Universities Are A Microcosm of Society
9 July 2005
Groupings of public universities within Australia have become
more obvious and more important in recent years.
USC has aligned with the largest group, known as the New
Generation Universities. Whilst we have many features in common
with that group of universities, that were mainly formed in the
1990s, we also possess some significant differences. The most
important is that we have been expected to operate as a university,
under two Acts of State Parliament, since opening in 1996. The
other universities have grown out of long histories as colleges of
advanced education.
The current convenor of the New Generation Universities (NGU)
group this week wrote about the importance of the growing research
record of these universities, that are on a 'phenomenal research
growth trajectory'. She went on to stress that any new research
funding formula must not neglect these universities which have such
close links with their regional communities.
In this context it was interesting to read some of the minutes
of evidence of a recent United Kingdom House of Commons Select
Committee on Education and Skills.
It was interesting because some of the academic leaders being
questioned were vice-chancellors of what was called the Coalition
of Modern Universities (CMU) similar to Australia's NGU group. They
were commenting on what had happened in the UK system, a system
which in part Australia may be copying.
The thirty-one new CMU universities are also new, and teach
nearly half of the undergraduates in UK universities. The current
funding environment in the UK favours the older Russell Group
universities but the CMU spokesperson was claiming that CMU
universities have the financially poorer students in largest
number, and the costs of providing support for them is eroding
their capacity to attract and retain the best staff. One of the
unintended consequences of the reform process in the UK therefore,
it is claimed, is 'direct discrimination' against poor students and
their universities, and 'runs totally counter to the spirit of what
the Government says it wishes to do'.
These were very strong cautionary remarks how the huge scale of
change in universities internationally could result in a much more
market-driven system, rather than the more equitable public systems
we have seen in some leading western democracies like Australia and
the UK over recent decades.
Also one of Australia's most respected higher education
researchers said recently that the Australian reforms could mean we
end up with a few more universities in the world's top one-hundred,
but fewer in the world's top five hundred, because of the
disproportionate level of support that may go to a privileged,
older few.
Contentiously, he also commented that he thought public
education and health were insufficiently supported from the
proceeds of taxation, which is often an issue raised with me on the
Sunshine Coast. He claimed that most Australians would support
'universal health and education of good quality' and that 'they're
the two areas to which people would like to see government beef up
its commitment, even if it meant paying more taxes'. But he also
conceded that there was little prospect that would happen.
There is no doubt that not just in universities, but throughout
our Australian system and way of life, there is a profoundly
important redefinition occurring, evidenced most obviously recently
in the proposed IR reforms. It is the Thatcherite proposal of the
late 1980s all over again: 'that there is no such thing as society,
there are only individuals'.
The extent to which we come down on the side of individuals and
the market, as opposed to taxpayer-funded fundamentals and a sense
of community, I suspect will determine the nature, not only of our
universities, but of our country, for some time to come.
Professor Paul Thomas is Vice-Chancellor of University of
the Sunshine Coast