The rise and fall of Australian higher education.

Journal of Access Policy and Practice, 2008

In 1986 an estimated 11% of Australian 18 to 24 year olds were enrolled in higher education. By 2005 just under 20% of 18 to 24 year olds were enrolled in higher education. In 1986 Australia had a structure but not the financing to support mass higher education in Trow’s terms; 20 years later it has the financing but no longer the structure to support mass higher education. Another big and distinctive change in Australian higher education over the last two decades has been the growth of international students, from 4% of total enrolments in 1988 to 25% of enrolments in 2005. This paper reports on how Australia made these changes, the strengths and weaknesses of Australia’s approach and the issues these may raise for other countries. It argues that the main motive for Australia’s expansion of higher education for both domestic and international students was to expand its contribution to the country’s economic development; equity and student access remained an incidental consideration, increasingly overlooked as the period under review progressed.

2019

Over the past 30 years, Australia has trialled a series of educational reforms, courting fee deregulation, marketisation and liberalisation. These reforms have been key drivers in the success of Australia’s higher education sector, enabling many of its institutions to ‘punch above their weight’ globally as measured by various global ranking schemas. But it has also created economic dependencies that makes Australian institutions vulnerable more than ever to the political international fluctuations. Over the period 1989 to 2018, domestic student enrolments have seen an annual average growth of 3.4% compared to 11.9% for international students. Since 2000, Australian universities alone have earned more than A$90 billion from international students in concept of tuition fees. Between 2000 and 2017, revenue from international students has increased five times faster than the Australian government contribution to universities. Australian universities are urged to have a sound risk management strategy, realizing that the loss of a market like the size of China will not be replaced by one single market. Australian universities need to diversify their international student recruitment away from traditional markets, instead focus on middle income economies and countries with which Australia has forged strategic trading partnerships, including harmonization and recognition of qualifications. There is no doubt that the road ahead for Australian universities is bumpy. Policy responses from government, civil society, market forces and university leaders need to consider the spectrum of possibilities arising from these demographic and geopolitical shifts. Timeliness and moderation is central to mapping out a way forward.

Cakrawala Penafsiran Ilmu-Ilmu Adab, 2022

Sejarah 2. Sastra 3. Judul @ Hak cipta Dilindungi oleh undang-undang Memfotocopy atau memperbanyak dengan cara apapun sebagian atau seluruh isi buku ini tanpa seizin penerbit, adalah tindakan tidak bermoral dan melawan hukum.

Higher Education, 2000

During 2002, the Australian Education Minister conducted a year-long review of tertiary education under the title Higher Education at the Crossroads. The policy statement arising from that review was released on 13 May 2003. It incorporates a combination of new financial incentives on students and universities, potential expansion of full-fee places, and increased intrusion into university priority setting.

Journal of Access Policy and Practice, 2008

Higher Education, 1997

Conventional liberal frameworks -in which power is seen as the property of states, and repressive in character, and market and state exclude each other -are unable to comprehend the recent changes in liberal government, including the government of systems and institutions in higher education. Neo-liberal government rests on self-managing institutions and individuals, in which free agents are empowered to act on their own behalf but are 'steered from a distance' by policy norms and rules of the game. In the universities government-created markets and quasi-markets have been used to advance both devolution and central control, simultaneously, and national government and institutional management are increasingly implicated in each other. These issues are explored in relation to recent higher education literature, and empirically, the latter by examining the changes in the Australian higher education system in the last decade. The Australian system provides an example of a quasi-market in which the development of a stronger institutional management, the introduction of government-institution negotiations over educational profiles, and the new systems of competitive bidding, performance management and quality assessment have all been used to steer academic work and to install a process of continuous self-transformation along modern neo-liberal lines. Following a change of government in 1996 there has been some movement from a quasi-market to a more fully developed economic market, but no relaxation of government control.

Higher Education Research & Development, 2020

This article analyses the social contract formulated between state and university, in the period 1850-1930. Using contemporary recordsfor example, legislation, parliamentary debates, university acts, newspaper articles, senate and professorial board minutes, and similarthis article examines how Australia's early scholarly community contested and negotiated what it believed to be the purpose of higher education, with a sometimes-conflicting view held by the state. The analysis indicates that, from the outset, certain paradoxes have inscribed into these foundational negotiations. Conflicting narratives of opportunity and privilege positioned universities, simultaneously, as agents for social inclusion and maintainers of social privilege. The purpose of knowledge as either/both pure and practical has been another point of contestation. Consequently, universities vacillate between acts of social conservatism and progressivism. These tensions remain apparent in the modern purpose of higher education institutions.

Higher Education, 1991

The policies of the Australian federal government are clearly intended to bring about a fundamental transformation of the country's higher education system. The Australian case, however, presents several paradoxes. Policy changes are being initiated by a federal government that has no legislative control over state chartered higher education institutions. While the federal government wishes to see a more diversified and adaptive higher education system, it seems to be implementing a reward structure for individual institutions and academics which encourages imitation of the elite universities. Although government claims that its new policy initiatives are designed to debureaucratize the system, a significant proportion of the Australian academic community claims that government is centralizing control. This article explores these and other issues facing Australian higher education, not for the purpose of resolving the seeming paradoxes, but to suggest a particular research agenda for investigating change in higher education.

2012

In the last few years, a scholarly critique of current forms and directions of higher education has become increasingly prominent. This work, often but not exclusively focussed on the American and British systems, and on humanities disciplines, laments the transformation of the university into ‘a fast-food outlet that sells only those ideas that its managers believe will sell [and] treats its employees as if they were too devious or stupid to be trusted’ (Parker and Jary 335). Topics include the proliferation of courses and subject areas seen as profitable, particularly for overseas students;1 the commensurate diminution or dissolution of ‘unprofitable’ areas; the de-professionalisation of academic staff and limitation of their powers in decisionmaking; the dismantling of academic disciplines and department-based academic units; the growing size and authority of management in determining priorities in research (see Laudel) and teaching; quantification and evaluation of academic work...

Policy Futures in Education, 2013

Higher education is one of the key foundations that economic prosperity is founded upon. Government policies, funding and strategic planning require a fine balance to stimulate growth, prosperity health and well-being. The key Australian government policies influenced by a Review of Australian Higher Education report include attracting many more Australian citizens from disadvantaged backgrounds to higher education and increasing to 40% by 2020 the number of Australian people aged 25 to 34 years attaining at least a bachelor-level qualification-a challenge, given that the current level is 29%. An added key policy is the move to a student entitlement funding model that Australia introduced from 2012, with around half of the 46 recommendations being implemented by early 2013. This article undertakes research based on secondary data from extensive literature reviews to comment critically on the efficacy of the policy approached recommended by the Review of Australian Higher Education in 2008, and now being gradually implemented. Australia faces significant challenges in higher education to rebuild, redevelop, sustain and progress higher education. The domestic and global competition for talented and skilled people is becoming more crucial. Ageing populations combined with a decreasing proportion of young people, particularly within OECD countries, exacerbates the problem. Australia, among most, if not all nations, must develop many more innovative and skilled people to sustain and rejuvenate its industry and society.