The federal government proposal for performance metrics to award undergraduate growth places does not appeal to the National Tertiary Education Union. Instead, it has another idea which could find favour, if Labor wins the election.
what’s not on: The union’s submission to the Wellings Review (as in Uni Wollongong VC Paul Wellings) flat out rejects government suggestions for performance based funding. For a start, national president Alison Barnes and policy coordinator Paul Kniest argue universities operate efficiently and that talk of “growth funding” obscures $10bn “slashed” since 2011.
They also warn making funding dependent on improved student outcomes can have unintended but anticipated outcomes. For example, universities could improve student pass-rates by reducing standards or restricting undergraduate entry. Dr Barnes and Mr Kniest also suggest universal metrics do not make for fair competition if they apply to institutions with different resources and catchment communities.
what would work: The union proposes Professor Wellings and his colleagues replace metrics with accountability models, under which “each university would be judged in terms of its own goals and objectives, not those determined by a group of Canberra bureaucrats.” Models could include, changes to student enrolments, student progression, support services, academic staff profiles and the mix of FT/PT staff.
Such agreements would be negotiated by each university with a regulating and funding tertiary education commission.
we have been here before: The union’s accountability model (albeit ex the commission) is a bit like a 2010 Labor plan for compacts, intended to accompany demand driven funding and; “relate the unique mission of each university to the government’s goals for the sector, and for the first time draw together information about the public funding received by each institution. Compacts will also be the mechanism by which new teaching and learning performance funding is delivered to universities across Australia. Performance funding will increase the focus on quality and accountability and give incentives for universities to improve outcomes for students,” (CMM February 20 2018).
and could be again: Last week Labor shadow education minister Tanya Plibersek outlined plans for government, including; funding agreements between government and universities. “As publicly funded organisations Australians rightly expect that universities to contribute to our social, cultural and economic development. … if I am the minister, I want to work with you to ensure those funding agreements clarify how universities are meeting community expectations.”
Ms Plibersek cited entry standards for teaching degrees and sexual assault and harassment on campuses and in residential colleges as issues to include in agreements adding;
“I expect that funding agreements might address other national and local priorities such as meeting local labour market need, boosting diversity and participation, community engagement, and driving research excellence.”
Granted there are no mentions of teaching performance and student outcomes, but they could be easily added to government agreements.