HECS discount cancelled for Math/Sci/Stat

[Mao]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/hecs-discounts-to-go/story-e6frgcjx-1226209093274

The HECS discounts for students taking maths, science and statistics will be removed from January 2013, raising the estimated 2013 HECS contribution to $8,353 from a discounted $4,691.

Figures in that article are in /p.a.

Starting from 2013, new undergraduate science students will be paying more than undergraduate engineering. The standard science scholarship ($6k/pa) will no longer be able to cover the HECS fees.

Continuing students will not have their fees raised. The current rates apply for continuing students until the end of 2015.


Approximates of current rates can be found here: http://www.gooduniguide.com.au/School-Leavers/Paying-Your-Way/Degree-costs-and-loans


That's cool, ALP. We'll just keep producing more engineers and fewer scientists. Because science is obviously not applicable to real life, right? I mean, why was it even national priority in the first place? Glad you made things right.

Dickheads.

[dc302]

Wtf, how did it change from national priority to one of the highest bands..

[Hutchoo]

Another reason to show that ALP is stupid...

[slothpomba]

Well, i mean its not like it's going to cripple many people or influence their choice too much, considering almost everyone out there puts their fees on HECs and doesn't pay them till way in the future. I doubt such a move will influence many people at all.

I doubt for many people in Australia who can get CSP places that cost is a significant factor and isn't that a great thing to behold compared to places like the USA with huge fees.

Just for the record, the liberal party is just as likely to have done something like this, if not more likely. Labour leans towards the left and favours more left wing and social democractic policies like government programs, subsidies, ect. If anything the more right wing liberal party is more likely, based on their ideology, to continue doing things like this.

[Mao]

Well, i mean its not like it's going to cripple many people or influence their choice too much, considering almost everyone out there puts their fees on HECs and doesn't pay them till way in the future. I doubt such a move will influence many people at all.

I doubt for many people in Australia who can get CSP places that cost is a significant factor and isn't that a great thing to behold compared to places like the USA with huge fees.

Just for the record, the liberal party is just as likely to have done something like this, if not more likely. Labour leans towards the left and favours more left wing and social democractic policies like government programs, subsidies, ect. If anything the more right wing liberal party is more likely, based on their ideology, to continue doing things like this.

You are quite right.

However, my problem with this is not so much the fact that HECS discount was removed, but more that an alternative solution was not proposed. They have identified the issue of having too few science students (in another thread), and this was proposed as a solution. It's okay that this particular solution did not work, and was scrapped. But there's no indication that another solution is being proposed.

I think the government can do much better than cut funds then give themselves a pat on the back for saving money. I don't know what the liberal government will do in this situation, or if they will choose a better path than the labor government. But I am very disappointed with this decision.

[slothpomba]

Well i mean no matter how many incentives and bonuses you give people to take up science, if they don't, they won't.

I think its largely compounded by the fact that a particular vision of university is fairly prevalent in the Australian psyche. Most people see them as job factories or a place to get a degree and leave rather than learn so much. Anyone who is in science and even some who are out know the employment prospects with just a bachelors are usually fairly shitty. I think this is a big problem with it. I don't really think its the governments fault for lack of incentive really and we can all tell its a bad idea to place huge incentives on things, especially in this case where i doubt the hecs had any affect.

I remember reading awhile ago that science was apparently the most popular degree in victoria (BSc). I have no reason to make this up but i could be wrong, if you really want to check theres a shitload of data here - http://www.vtac.edu.au/reports.html .

http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/more-miss-out-on-university-places-20090119-7ku7.html Also suggests some growth.

It's not that we really need any more undergraduate scientists to become lab monkeys, we need more people going through to postgrad.

I personally think nearly half a *billion* dollars saved is nothing to be sneezed at, considering the global economic outlook. Australia has had fantastic fiscal management, we've been achieving positive growth that other countries could only dream of. Most have recorded negative growth. I know it seems unfair but sometimes money needs to be saved somewhere and deadweight needs to be cut. I personally think it was a rather sensible cut.

