|
9 April 2001
Mr John Carter
The Secretary, Senate Employment, Workplace Relations, Small
Business and Education References Committee
Suite S1.61 Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600
Email: john.carter@aph.gov.au, eet.sen@aph.gov.au
SUBMISSION TO THE SENATE INQUIRY INTO
TERTIARY EDUCATION
Dear Mr Carter,
This submission is put forward by the
Australian Geoscience Council, a consortium of seven geoscience
societies, which has a combined membership of more than 7500
professional geoscientists. Our members work in diverse fields,
embracing Earth resource exploration (minerals, coal, oil and
gas), environmental monitoring and remediation, geotechnical
investigations, hydrogeology including groundwater management,
teaching, and strategic and applied research. The majority of
our members have tertiary qualifications and a four-year degree
is the usual minimum qualification for employment as a
geoscientist.
We are therefore vitally concerned with the
health of the public university sector, particularly in the core
geoscience disciplines of geology, geophysics and geochemistry,
along with the associated technologies such as mining
engineering, mineral processing, and environmental management.
These subjects are crucial to underpin the economic well-being
of Australia, now and in the foreseeable future.
Some of the more important decisions the
Australian community will make in the decades ahead relate to
our stewardship of the Earth. We need to have available the
technical capability and capacity to make and implement these
key decisions, and the general community needs a basic
understanding of how our planet works.
Public universities have a vital role in these
matters and we welcome the opportunity to place the following
points before your committee. They are indexed according to the
Terms of Reference for this inquiry.
 | (a) (i) At a time when investment in
science and technology is the key to the quality of life and
a healthy economy, the investment in the tertiary sector by
the Commonwealth has been declining steadily and is
completely inadequate. At a time when many of our OECD
partners such as Canada, Sweden and the UK are increasing
their public investment in the sciences at the tertiary
level, in Australia the reverse is taking place. A few
examples indicate the situation: |
| In 1997, as a percentage of GDP Australia
spent less than two-thirds of the figure spent by the United
States per tertiary student (OECD, 2001). |
| Commonwealth budget papers show a reduction
in Federal higher education expenditure from 0.72% of GDP in
1996-97 to 0.62% in 1999/00, and a projected further
reduction to 0.52% in 2003/04 (these figures exclude student
financial assistance). Worse still, the funding provided to
higher education is projected to decrease from 2.56% of
total Government outlays in 2000/01 to 2.44% in 2003/04.
Clearly, these trends are unsustainable given that private
funding has stubbornly remained a marginal source of revenue
for universities (at about 10% of total university revenue)
for the best part of a decade. It is unlikely that private
funding will suddenly come to the rescue. |
| The percentage of the population with a
Bachelor's Degree or higher qualification has steadily
increased from 6.9% in 1985 to 15.1% in 1999, yet the
Commonwealth Government has almost halved its funding to
universities over a similar period. It provided 89.3% of
total university revenue in 1981, a figure that dropped to
50.8% by 1998. Even the new money committed in the 'Backing
Australia's Ability' action plan will not be enough to
reverse this trend. |
| The number of student places provided by
universities continues to grow each year. There were 341 000
places in 1990, 419 100 in 1995 and 457 200 in 1999.
However, full funding has only been provided for 335 100
(1990), 410 500 (1995) and 413 000 (1999) of those students.
The annual per capita contribution from the Commonwealth has
declined from $12 300 per student in 1984 to about $9000 in
1999*. |
We believe this is unacceptable in a world
where education and research capabilities are vital for our
future well-being.
Some reliance on private funding is inevitable
if Australia is to maintain its present university system, meet
increasing demands in terms of the numbers of students and the
range of research activities and facilities. In fact, private
funding may have to be relied on even more, but this should not
be done at the expense of a decline in public funding. The
desirability of private funding and determining what constitutes
an acceptable level is a formidable issue that must be
addressed.
