No place for TAFE in student-centred higher ed?

TAFEs and private higher education providers will be excluded from the government’s new demand-driven higher education funding system, budget documents suggest. The papers indicate that the “new system for the 21st century”, which is supposed to let students choose where they want to study, may only let them choose the 38 public institutions where government-supported study is already widely available. The papers say Commonwealth-supported study will only be an option at public institutions – thus ruling out private higher education providers, with the possible exception of the University of Notre Dame Australia. “Consultations will be undertaken with Notre Dame as to its ongoing participation in the student-centred funding system that will be in place from 2012,” a key budget paper says. The paper, ‘Transforming Australia’s Higher Education System’, also appears to rule out TAFEs. “From 2012, Australian public universities and the Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary Education will be funded for student places on the basis of student demand,” it says. The paper also specifies that the new system will apply to Table A providers – the 37 public universities and Batchelor. These restrictions are repeated in other budget documents. But elsewhere the paper is less restrictive, saying Commonwealth-supported places could be funded at any “recognised public higher education provider”. This ambiguity is reinforced in the paper’s references to the $402 million Structural Adjustment Fund, designed to help institutions adapt to the new demand-driven arrangements. This fund “will be available to all regional and metropolitan higher education providers”, the paper says – opening up the ludicrous possibility that some providers could be funded to adapt to a new system that they’re not allowed to join. Another document says half of the Structural Adjustment Fund will be quarantined “to support collaboration between universities and the vocational education and training sector” – suggesting VET providers could be excluded from the demand-driven system, but that universities could sub-contract them to deliver courses. Other changes aren’t ruled out, either. An appendix in ‘Transforming Australia’s Higher Education System’ says “the government will consult with private providers about their future in a demand-driven system”. This ambiguity has persisted ever since education minister Julia Gillard endorsed Denise Bradley’s recommendation of a demand-driven funding system. “She has recommended we move from funding institutions to funding students – letting student demand, moderated by public and university priorities, determine where public dollars go,” Gillard told a Universities Australia conference in early March. “All Australian universities will be funded on the basis of student demand from 2012. This means we will fund a Commonwealth-supported place for all domestic students accepted into an eligible, accredited higher education course at a recognised public higher education provider.” Campus Review sought clarification of the new arrangements from the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. DEEWR staff, understandably busy during budget week, hadn’t responded by our publication deadline. Andrew Norton, research fellow with the Centre for Independent Studies, says he has sought clarification of the new arrangements from Gillard’s office – also without success. Norton believes it’s now clear that TAFEs and private providers will be excluded from the system, at least initially. “There’s a promise to talk, but nothing else,” he told CR. Norton told the Victorian TAFE Association conference earlier this month that he was baffled by the decision to exclude TAFEs. “It’s inconsistent with so much of what the government is trying to do,” he said. TAFEs can play a big role in helping meet the new higher education completion target, Norton said. And they can play a bigger role in meeting the equity target, given the strong enrolments from low socioeconomic background students – particularly those from regional areas. “They’re basically already at the target that Gillard set for 2020. Why are we excluding the institutions that have the best access to these students?” Dr Leesa Wheelahan, senior lecturer in adult and vocational education at Griffith, said excluding TAFEs would raise many other questions. For example, what would happen to the 10 TAFEs which already have accredited higher education programs – not least Holmesglen Institute of TAFE, which recently obtained Gillard’s approval to provide Commonwealth-supported places in the national priority area of nursing (CR, 14.04.09)? Wheelahan said it would also be highly contradictory to exclude private providers from a demand-driven higher education system, given that the federal government’s demand-driven vocational education system – the Productivity Places Program – is overwhelmingly dominated by private providers (CR, 02.03.09). But the role of TAFEs and private providers in the new system is still far from clear, Wheelahan added, saying the government was giving itself “wriggle room” while it worked out some of the more complex side-issues around entitlement-based funding. Go todeewr.gov.au/HigherEducation/Pages/TransformingAustraliasHESystem.aspx