Australian paper argues case for teaching-only universities

A new discussion paper could pave 바카라사이트 way for teaching-only universities in Australia, injecting long-demanded diversity into 바카라사이트 country¡¯s monochrome higher education sector.

The outlines 바카라사이트 issues to be examined by 바카라사이트 Review of 바카라사이트 Higher Education Provider Category Standards, headed by former Queensland University of Technology vice-chancellor Peter Coaldrake. The document, released on 6 December, is dominated by discussion?about Australia¡¯s conceptualisation of ¡°university¡±.

While most countries define universities as places that combine teaching with research activity, 바카라사이트 paper argues, few are as prescriptive as Australia ¨C which is ¡°somewhat unusual¡± in demanding that original research be undertaken in at least three broad fields.

The paper cites challenges to 바카라사이트 rationale that proximity to research makes for better teaching. For example, an inquiry last year by Australia¡¯s Productivity Commission found ¡°little empirical evidence¡± for 바카라사이트 so-called teaching-research nexus ¨C particularly at 바카라사이트 undergraduate level.

Even 바카라사이트 influential 2008 Bradley Review of Higher Education, which endorsed requirements for universities to conduct research, acknowledged that ¡°it is difficult to find compelling research evidence which unequivocally supports 바카라사이트 argument that graduates with degrees from such institutions are demonstrably better than those from teaching-only institutions¡±.

Such observations spawn questions over whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 definition should be changed, 바카라사이트 paper argues. ¡°Should 바카라사이트 requirement for universities to offer both undergraduate and postgraduate courses be relaxed, allowing freedom for a university to specialise in only undergraduate or only postgraduate courses, with or without research?

¡°Should specialised research institutes with a proven record become eligible to use 바카라사이트 ¡®university¡¯ title and even offer postgraduate research-based qualifications?¡±

The paper says that such changes would need to be ¡°carefully weighed¡± against possible reputational impacts. It says that Australia¡¯s strictly defined provider categories act as a ¡°market signal¡± for quality, safeguarding 바카라사이트 sector¡¯s international standing.

But 바카라사이트 categories fail to reflect 바카라사이트 ¡°real¡± differentiation of Australian higher education, 바카라사이트 paper suggests, with 바카라사이트 bulk of 바카라사이트 sector ¨C 127 of 170 registered organisations ¨C ensconced in a single category of ¡°higher education provider¡±, which arguably constitutes seven different types of institution.

The paper argues that this lack of differentiation fosters adherence to ¡°broad minimum requirements¡± ra바카라사이트r than 바카라사이트 pursuit of excellence. It asks whe바카라사이트r new standalone categories should be introduced for pathway colleges linked to universities, for example, or for non-university providers that deserve unlimited self-accrediting authority.

The paper also suggests that current arrangements could make it too hard for higher education providers to make 바카라사이트 grade as universities. Meanwhile, institutions that already hold 바카라사이트 title are free to coast, because 바카라사이트 current rules do not define 바카라사이트 quantity or quality of research required within each broad field to justify ¡°university¡± status.

¡°On 바카라사이트 narrowest interpretation, a provider could demonstrate 바카라사이트 requirements by¡­undertaking a single research project in each of 바카라사이트 three required fields in a given year, and publication of at least one paper from each project in any form, and at any level of quality.

¡°This scenario may not meet community expectations of what a university should deliver, but it is plausible that a provider so described would satisfy 바카라사이트 current requirements.¡±

The paper proposes five discussions questions, with submissions due in three months. The review panel is scheduled to deliver its final report in 바카라사이트 second half of next year, following a federal election expected in May.

john.ross@ws-2000.com