

another, instead of with consumers or employees’

Government policies focus on consumer market – van Vught • “It is the first market (consumer markets) that

appears to be the object of many governmental policies that try to increase the coordinative capabilities of market forces in higher education. By increasing the capacity of the consumers of higher education outputs (students, clients) to choose among the various products of higher education institutions, these policies intend to strengthen the consumer market. However… these policies are usually only marginally effective.” (2008: 168)

Market for reputation

• “…HE institutions are first & foremost each other’s competitors (on the institutional market). They compete among themselves for the best students, the best faculty, the largest research contracts, the highest endowments, etc. They compete for all the resources that may have an impact on their institutional reputation.”

van Vught 2008: 168

Market for positional goods

• Students compete to get into high status universities, that lead to high status jobs

• Universities compete for students, research funding etc – reputation is everything

• Rankings illustrate that – shape institutional behaviours

Relevance to Canada?

• Don’t think it can’t happen here • The ‘mission problem’ • Residual definition

– Colleges in Australia, England, & Ontario defined as doing what schools & universities don’t do

• Role of educational institutions in society – respond to society’s needs, articulate needs & develop appropriate responses as society changes

• Universities – research, creation of knowledge, training professions, & society’s conscious & critic

Schools & universities

• Schools – young people have foundational knowledge for lives as citizens & workers – will change as society changes

Market in positional goods even with government’s differentiation plan

• Will some universities become ‘teaching-focused’ in vocationally oriented HE?

• Or, to put it another way, polytechnic type institutions?

• Isn’t this the space that many colleges want to occupy?

One tertiary market

• More stratified, with different segments – Market for positional goods – Market for credentials – will include ‘bottom

end’ of HE as well as VET – TAFE can’t win in either

• How is public & social good to be articulated?

• Support disadvantaged students & contribute to social cohesion & inclusion

• Develop knowledge & skills for innovative, competitive workforce

• Anticipate, develop, codify & institutionalise knowledge & skills needed for workforce now & future

• Can’t whistle up institutional capacity

What should colleges’ role be?

• Need strong institutions as foundation of vocationally oriented HE

• Markets based on transactions, no place for developmental role

#2014HES