So, as far as i can tell your issue isn't so much with the cut, its more with the fact that there aren't enough science graduates. I don't really know just how much the government can do about that though. You can try force it down peoples throats or incentivise it as much as you like but i don't think it'll help all that much.

Just out of interest, if you were in their position, what would you do?

[funkyducky]

^ +infinity. You get so many "...why would you want to do x degree if you could do y degree instead and get a better job, quicker?"
In my case, it's "why would you want to do a BSci at Melbourne and have no job at the end when you could get into MBBS at Monash?". After I explained the whole guaranteed entrance thing, my Mum was still iffy about it. To be fair though, getting into postgrad places after finishing a BSci is highly competitive, especially when many have only about 20 or 30 places available...

In a nicer world, we would all be able to just study what we like and not worry about work/money/etc. but in the end, that's a luxury that's really only available to high achievers. For so many kids, it's not a realistic option - it's do a course that will guarantee you a decent living at the end, or else you're screwed for life.

I think what the government needs to do is make transitions into postgrad more accessible for graduating BSci students. It's ridiculously competitive for those who don't have guaranteed entrance (ie. the vast majority of science students), many don't have any choice but to find a job for a year and reapply the next year, and if that doesn't work out for them, they're just going to end up staying in work rather than getting the postgrad qualifications the government wants them to get. I think there should be more funding, more CSP places available in postgrad areas where the nation needs more professionals, eg. maths, allied health

So yes, that's my 2 cents on what the govt should do, but they're awfully stingy with opening up new CSP places for anything, so probably not going to happen any time soon.

[nubs]

Sorry for burdening you all with my cluelessness and idiocy, but what is HECS?

[Panicmode]

Sorry for burdening you all with my cluelessness and idiocy, but what is HECS?

Government loan for studies.

[nubs]

Sorry for burdening you all with my cluelessness and idiocy, but what is HECS?

Government loan for studies.

thanks babee xx

[slothpomba]

In a nicer world, we would all be able to just study what we like and not worry about work/money/etc. but in the end, that's a luxury that's really only available to high achievers. For so many kids, it's not a realistic option - it's do a course that will guarantee you a decent living at the end, or else you're screwed for life.

I guess but in general people with university education earn more than those without university education. A lot of government departments will take you as long as you have a degree, they don't really mind what in. Jobs in the civil service tend to be fairly stable in most cases and have decent pay and are considered "cushy" by some.

I'd call that decent, being able to pay the bills is decent.

If you want a large double story house and a couple BMW's then maybe you might want to look something that will satisfy your material needs a little better.

I think what the government needs to do is make transitions into postgrad more accessible for graduating BSci students. It's ridiculously competitive for those who don't have guaranteed entrance (ie. the vast majority of science students), many don't have any choice but to find a job for a year and reapply the next year, and if that doesn't work out for them, they're just going to end up staying in work rather than getting the postgrad qualifications the government wants them to get....

This sounds like a good idea in theory but its a bit of a simplistic analysis. You must think why post-grad jobs pay more than undergrad jobs, its because post-grads are more rare and posses skills that are more uncommon, so they get paid more. That's why jobs that almost anyone can do and need no qualifications pay minimum wage, because there is a lot of people who can do them. That's also partially why doctors  (non-gp) get paid so much, they have a very rare skill set.

We can't absolutely open the flood gates or that'll ruin that for everyone (much like the situation we have now with waay too many pharmacy graduates and they're getting bad pay).

The problem is jobs that you could get with technical tafe qualifications now usually need bachelors degrees because there are so many more bachelors out there now (the all too familiar lab monkey), theres a huge risk if we flood the market with post grads job will either become very scarce or we'll need something even further to remain competitive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_inflation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_devaluation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credential_inflation
http://www.pootergeek.com/2004/09/qualification-inflation/

So, i still think we need to choke the supply somewhat. Our current shortage probably isn't even a result of supply choking by the government, its probably the fact that it has an image problem and doesn't look all that attractive to many people. We shouldn't really lower the bar for getting in, we still only want the top proportion of students to get a PhD.
 

