Universities are going to boot under-performing students out of university to free up places for able students. Universities can’t afford to ‘carry’ the under-performing students.
I’m concerned about the effect this will have for Maori in particular. We struggle to get Maori into university as it is, but now for those who do get there it’s going to be easier to get booted out.
I remember my mate from the coast who spent (at least) nine years getting his law degree. Now I bump in to him at the airport occasionally as he flies around from one high powered meeting to the next.
I’m blowed if I know why he took so long, but he hung in there and now he’s doing really well.
If he’d been booted out because he failed courses then he’d probably be pumping gas in Nowhereville and Maori wouldn’t be benefiting from his services.
He subscribed to the theory if at first you don’t succeed then try and try again.
What are the solutions? I don’t want capable and deserving people to miss out on places at university, but I don’t want people like my mate getting the boot.
The other concern is the threat to automatic entry to people over twenty years of age. This really affects Maori. Many Maori have bad experiences at school and drop out of education. Many often come back later in life, enter university and get qualifications that take them in a new direction.
Is cradle to the grave education under threat?
Anecdotes are not always very valuable Kelvin, especially when you say this yourself:
I’m blowed if I know why he took so long
Maybe he mucked around? You could say ‘I’m sure he wouldn’t’ but you really need better evidence to back yourself up here.
I’m not sure what you’re getting at. We lost contact for quite a few years after I left Teacher’s College. Maybe he did muck around, maybe he had whanau, financial, health, or other problems, I don’t know and haven’t asked.
The point is if he’d been suspended/ excluded from university then, he wouldn’t probably be where he is now.
Not everyone’s educational path will be in a nice straight line.
I’m not against people being booted out of University for CONSISTENT poor performance. As our society has become more and more university-centric, we have thousands of people with Arts degrees in particular, achieved on a C average. My thinking is that unless we want to have a market flooded with low quality undergraduate degrees, we need to raise the bar at which you can attain these degrees. Otherwise, what distinguishes an A average student from a C average student, when both have the same degree? Where is the motivation for people to achieve better?
I’d like to see instead of this ongoing focus on University only, more money and funding put into alternative tertiary pathways such as industry and skills training acknowledging that not everyone is suited to the euro-centric University environs.
Kelvin, you must inhabit a very strange world if flying from one high powered meeting to another is the measure of a man’s success. Judging by some of the people I have met who do this, I owuld certainly have my doubts. Or is it a case of bullshit baffles brains? LOL
In any event, keeping thousands of underperforming students taking up scarce places at Uni in order to ensure that a rare “hard-luck” case gets multiple chances is a nonsense.
There are plenty of older people who have gone on (or back) to University after they have developed a real hunger for learning and have been hugely successful in their fields. I would rather see that than giving half the country’s teenagers continued free shots at something they have yet to decide that they actually want while they experiment with useless options like Pol Sci..
I know a guy who has a disability and he’s failed some stuff, and passed others, but the poor guy got his degree in the end. It took him ages.
I think the probability of your success at university is largely determined by your upbringing in your home and your learning at primary/secondary school. Thats where the focus, and resources, should be.
University is for people who want to be there, and are capable of acheiving. If they haven’t made it at secondary school, it’s tough luck until they can meet the university standard in my opinion.
Whats euro-centric about universities? Knowledge is universal
insnt it?
Those who enter university at a later age, are more likely to pass their courses, and be more motivated in their studies. They also give a healthy mix of students of various ages and backgrounds. Just because someone fails at high school doesnt mean they are failures in life.
Perhaps people who consistently fail should be booted from universities for the degree they are doing. However it is not appropriate to boot them from all degrees they may have simply chosen something they weren’t good at. It also doesn’t seem right to me to boot people who consistently get C’s. They are after all still passing and don’t deserve to lose their place in university because of that.
I have no doubt it would affect Maori badly for some degrees but don’t forget several such as law at my university have a 10% Maori quota so they would not be able to boot those students unless there are more able Maori students to replace them.