| (a) (ii) At the very least, private funding
creates expectations of outcomes by the provider and may
restrict institutional autonomy and flexibility. Demand for
a specific educational experience by fee-paying students,
the introduction of consulting deadlines, the direction of
research effort, and the embargo of research results are key
examples of such expectations. We recommend that appropriate
national guidelines be developed so that the results of
privately funded research projects, carried out at
universities, are made available in the public domain in a
reasonable time after the research sponsor has had access to
the results. |
| (b) (i) Reliance on market behaviour
(course popularity) to define cut-offs for course entry
adversely affects the quality of science taught at
universities. Mismatches between tertiary entrance
requirements and the intellectual demands of disciplines are
such that science departments must accommodate some of the
least able students entering the tertiary sector. Private
funding, in this case the provision of scholarships to
deserving undergraduates by some industry geoscience bodies,
is helping to counteract this situation but much more could
be done, especially by prospective employers of graduates. |
| (b) (ii) Under the present funding regime,
the university geoscience sector is able to maintain an
adequate supply of graduates for traditional fields of
employment in Australia. However, with recent marked
reductions in the numbers of geoscience academic staff** and
the consequent decrease in collective expertise in many
teaching departments, it is unlikely all graduates are as
appropriately qualified as in previous times. Co-operation
amongst geoscience departments in large metropolitan centres
has ameliorated this situation but this is not so for
regional universities. |
| The regulations governing the current HECS
scheme should be reviewed. Although HECS debts are not
subject to real rates of interest, the debt, is indexed each
year by the CPI to maintain its value. This provides
students with certainty of their future obligations and a
realistic chance to repay their debt within a reasonable
time of graduation and employment. However, students must
begin to repay their loan at a rate of 3% of their taxable
income once their income reaches $22 346 (2000/01 financial
year). We feel that the $22 346 level is too low, places an
unfair burden on the graduate, and should be raised. |
| (b) (iv) Private funding is important for
the maintenance of research and research training in the
geosciences. However, private funding is determined by
company profitability and earth resource companies are
greatly influenced by the international economic
environment. Economic change occurs more quickly than the
speed at which universities can react, which causes
problematic lags when private funding is denied. This might
be smoothed out by a more flexible approach by government to
the provision of public funds (see also our comments on (a)
(ii) above. |
| (e) A cursory examination suggests that
there is an adequate pool of geoscientists available to
staff Australian universities. Certainly, positions
advertised generally attract enough applicants who hold the
required qualifications (a doctorate). However, a shortfall
in satisfactory candidates is likely for geoscience
disciplines that are growing in importance (hydrogeology,
engineering geology, environmental geology, exploration
geophysics, regolith geology), assuming universities have
the funds to initiate or expand courses in these areas. The
causes are diverse but certainly include limited research
opportunities in Australia, isolation from peers, lack of
opportunity to engage in cutting-edge research and research
training, and the perceived need to devote excessive time to
administration and fund raising. Low salaries are also a
problem with the declining A$ and the changes in salary
relativities between academia and other parts of the work
force in Australia. Average salaries for our academics are
consistently low compared to equivalent positions in Canada,
Hong Kong, Singapore and South Africa. Assistant lecturers,
lecturers, senior lecturers, associate professors and
professors in Hong Kong earned between two and three times
more than their Australian counterparts in 1996. |
| (f) (iii) Minerals/Petroleum are
Australia's major export earner. The universities provide,
together with government agencies (e.g. AGSO and relevant
areas of CSIRO) and the mining and exploration companies,
the personnel, knowledge base, and cutting edge research
programs that have led to this position. The universities
have a special role in the basic research in earth science
that underpins, often serendipitously, emerging commercial
applications. The loss of local company-based expertise due
to globalisation, the ongoing financial pressures
experienced by relevant government agencies, and the
inability of the universities to finance adequate
infrastructure and their difficulties in funding
subscriptions to international research collaborations are
matters of great concern. |
Authorised by the Australian Geoscience
Council and submitted by its President
David Denham
President
Member Bodies: Australian Exploration
Geochemists Australian Geoscience Information Association
Australian Institute of Geoscientists Australian Society of
Exploration Geophysicists Australian Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy Geological Society of Australia Petroleum Exploration
Society of Australia
*These numbers are mainly derived from AVCC
statistics. **Figures for the geosciences at the University of
Sydney and the University of Western Australia show that
academic staff-levels have remained constant relative to Science
Faculty and Total University levels. At the University of
Sydney, geoscience academic staff have represented 7.7% of its
Science Faculty for 1998, 1999 and 2000 and the corresponding
figure for the University of Western Australia has remained
steady at 15.7% over the same number of years. Thus, if an
overall reduction in academic staff has occurred for the
university sector, the same trend necessarily applies to the
geosciences.
Dr David Denham AM, Tel: 02 6295 3014, Email:
denham@atrax.net.au
|
