Page name not found

Senate Employment, Workplace Relations, Small Business and Education Committee

Inquiry into the Capacity of Public Universities to Meet Australia's Higher Education Needs

From: Bob Berghout [rfb@frey.newcastle.edu.au]

Sent: Wednesday, 31 January 2001 11:05 AM

To: eet.sen@aph.gov.au

Subject: Inquiry into Higher Education

 

School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences

The University of Newcastle

Callaghan NSW 2308

(Personal Address: 47 Spruce St

Lambton NSW 2299)

ph 02 4921 5546(w) 02 4957 1098(h)

fax 02 4921 6898

 

The Secretary

Senate Employment, Workplace Relations, Small Business and Education

References Committee

 

Dear Madam/Sir

Below, in text format, and attached, in Word Format, is my submission into

the Senate Inquiry into the capacity of public universities to meet

Australia's higher education needs.

The submission is a private one. It does not represent the views of the

University of Newcastle or any of its organisational units.

Bob Berghout

******************************

 

Submission to

Senate Inquiry into the capacity of public universities to meet Australia's

higher education needs

 

I want to address the issue of falling academic standards. It relates to

terms of reference (a iii) and (b i).

Paradoxically, it proceeds under the jargon of Quality Assurance and is

bolstered by so-called Key Performance Indicators. The unintended effect

arises as follows:

When one supports Quality Assurance, one is likely to intend that teaching

and administration progressively improve. How is improvement measured?

Mostly by student opinion, as expressed by surveys, and by student

achievements. Both of these are subject to manipulation, not only by the

cynically minded but also by those simply interested in retaining their job

or in getting on with their job, in a climate of increasing student:staff

ratios and declining funding, without a lot of extra, non-academic

encumbrance.

The mechanism proceeds roughly as follows:

First, student achievement is most simply measured by pass, credit etc

rates. Faced with ever larger classes and added administration, and demands

to increase research 'output' one can most readily achieve an increase in

these by pruning course content, simplifying exams and getting on with

research. (This tends also to involve putting exams into multiple-choice

format, a format that tests intuition, memory and knowledge rather than the

ability to do extensive reasoning or express an argument coherently.) A

side 'benefit' is that students find the courses easier and thus make more

favourable comments about both the courses and their lecturers, in surveys.

(Regrettably the brightest students tend to be turned off by this, rather

than enthused, but they are in a minority. Has anyone investigated

relationships between a student's performance and their response to

questionnaires?)

The whole unfortunate process is reinforced by an expectation of continuous

improvement: pass rates need to (slowly) keep increasing, regardless of

(for instance) the fact that the quality of intake students may be dropping

in some areas, or that some subjects may not be much favoured by students

who are compelled to do them as 'service subjects' or for 'weeding-out

purposes'. While a generation ago, when retention rates were much lower and

thereby the overall intake quality was somewhat higher, about 5% of

students might have been awarded a High Distinction in a University exam,

now the figure is often around 30%. Teaching has not improved to that extent!

The situation is exacerbated by two student-based attitudes. One is the

wide perception, frequently noted in the media and used by teachers as

motivational device, that getting a good result in the HSC is the most

crucial bit of studying one has to do, as it's all important to get into as

'high' a university course as possible. Once on the train you can relax and

enjoy the ride. The other is the fact that many students are well aware of

falling standards and operate accordingly. I've heard students outlining

their - admittedly somewhat flawed - thinking along these lines: 90% (or

whatever) of us will pass anyway, and multiple choice exams are basically

lotteries, so I've got a 90% chance of getting through, regardless of how

little I study.

Why is the issue of falling standards across the system not more widely

acknowledged? Essentially because the first institution to do so is liable

to suffer a drop in applications to enrol, particularly from the brighter

students and fee-paying students, risking a drop in EFTSU-based funding and

fee income, and endangering prestige and job security.

 

Bob Berghout

Senior Lecturer in Mathematics

School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences

The University of Newcastle

Callaghan NSW 2308

Ph: (02)4921 5546

Email: rfb@maths.newcastle.edu.au