@ghost Yes knowledge is universal however they deliberately choose not to teach certain disciplines. For example one of my lecturers told us about how his department had frequently been trying to get an African lecturer to teach but had been frequently declined because the university thought it was inappropriate at the time or there was not enough interest in it. The style of learning courses use is also only one of a myriad which has been chosen and stuck to for hundreds of years now aside from a few technological advances.
Yes I could’ve phrased that better.
You justify not kicking out underperforming students on the basis that underperforming students may or may not buck up and finish their degree. ‘x’ number of students won’t finish, and are costing taxpayers money – you think this is worth it? Maybe it is, but without some form of evidence (say those devilish statistics) it’s hard to say which leads me to say ‘good luck you’ll need it’ in trying to get traction on this.
Whanau, financial and health problems often are avenues for various exemptions in my experience (not having used them, just heard about them, anecdotally!).
What I think people tend to forget when it comes to access for over 20yr olds is that even though you have automatic access to uni, you don’t have automatic access to the degree you want to do. You need you to prove you can work at that level.
As it stands at the moment is that you apply to Uni, do a few papers from the degree you want to do as a cert in university prep, pass them to prove you can work at that level. Then you apply to the program you want to do. You don’t jump straight into the degree program.
By the way this is what I did and I have a B average last year.
If they take this away then 30+ will have to go back to highschool? Leave it how it is.
Back when I went to highschool it was pass or fail in one 3hr exam. No internal assessments. Even though I knew all the work, exams sent me into a panic and would sit there shaking and sweating.
Thank goodness I got in before all this changed. At 30 highschool culture is not a place for me.
@Kiwireader.
I do want to be there, (I studying from home extramurally)and are capable of acheiving (I’ve proved this last year by gaining my cert of universtiy prep By enrolling as an adult student and doing a few papers)
No I wasn’t the best at highschool but I have been given a second chance.
And where else can you be given a second chance. Do you really want 30, 40, 50yr olds back in highschool? The ones that dropped out before 7th form to do trade work who now want to go on a different track maybe want to do a business course so they can run there own business in the trade they chose?
Some people just want to do a few papers to help advance them at work, should they go back to highschool?
If you can front up with enough gumption to give it a go and are able to source money to pay the fees, why the hell should you be excluded. You learn as much from failure as you learn from success. You learn nothing from getting the B..lls to give something a go, and then being told you cant because you might fail.
This is not the Kiwi way, Giving it a go is as important as acheiving, no matter how long it takes!
If you can front up with enough gumption to give it a go and are able to source money to pay the fees, why the hell should you be excluded.
Because there isn’t an unlimited amount of money out there to pay for their subsidised university education!
I like to be informed on things before I jump too far into a debate – so I would also like to know the stats about what it costs for the ‘underperforming’ student to be kept at Uni. What costs are these? Why, if the uni is getting its fees, is it a cost to them? What are costs do you allude to?
I agree it takes a number of pathways for some people, and I think there should be more options than just uni.
I personally used to get cross with the people who mucked around and failed pretty much all they touched – for sure they had plenty of fun at the frequent social events and wet lunches – but what a waste of time and money. But how I personally feel about that and what that looks like if they are booted out is different when I am unsure of the actual costs to the uni and taxpayer. Whose money were they wasting – theirs, their parents or the taxpayers? It makes a difference to me. Do we have some of these stats? Perhaps you should not be able to access student loans if you fail your first year…
I value my education – it cost me heaps – and it is mindblowing to me when I hear of or knew people who ‘drank’ their uni days away with nothing to show but a huge debt. I have always personally thought if you are not serious about it and you are not doing it to get quals for your career – don’t do it – but a wise person once said to me, during a discussion on this – that an educated mind is better than an uneducated mind…for me the jury is still out on this one.
This is a good article on this topic.
http://www.voxy.co.nz/national/ausa-uni-crackdown-reveals-wrong-priorities/5/35034
@Paul. “I have always personally thought if you are not serious about it and you are not doing it to get quals for your career”
Exactly. Adult students know what they want out of it. Have more to lose, so are very dedicated, committed and put their all into it. That is from what I’ve seen looking at other adult students that I know.
