labellementeuse | (no subject)

I just read an article on stuff.co.nz that the government plans to change course funding from the bums-on-seats method currently being used, where courses which attract higher numbers of students are more likely to continue to be funded. While this is theoretically great - because that approach involves chasing students, extremely competitive courses, and ultimately a huge loss of variety and broadness of course spectrum - I'm a little concerned about what they're changing it to.

Says the Stuff article, "[The Government] want[s] to change the emphasis from funding [courses] based on the number of students they attract to providing courses that are seen to be in the national interest." Adds Dr Cullen, "While academic freedom would be recognised, universities had acknowledged the public had a right to see taxpayers' money was used responsibly and strategically." That's okaaaaaay, although I am hesitant to say that Jo/e Public is the judge of what is a responsible use of funding - quite probably s/he would be perfectly happy with the continued loss of funding in the Arts degree, which suffers because people think it's useless (despite the fact that money from these popular courses is frequently used to fund expensive courses like Science and Engineering.) I don't like thinking that the value of so-called "useless" or "unpractical" courses like the poetry writing and reading course I'm taking is dependent for its continued existence on it being seen as valuable to the "national interest."

Sound alarmist? Maybe - surely the gvt can be trusted to keep its nose out of the Universities' choices? Except maybe not, because the article concludes: "The changes would be gradual not revolutionary and would steer universities into a greater partnership with business and their communities."

Um. Excuse me? Universities are supposed to be acting with the Business Roundtable now? But I don't wanna!

This move has been welcomed by the Otago University Students' Association and the NZ Vice-Chancellor's Committee (Headed by Roy Sharp, the busy little bee!) But that might have more to do with the $126 million in funding that comes with it, including some to help with the funding shift and some to help attract and retain staff to keep NZ universities competitive/respected internationally. I'd be interested to see what the New Zealand University Students' Association and the Association of University Staff have to say about it, but there's nothing yet. And maybe I am being paranoid and insane, but, yeesh, seriously, it does sound a little dodgy, right? It's not just me?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Wow, in Canada, it doesn't work out like that at ALL. . . ^^'' Personally, I'd be suspicious because "public interest" seems pretty, well, undefined to me. In Canada, the government gives public universities money based on how many students are attending that particular university, ie, The University of Toronto would get more the The University of Western Ontario because UofT has 70 000 students whereas UWO only has 30 000. . . And I think it's pretty much up to the universities to spend it how they like.

At UWO, I think that it's spread pretty much equally, because the cheapest classes are Arts and Humanities and Social Sci classes - Engineering tuition fees are nearly 1.5 to 2 times Science tuition, which is a few hundred bucks more than Social Sci tuition. --''

Well, I agree, I mean, public interest could mean whatever the university says is in the public interest or it could mean what the public thinks is in the public interest, and the first would be fine, good in fact, and the second would suck ass.

in re: the bums-on-seats method, pretty sure funding was sourse-bvy-course based on whichever courses get the most students - science and eng papers are fractionally more expensive though, yeah. I mjean, the kind of discretion this new thing implies could be fantastic. Last year we had a huge thing at my university because our islamic studies lecturer was laid off because her classes were so tiny. Under this new method she maybe could have said, hey, look, I know I don't have many people taking it but don't you think islamic studies is pretty important right now? Huh? Huh? And I think that's great because I think it is in the national interest to have as many different courses, the widest spectrum, as possible.