[funkyducky]

^ My point is, there are skills shortages in certain areas, ie. the nation desperately needs people with qualifications in certain areas. http://www.skills.vic.gov.au/skills-and-jobs-outlook/skills-shortages From there, they need more food scientists, agricultural scientists, engineers, nurses, physios, dental therapists, ambulance officers - many of these jobs require postgrad qualifications following a BSci. I know a girl who finished a BSci at UoM, applied to do physiotherapy (one of the skills shortages listed by the government) but there were only 30-ish places available for postgrad physio at Melbourne Uni, with (I think) about 200 people applying. She didn't get in, applied to Latrobe the next year and is now doing physio at Latrobe.

My point is, if there's a skills shortage in these professions, the government should fund more places in these postgrad courses to encourage unis to accept more students in these courses, thereby fixing the skills shortage problem in these areas. It's not like demand is low either, BSci graduates are scrambling for postgrad places.

[Mao]

It's not that we really need any more undergraduate scientists to become lab monkeys,

Correct, that's a common misconception, one that needs to be broken. This is simply because most people do not understand what science (research and development) is about. Without R&D, we will have no industry.

So, as far as i can tell your issue isn't so much with the cut, its more with the fact that there aren't enough science graduates. I don't really know just how much the government can do about that though. You can try force it down peoples throats or incentivise it as much as you like but i don't think it'll help all that much.

Just out of interest, if you were in their position, what would you do?

The source of the problem is in primary and secondary school teaching. We need more (better) math teachers. Students in this country are especially lacking in numeracy skills at early ages, it's no wonder there are so few science students, considering science relies on mathematics. Without a good foundation in mathematics, you simply don't get interested by science.

That and, the common thinking in schools that being a 'nerd' is bad. Australian primary school needs to become more academically oriented. The Asian grip on high scores must be broken if this country wants to keep up with the rest of the world.

[Mao]

^ My point is, there are skills shortages in certain areas, ie. the nation desperately needs people with qualifications in certain areas. http://www.skills.vic.gov.au/skills-and-jobs-outlook/skills-shortages From there, they need more food scientists, agricultural scientists, engineers, nurses, physios, dental therapists, ambulance officers - many of these jobs require postgrad qualifications following a BSci. I know a girl who finished a BSci at UoM, applied to do physiotherapy (one of the skills shortages listed by the government) but there were only 30-ish places available for postgrad physio at Melbourne Uni, with (I think) about 200 people applying. She didn't get in, applied to Latrobe the next year and is now doing physio at Latrobe.

My point is, if there's a skills shortage in these professions, the government should fund more places in these postgrad courses to encourage unis to accept more students in these courses, thereby fixing the skills shortage problem in these areas. It's not like demand is low either, BSci graduates are scrambling for postgrad places.

No, skill shortages are a lack of skills, not a lack of people. There is a huge lack of mining engineers at the moment (especially in Queensland), but that does not mean we can 'train young people from the suburbs' to work there (quoted is Julia Gillard's words, as appeared in a news article I read). You need a certain level of aptitude to get into certain jobs.

The government *should* fund more places, but that means the ATAR barrier will be lower. Generally, that correlates to a worse cohort (in terms of averages), which becomes harder to teach. I have had discussions with several lecturers about this, the consensus there is that if the cohort is not good enough, the required materials simply cannot be taught properly. The course has to be structured to cater for the lowest denominator, so more places lead to less skill, unless the population can become smarter on average (i.e. better primary/secondary education).

BSci graduates are scrambling for postgrad places.

This is not true. You look at the retention rates for honours, it's atrocious for Math/Phys/Chem. The worst thing is most of these students are in an engineering double degree / planning to take postgraduate engineering. Physical sciences have to compete with engineering for students.

[dc302]

Actually a lot of people I did 2nd year physics with just liked physics, and hated maths. Those types of people are quite plentiful I think, but I doubt they'd be very successful if they hated/sucked at maths =/