@DavidW – you’re right, my mate would probably be better off if he was pumping gas in Nowhereville.
@Ghost, agreed.
And you’re right highschool is no place for you.
@millsy agreed. I thought you were banned, good that you’re not.
@A Mother, good for you
@Waterboy – hell yes!
@Stephen R – but those educated older students will then be able to contribute more in taxes with their better jobs.
Stephen R – but those educated older students will then be able to contribute more in taxes with their better jobs.
Seems this was about the ‘right of entry’ for over-20s…I wasn’t really addressing that. My bad, I think(?)
Exactly. Adult students know what they want out of it. Have more to lose, so are very dedicated, committed and put their all into it. That is from what I’ve seen looking at other adult students that I know.
Totally agree.
Actually it doesn’t even seem that there is ‘right of entry’:
If you are over 20 on the first day of semester, are a New Zealand or Australian citizen or permanent resident, and have no formal University Entrance qualification, you may be eligible for Special Admission.
If admission is approved, you may be considered for selection into programmes such as the Bachelors of Arts, Education, Laws (Part I), Science or Theology or the Certificates of Arts or Science.
You will need to consult with the relevant faculties before applying for courses or programmes. Evidence of other study or work skills will need to be provided with your application.
Then that sounds alright, they’re already somewhat choosy.
Thats what I’ve been trying to say.
You can enter but you have to prove you can study at that level. You take a few papers to prove you can, and then apply for the degree you want to do, cross credit them over if your accepted.
If they take that option away, how can you prove you can study at that level?
This is what I did.
What doesn’t seem to be brought up is that University education is especially important when you take into consideration the service nature of the economy. This is the case in Auckland especially – due to extreme deregulation.
If you don’t have a nice shinny degree in Commerce or Law its likely you will be serving coffees or selling cheap Chinese made goods at the warehouse for twelve bucks an hour.
University should be made more attainable for everyone, but special attention should be paid to the Pacific Island and Maori people in Auckland who are still recovering from the neo-liberal reforms. Questions need to be asked why Pacific Island and Maori are so poorly represented at Auckland University.
Regarding mature students. Auckland Uni runs a fantastic, one semester, preparation course named New Start. A B+ and above allows full entry into a degree program, and a B and below allows for a targeted entry. The New Start program provides a taste of university life including the lecture environment, workload expectations, and a good indication of what level is required to succeed. And there are students who discover that university study isn’t for them.
I have no problem with this type of program being compulsory for adult students wanting to enter university; so long as it continues to be subsidised by the government.
@Kelvin 1:24 – your call!
Yes but would that New Start program, not much different from what I did from what you explained, would that be closed if they stop entry for 20+?
Chris L – I think that you overestimate the value of a university education.
There are many graduates working in jobs they could have obtained without going to Uni for 3 or 4 years and acquiring a hefty debt.
Unless someone is genuinely academic, or really feels that they’ll benefit personally from the educational experience itself, they’d possibly be better off looking to get into an apprenticeship or a job where they can ‘work their way up’.
In most companies I’ve worked for a significant number of managers started on the ground floor and worked their way up (in recent times, as well).
The Education Industry over sells the value of its product : for many, as long as basic skills are there (and even in graduates these are often lacking), many companies prefer to train recruits in the specific skills required.
There will never be the number of truly graduate jobs for the proportions of our youth currently being conned into tertiary study. We tell youths they can have the world, thrust a huge debt on them and then burst their bubbles. Now that’s cruel!
Wow, that took me a while to read through.
Some interesting thoughts here. Firstly, I want to say that I think it’s a bad idea. I went straight from school to Uni, and when I did my bachelors degree I found it hard, I was no where near an “A” student, but I stuck at it. Some of my fellow class mates failed, and it wasn’t because they couldn’t handle the work, it was because they found particular lecturers hard to understand, or didn’t like their teaching styles. I had one friend who received an “E” for one paper, then took it the next semester with a different lecturer and received an “A-”, he put this all down to the different teaching styles. He was an intelligent student, but found some teaching styles difficult, so under this system should he have been kicked out? He finished his degree and is now earning a great salary, contributing to the economy and hasn’t looked back.
