New Models of Tertiary Education Discussion

Sunday, March 27, 2016

Q70 How much does funding shift inside a TEI (eg, between courses, academics, or faculties) based on assessments of performance? Whose assessments are they, and what are they based on?

With the introduction of Colleges and PVCs at one University in NZ over a decade ago, the VC is perceived to be monitoring the "performance" of each College on the basis of the number of EFTS that it "brings in". The flow of EFTS is distinguished up to each enrolment event, i.e., (student_id, course_code, Department_code, College_code, year_semester, course_EFTS_band, etc).

From a faculty member's perspective there is a perceived notion of job-security that is mutually reinforced by most faculty members within an academic Department. This perception, in many cases, seems to ensure that the set of all lectures delivered by each faculty member within a Department brings in about the same number of EFTS. Such egalitarian EFTS distribution usually amounts to multiple lecturers per course and a partitioning of the lectures in each course (especially with large number of students) by "specialisations" or "areas of expertise". Unfortunately this often leads to curricular stagnation and conceptual fragmentation within a course and is not usually in the best interest of the student (who now has to adapt to over 3 or 4 lecturers and their teaching styles in each course).

The "EFTS captured" by each Department is perceived to be associated with its clout within the College. At this intra-College level of the EFTS accounting model, each Department is trying to capture as many EFTS as possible and thus implicitly discourages the flow of EFTS to other Departments. This usually can culminate to a state where each Department tries to offer its own course in a given subject. For example, the Psychology Department may offer its own course in "Statistics for Psychologists", the Maths Department may offer its own course in "Computer Programming for Mathematicians", or the Engineering Departments may offer their own course in "Fluid Dynamics for Engineers". This EFTS-driven curricula is typically reinforced by "personally validated curricula". For a concrete account of inter-Departmental EFTS-motivated dynamics see comment:
http://new-models-of-tertiary-education.blogspot.co.nz/2016/03/discussions-on-q26.html?showComment=1459482826635#c8119902329381372153
in the discussion on Q26:
http://new-models-of-tertiary-education.blogspot.co.nz/2016/03/discussions-on-q26.html.

The "EFTS captured" by each College is once again perceived to be associated with its clout within the University. At this inter-College level of the EFTS accounting model, each College tries to capture as many EFTS as possible and thus implicitly discourages the flow of EFTS to other Colleges, especially when there are no explicit graduation requirements that foster true University training (learning to write from the Arts faculty, to be numerate from academics in the Maths or Stats Departments, to program from academics in the Department of Computer Science, etc). For example, with the lack of a minimal writing requirement in a BSc degree, the potential for EFTS flow out of every Department (besides English) and every College (besides Arts) is minimised. In other words, there is no perceived economic incentive for the Head of the Department of BlahBlah-o-ology in a non-Arts College to ensure that its graduates can actually write reasonably well in English.

On a positive note, University of Canterbury (UC), one of six NZ Universities, recently introduced numeracy requirement for its BSc degree. On another very positive note UC has introduced 'employability' in one of its graduate attributes (see http://www.canterbury.ac.nz/student-support/ccr-skill-development-outcomes/employability-innovation-and-enterprise/). A focus on this graduate attribute can ensure that its graduates will meet basic writing/communicating, numeracy and possibly coding/programming requirements as expected by their employers. The following list of admirable graduate attributes:
http://www.canterbury.ac.nz/student-support/ccr-skill-development-outcomes/ can only be truly achieved in the absence of the perceived hierarchies of various "EFTS-silos" across academics, Departments and Colleges within a University.

Unfortunately, significant cultural momentum within managerial universities also exists. For a very interesting perspective on managerial university culture see:
http://www.demosproject.net/the-managerial-university-a-failed-experiment/
and for the nature and rate of general workplace bullying in NZ see:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/better-business/83618177/New-Zealand-has-worlds-second-highest-rate-of-workplace-bullying.

Discussions on Q69

Q69 How much does funding shift between PTEs based on assessments of performance? Whose assessments are they, and what are they based on?

Discussions on Q68

Q68 What impact has Performance-Linked Funding had on providers’ incentives to innovate?

Discussions on Q67

Q67 Does the programme or qualification approval process via NZQA or CUAP enable or hinder innovation? Why?

Discussions on Q66

Q66 How easy or hard is it for a new provider or ITO to access TEC funding?

Discussions on Q65

Q65 Are there examples where the New Zealand Government has directly purchased innovation or innovative capacity in tertiary education? If so, was it successful?

Discussions on Q64

Q64 How successful was the Encouraging and Supporting Innovation fund in promoting innovation in the tertiary sector? What evidence supports your view?

Discussions on Q63

Q63 How well do innovations spread in the tertiary education system? What helps or hinders their diffusion?

Discussions on Q62

Q62 What are the barriers to innovation in the tertiary education system? What might happen if those barriers are lowered?

Discussions on Q61

Q61 What are the benefits to innovators in the tertiary education system? What challenges do they face in capturing these benefits?

Discussions on Q60

Q60 What are the factors associated with successful innovation in the tertiary education system?

