Well, I wouldn’t go via Padstow

Reflections on Day Two of an equity symposium

Back by popular demand for the seven people who read Student Equity Symposium Reflections on day one of an equity symposium, cheese toast and other matters, here are some brief notes of Day Two. Firstly I’ll celebrate my inner trainspotter and check my privilege.

Taxis and Uber are great for getting from point to point, and you can learn a lot by talking with the drivers about life, the universe, and everything. I do like however, to catch local public transport wherever I can. It’s my tame attempt a living on the edge, conscious that as a white male I can find myself in spaces that others might avoid on security grounds.

On departing what was an excellent symposium I decided to take the train from Bankstown to the airport only to find that all trains in both directions were cancelled due to an emergency. So I hopped on a random bus driven by a learner driver (driver in training) to get to Padstow, which then took me into the Airport.

I share this information as an attempt to highlight that:

1. We know where we are going with the Accord

2. We should acknowledge that where we depart from is not perfect, and

3. We should be prepared to adapt and adjust our thinking to ensure we stay the course.

The symposium affirmed cross-sector support for growth for skills through equity. The quite exceptional student panel and student ambassadors in the audience spoke authentic truth to power in highlighting the flaws in our current system. Students are still not afforded the dignity and respect they deserve. However, the fundamental strengths of our sector, and capabilities of those interested in accessible quality will ensure we’ll get to our destination without incident an on time, even if we confront the odd emergency along the way.

Contrasting Options

We kicked off the day with an address from the Shadow Minister Sarah Henderson. This was a marked contrast from the Ministerial Masterclass on offer yesterday. My notes through this session asked myself if my critique was gendered. I was not alone in my critique. My analysis of Minister Clare’s approach, i.e. connect with the audience, make it personal, and contextualise pre-prepared remarks with events in the moment was not repeated.

Remarks from politicians are endlessly parsed for meaning and intentions, making it such a hard life to lead. Here is my take on parsing the implications of the Shadow Ministers remarks and intentions:

• Keep an eye out for Senate Estimates – I saw a glint in the eye she referred to what was coming. I think they think they have found a chink in the armour to exploit.

• Tit for tat is part of politics. The funding cuts for Destination Australia will see Labor’s pet projects culled when they lose power.

• There is common ground. Regional Study Hubs were born under the Coalition, and will expand markedly under Labor.

• There is an unapologetic pride in Job Ready Graduates. Nursing, Education and Maths is cheaper for students, and will be expensive to unwind.

• The price tag for the Accord is very big, and there is unlikely to be bipartisan support for some of the big policy announcements already made and to come.

• The Coalition will potentially position this overarching price tag as unfunded liability, and as a precursor to supporting a narrow range of policies. Whilst there is common ground, it may be hard to get to. The airport, from Bankstown via Padstow, Beijing, Delhi, Dubbo, and Vaucluse.

• On Beijing and Delhi, there is an emerging negative narrative that means that Accord related objectives confront, at the very least, countervailing fiscal forces. One might ask which areas will be affected when budget projections across the sector no longer match reality.

Gotta Wear Shades

If anyone has a pessimistic view of the state of Australian higher education, do yourself a favour and watch the You Tube replay of the Symposium Student Panel. Expertly facilitated by an exceptional educator in Maria Raciti, and subtly enabled by the irrepressible Sally Kift, the students were so bright the entire room had to wear shades.

My notes in the moment  were drawn to the idea that ‘the kids are alright’. The lyrics to this are problematic in my view, but I’m still drawn to the phrasing. The kids really are alright. The leaders we saw on stage were so considered and articulate others quipped that we need to flip the script and have them run our universities. They were an absolute credit to themselves, their families, communities, and institutions.

On the other hand, the kids are not alright. Year 12 completion rates are trending down. There are well described mental health challenges, and alarming increases in the proportion of children with disability. It is a regrettable reality that in some communities kids are more likely to go to prison than university, or destined to die an early death. This needs to change.

I heard first-hand the continued challenges associated with assumptions and stereotypes of kids from Sydney’s West. Capable kids from middle Eastern backgrounds streamed into lower classes on mass, who may at some point take advantage of fee-free enabling programs. They shouldn’t have to.

Russian Dolls

To round out the symposium we had a rubber hits the road session, with a more technical discussion around how we can finance the Accord, facilitated by the always impressive Nadine Zacharias.

Gwyll Croucher stepped us through the ebbs and flows of funding for equity, and estimated that the Commonwealth is on the hook for around $1.5 b to get student income support to a level that would keep students above the poverty line. Getting equity loadings up to a level in line with Base Funding Review recommendations would take this up another $1.5 b. This on top of additional funding to potentially unwind Job Ready Graduates funding clusters, and additional funding for all of the other things the Budget needs to accommodate like needs based funding, placement support, and enabling places. The student panel, as impressive as they were, did not confront the reality of finding an extra $7 b, $8 b, or $9 b per annum to fund all this and one can’t just pluck money of this magnitude out of thin air. At some point some pragmatic choices will need to be made.

Ever the pragmatic policy expert, Andrew Norton highlighted the interconnection between policy detail and implementation. Current definitions of low socioeconomic status, for example, are not precisely aligned with need. Some of the additional funding could be more effectively targeted in policy design, perhaps underpinned by better data linkages with Centrelink and other government services.

The University of Wollongong’s Vice-Chancellor Patricia Davidson drew attention to the financing challenges when one is at the strategic apex of a university. The government giveth from the Accord, and may taketh away given sentiment hostile to fee paying international students (just read the comments on this piece to illustrate). The costs of supporting campuses in smaller regional communities is legitimised by the outsized impact that regional delivery can have, but is currently a tough internal cross-subsidy. Balancing competing tensions in politics, policy, and implementation has been for many universities a high wire act.

Shamat Saggar persuasively encouraged the audience to avoid the traps of policy-wonkery and undue fixation on excessive regulatory detail. Policy and implementation should focus on the big ideas, growth and equity. Likened to Russian Dolls, the growth agenda contains smaller component parts that must fit neatly within. Arguing on the colour pallet and artistry for the smallest dolls can detract from appreciation of the bigger picture whole. Shamat’s macro view can however, only have plausibility if the smaller component parts are functioning effectively.  As the students told us, even the smallest parts like: not sending countless duplicate emails; non-standard assessment submission times; or implementing recommended reasonable adjustments are beyond the wit of the entire sector at this point.

All of this discussion got me to revisit my work on Equity Performance and Accountability, and I think it stacks up well. Key themes I was toying with: balancing micro and macro funding, with appropriate regulatory focus on the big and the small, and national and local, and bolstered accountability and transparency of institutional equity, growth and quality commitments are there for anyone to riff on. Perhaps the time has come for this work to actually get some traction.

Anyhow, thanks for reading.