University Cuts

[Mr. Study]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/gillard-to-pull-23bn-of-funding-from-unis-to-pay-for-gonski-reforms/story-fn59niix-1226619719867

The government will also scrap the 10 per cent discount given to students who pay their university fees upfront, saving $230 million.

A further $1.2 billion will be saved by requiring students to pay back start-up scholarships once they enter the workforce and once an earning threshold is reached.

http://minister.innovation.gov.au/chrisevans/MediaReleases/Pages/TonyAbbotttoslashsupportforuniversitystudents.aspx

Opposition spokesperson, Brett Mason, today confirmed the Coalition will cut student support payments, including the Student Start-up Scholarship...

Thoughts?

EDIT: http://www.afr.com/p/national/student_aid_too_much_for_some_GvMTnT7zFOnkttCRoPkUKP

[CH3ezEC4KE]

It's ridiculous

[MJRomeo81]

Obviously as a university student I am concerned. I don't have any problems with the government removing the 10% discount. A HECs loan is the best loan you will ever receive. I don't know why anyone would want to pay off the debt upfront.

As for the student start-up scholarship, it's honestly too much money. How much do you spend per semester on textbooks and other equipment? I bet it isn't 1k. Keep in mind the scholarship pays around 2k A YEAR. Besides labor are still willing to provide it, although we'll have to pay it back later on.

Now if you vote Tony in, he wants to cut the start up scholarship altogether and also give us fibre to the node. This will be a close election.

I just hope uni's don't start cutting more subjects. Already we're seeing universities such as Deakin looking into online learning as their main method of delivery. Are they charging students less for online lectures? Probably not. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Universities are essentially operating like big business corporations. University administrations are now taking into their own hands the right to decide what is, and what is not, useful research, and are in effect claiming the right to fire at will those who do not fit the requirements that they lay down. Cutting subjects, restructured degrees, online courses, etc.

I predict that it won't be long before many universities recognize the financial benefits of mass online courses, in many cases with their eyes tightly focused on fertile recruiting grounds such as India and China. Obviously, it takes far fewer faculty to run and maintain an online course than a conventional course, and there is virtually no limit to student enrolment.

[abcdqdxD]

The notion of university courses being delivered scares me. How are you going to do lab pracs? What if a concept can't be clearly explained online?

FTTN alone is worth not voting for the libs. Save the NBN!

[Thu Thu Train]

The notion of university courses being delivered scares me. How are you going to do lab pracs? What if a concept can't be clearly explained online?

FTTN alone is worth not voting for the libs. Save the NBN!

I'm conflicted

I want faster internet
but I don't want to pay more for uni

wat do

[alondouek]

Oh man I'm so angry right now. The government doesn't seem to realise how vital tertiary education is for Australia. Fact is, out of most of the world's countries with advanced economies, Australia ranks lowly in tertiary education:

Professor Glen Finger, from Queensland's Griffith University, says the cuts could lower Australia's university ranking and reputation overseas.

He says Australia already ranks low for advanced economies that invest in universities.

"This will have a long-term impact on university research and education in a very negative sense," he said.

"Australian universities are punching above their weight in terms of university rankings, being 25th out of 29 advanced economies for public investment in universities as a percentage of GDP.

"That's not a good ranking, it means we are in the bottom five."

As I understand it, the best way to grow our economy and reduce national debt is by training a generation of highly-skilled, professional workers who can fill every function needed in society; everything from trades and apprenticeships to PhDs and Doctorates require a form of post-school learning - and the Government is taking away the means to fulfil this need. They're just shuffling money around, so when they see that this cutting of university funds going to work, what will they do? Will they take back the money from the schools, or drain the funding of another vital sector instead?

The Government is just taking from one hand and giving it to the other.

Obviously, I see the need for further fund allocation to schools - this is also important to the nation's future. But the Government is going about it all wrong. Cutting funds allocated for education to raise more funds for education? Just doesn't make sense to me.

Come election time, I'll be voting for the libs. I'm definitely disappointed with their response to the NBN - but I'll take slower internet and better tertiary education over the alternative any day.

[Russ]

The Government is just taking from one hand and giving it to the other.

So ah, where would you get the 2.3 billion from?

[alondouek]

So ah, where would you get the 2.3 billion from?

That's where I recognise that the Government has a dilemma. What area can be scaled back to that extent? With the mining boom set to end sometime in the relatively near future, why not begin to gradually divert funds from that sector?

But why would you cut funds from a level of education to allocate those funds to another level?

And do you honestly believe that it's proper to cut those funds from the universities to give more to the schools?

[Russ]

If education as a whole has a set percentage of the budget, it is not improper to reorganize the distribution to address a glaring need. Honestly, the only cut they made that is concerning to me is the reduction in grant money, which is only a third of the total.

[alondouek]

Well, if the Government is reallocating money to "address a glaring need", then that's fine. Only problem is, they're setting themselves up for another, major "glaring need" in the future. Universities are already not very accessible to those who are of a lower socioeconomic standing - taking funds away from the universities means that the mitigating measures (i.e. equity scholarships etc) that these institutions have in place are threatened. That concerns me, as the government is inadvertently making it more difficult for those who don't outright have the financial means to attend university.

[Professor Polonsky]

It's actually not such a drastic cut at all, in terms of the numbers. And it's more a 'slowing the rate of growth' cut rather than actually cutting.

[deleted]

It's not as bad as the TAFE cuts.

[mark_alec]

You guys do realise that this has nothing to do with funding that universities get. The cuts affect students, not the unis.

[Russ]

Except for the bit where they asked universities to cut costs but keep the same efficiency level.

[CH3ezEC4KE]

You guys do realise that this has nothing to do with funding that universities get. The cuts affect students, not the unis.

I'm pretty sure it says unis have been left to decide what to, whether that be increased class sizes or staff cuts