Discussions on Q59

Q59 How innovative do you consider the New Zealand tertiary education system is? Do you agree that there is “considerable inertia” in the system compared to other countries? If so, in what way and why?

Discussions on Q58

Q58 What measures have been successful in improving access, participation, achievement and outcomes for adults with low levels of literacy or numeracy? What measures have been less successful? Why?

Discussions on Q57

Q57 What measures have been successful in improving access, participation, achievement and outcomes for people with disabilities? What measures have been less successful? Why?

Discussions on Q56

Q56 What measures have been successful in improving access, participation, achievement and outcomes for those with limited access to traditional campus-based provision? What measures have been less successful? Why?

Discussions on Q55

Q55 What measures have been successful in improving access, participation, achievement and outcomes for at-risk youth? What measures have been less successful? Why?

Discussions on Q54

Q54 What measures have been successful in improving access, participation, achievement and outcomes for Pasifika? What measures have been less successful? Why?

Discussions on Q53

Q53 What measures have been successful in improving access, participation, achievement and outcomes for Māori? What measures have been less successful? Why?

Discussions on Q52

Q52 What can be learnt from the tertiary education systems of other countries? Are there models that could be usefully applied here?

Discussions on Q51

Q51 How might new models of tertiary education affect the New Zealand brand in the international market for tertiary educations, students, education products and services?

Discussions on Q50

Q50 Are current quality assurance and accountability arrangements robust enough to support a wide range of new models?

Discussions on Q49

Q49 What new models of tertiary education are being implemented in universities, ITPs, PTEs and wānanga? How successful have they been?

Discussions on Q48

Q48 Are there other important types of new model that should be included within the scope of this inquiry?

Discussions on Q47

Q47 What trends are likely to be most influential for the tertiary education system over the next 20 years?

Discussions on Q46

Q46 What other trends provide challenges and opportunities for the tertiary education system?

Discussions on Q45

Q45 Is the “New Zealand” brand an important part of international competition for students, staff, and education products and services? What should providers and government do to manage or enhance this brand?
See Discussion on Q26 for ensuring international standards in non-professional NZ degrees.

Let us recall the remark on page 71: Tertiary education providers share a “New Zealand” brand to the extent that exemplary (or bad) performance by one provider indirectly affects the reputation of others.

Ensuring that NZ's degree in a given subject is standardised across its six Universities and remains equivalent with its counterparts in the UK and the US will go a long way towards managing and enhancing the "New Zealand" brand.

Furthermore, having high standards for international students (say by higher thresholds for English language exams or even requiring other standard exams such as the US GRE or equivalent), especially at the postgraduate level, can turn NZ into the preferred destination for bright international students, the core formula fuelling the engines of American innovation.

Thus, the immediate economic advantage to Universities by having full-fee paying international students need to be counterbalanced by the international admission standards (measured via standardised tests). To maintain the "New Zealand" brand, such international admission standards need to be made universal across all NZ Universities.

Discussions on Q44

Q44 How has internationalisation affected New Zealand’s tertiary education system? What are the ongoing challenges and opportunities from internationalisation of the tertiary education system?

Discussions on Q43

Q43 What parts of the tertiary education system are challenged by ongoing technological change? What parts can exploit the opportunities created?

Discussions on Q42

Q42 What specific technologies should the inquiry investigate? Why?

Discussions on Q41

Q41 How might Baumol’s cost disease or Bowen’s law (discussion of which tends to focus on providers like universities) apply in other parts of the tertiary education system?

Discussions on Q40

Q40 How have providers’ input costs and revenue changed over time? What are the implications of these changes?

Discussions on Q39

Q39 What impact has the pattern of government spending on tertiary education had on the tertiary education provided?

Discussions on Q38

Q38 What are the likely impacts of domestic student fees increasing faster than inflation?

Discussions on Q37

Q37 What evidence is there on the effect of tuition fees on student access to, or the demand for, tertiary education in New Zealand?

Discussions on Q36

Q36 What challenges and opportunities do demographic changes present for the tertiary education system?

Discussions on Q35

Q35 What are the implications of new technologies that are predicted to make many currently valuable skills obsolete? Will this change the role of the tertiary education system?

Discussions on Q34

Q34 What is being done to develop, assess and certify non-cognitive skills in tertiary education in New Zealand? Do approaches vary across provider types, or between higher, vocational, and foundation education?

Discussions on Q33

Q33 What are the significant trends in employer demand for tertiary-educated employees, and in student demand for tertiary education? How is the system responding?

Discussions on Q32

Q32 To what extent are graduates meeting employers’ expectations with respect to hard or technical skills? What about soft skills and capabilities?

Discussions on Q31

Q31 What other evidence is there about the influence of tertiary education system performance on graduate income premia in New Zealand?

Discussions on Q30

Q30 What are the best measures to determine whether the tertiary education system is working well?

Discussions on Q29

Q29 What factors best explain the discrepancy between growing levels of tertiary education attainment without a significant productivity dividend?

Discussions on Q28

Q28 In what ways does a focus on educating international students complement or undermine the other goals of tertiary education providers?

Discussions on Q27

Q27 How do New Zealand’s government institutional arrangements for tertiary education compare to those in other jurisdictions?

Discussions on Q26

Q26 What are the pros and cons of different quality assurance arrangements for universities to those for ITPs, wānanga, and PTEs?

One of the major cons of the quality assurance arrangement for universities through the CUAP is the potential for divergence of certain non-professional programmes from similar programmes in other English-speaking countries.

An explicit comparison of NZ's BSc and BA degrees with those in other English-speaking countries, including the UK and the US would make the quality assurance arrangement for Universities through CUAP more meaningful and internationally synchronised. To ensure graduating students are up to speed with international standards and expectations in a fast-changing world, it is equally important that curricula are revisited periodically (minimally every 5-10 years) to ascertain whether they continue to meet these objectives. Let us focus for example on the course requirements for a Bachelor's degree in Statistics/Mathematics in the US (regionally accredited programmes) and the UK. See the following URLs:

A simple theme emerges across all these programmes. All of them require multi-variate calculus and linear algebra as a minimal requirement in a Bachelor's programme in Statistics, for example. Furthermore, the American Statistical Association (ASA) Curriculum Guidelines for Undergraduate Programs in Statistical Science (PDF), circulated as excellent reading by a recent NZ Statistical Association President, states, "Mathematical foundations: Graduates should be able to apply mathematical ideas from linear algebra and calculus to statistics, and to set up and apply probability models."

Unfortunately, students from NZ (from more than one University) can complete their BSc (Hons) in Statistics with no course work in multivariate Calculus or Linear Algebra. Similarly BSc (Hons) students in Mathematics can complete their degree without doing a course in advanced Analysis for example (usually considered a requirement in the US and UK). A systematic comparison of various non-professional majors in NZ with their counterparts in the US or UK may shed further light on the extent of this problem.

Such students are typically asked to repeat up to a full year of undergraduate courses upon conditional acceptance into PhD programmes in the US (case studies will be provided upon request). Fortunately, good students do take more than the minimal required set of courses and the best students routinely go to the top 10 Universities in the world for further studies. Unfortunately, this is not the case for most students who need more structure and guidance regarding the required coursework.

At the very least, we need to let our students know what combination of courses are equivalent to a BS programme in Mathematics/Statistics at any accredited US State University or to a BSc (hons) programme at a typical UK University. Therefore an explicit comparison of NZ's BSc and BA degrees in terms of the defining coursework of a major such as Statistics or Mathematics with those in other English-speaking countries, including the UK and the US, would make the quality assurance arrangement for Universities through CUAP more meaningful to the student. Further, re-evaluating course curricula periodically (minimally every 5-10 years) in a comparative international context, will ensure NZ students receive the most relevant and up to date training in their field of study, in this fast-changing world.

The following natural questions arise:
How can such degrees in NZ Universities be considered to be quality assured in an international sense? How can the system be encouraged to compare and contrast its quality assured degree with those from the UK or the US in an independent and unbiased manner?

The reasons for the perpetuation of such "quality-assured" programmes in NZ that continue to diverge significantly from similar programmes in the US/UK (in some cases, including BS/BSC(hons) in Mathematics/Statistics) will be discussed as part of other questions. Some such reasons include:

systematic and gradual grade inflation aimed at easing of standards to be more inclusive of a larger number of students and/or a broader range of student backgrounds (in terms of prerequisites) and thereby increasing the flow of EFTS into a programme,
requiring courses in linear algebra or multivariate calculus from another course code (possibly in another Department or even College within the University), say Mathematics, may lead to perceived loss of EFTS to the major's course code or Department, say Statistics (See Question 70 on funding shift inside a TEI),
pressure for course/degree/qualification completion to justify course offerings and
the phenomenon of personally-validated curricula, whereby a few strong personalities within a Faculty, who personally went through Bachelor's programmes outside the major field of study in question or ones without international standards/accreditation, strongly oppose any democratic effort to bring courses up to international standards, to some of the currently diverged programmes in NZ.

Clearly, ensuring international standards for NZ's BSc and BA (hons) degrees (in all non-professional majors) by independent comparisons with accredited degrees in other English-speaking countries, including the UK and the US, will help protect the "New Zealand" brand and help answer: Q45 Is the “New Zealand” brand an important part of international competition for students, staff, and education products and services? What should providers and government do to manage or enhance this brand?
See Discussion on Q45.

Also see discussion and comment on Joyce says migration not education will close the IT Skills gap.

Q23 How effective is the TES instrument at giving government education agencies direction about prioritising resources and making trade-offs in carrying out their roles? What are the benefits and risks, in terms of fostering an innovative system, of a more or less directive TES?

Saturday, March 26, 2016

Discussions on Q2

Q2 Do prospective students have good enough information to enable them to make informed choices about providers and courses? What additional information should be provided? Who should provide it?

Tuesday, March 22, 2016

Discussions on Q1

Q1 What are the advantages and disadvantages of administering multiple types of post-compulsory education as a single system?

New Models of Tertiary Education Discussion