Let’s give our young people a chance, they might not get it right the first time, but then I guess neither did you or I on some things.
Let’s build more universities?
This policy could adversely affect students with disabilities such as Aspergers. They have often had a bad time at school and come back into education as mature students under open entry to university. However, circumstances such as lack of understanding and support often mean it takes a while to get that degree. But once qualified they are usually great advocates, role models and make a considerable contribution in their field.
@George
While I agree there are jobs out there that you can work from the ground up, other jobs you cannot and need to go to Uni first.
@ A mother “At 30 highschool culture is not a place for me.
”
That makes two of us….the thought of going back to high school leaves me cold. The person who says that school is “the best years of your life” must have been wearing some pretty rosily-tinted glasses.
@ Chris L “There are many graduates working in jobs they could have obtained without going to Uni for 3 or 4 years and acquiring a hefty debt………
”
A-bloody-men to that brother. For a country that values capitalism so strongly, we tend to forget the capitalist tradition of starting in the mailroom and working your way up…..
Anyway, I think a radical restructuring of the education system is needed here. For a start, we need to start asking whether a) some courses are best left to polytechs, and others to universites b) whether some subjects are really suitable to be delivered using a 3 year degree program, where a (more intensive) 1 or 2 year certificate/diploma would be sufficent (Bachelor of Audio Engineering? Sports Science?) c) whether we are better off handing over some courses to industry, with regards to apprenticeships etc d) whether we need to standardise courses across the country, like with the old NZCE/NZCS e) whether we need to better link course placements with industry demand, and perhaps have gauranteed jobs at the end of them.
From my friend Sherri in Georgia:
“Gastrocenemius, tapezius, tibialis anterior, latissimus dorsi, etc……..words from my 3rd graders anatomy test wordbank…..ARE YOU KIDDING ME?????”
My daughter here in Dunedin (primary school) is also learning words I first encountered when studying for the SAT.
What’s up with that? Did kids get 10x smarter in the last 30 years? Flynn Effect, right?
@A Mother (8:57 pm)
I totally agree, but these jobs are far fewer than then numbers who are being crammed into our tertiary institutions.
I really feel for the kids from ordinary homes who are the cliched ‘first in my family to go to uni’ who have been sold the idea that this will be the same golden key to a decent job that it was 30 or 40 years ago. It was only such in those days because the system was elitist and the few being spewed out at the end of the sausage machine had ‘graduate type’ jobs to go to.
What’s our aim? 50% to go to uni? 75%? 100%? Where are the jobs to come from to make the personal and communial costs and the huge personal effort worth while?
The truth is that many kids are sold this dream by those who have played the system and won – teachers. Their careers have been built on formal education, they’ve done well for themselves, and so that’s the way they see everyone progressing. In so many ways they show contempt for those who demonstrate significant (and potentially lucrative) practical skills and decent lives built on non-academic skills and qualifications.
Look, for example, at the way old fashioned practical subjects like cooking, woodwork and so on have been made more academic at the expense of the teaching of skills. The assumption today seems to be that the need is primarily to educate kids in designing items rather than actually producing them. For the majority it would be the other way round.
@George
Yes you are right.
There isn’t anyone in my family (I’m the first but that is because I want to be a teacher and can’t start from the bottom up) They all seemed to pick up a trade. There is a builder, 2 electricians and one does data cabling. My Mum does call centre work and worked her way up.
It depends on what type of career you desire. I was drawn to teaching but convinced myself I couldn’t do Uni until a major event in my life, I decided it was now or never and if I don’t give it a go then I would regret it forever.
“I really feel for the kids from ordinary homes who are the cliched ‘first in my family to go to uni’ who have been sold the idea that this will be the same golden key to a decent job that it was 30 or 40 years ago. It was only such in those days because the system was elitist and the few being spewed out at the end of the sausage machine had ‘graduate type’ jobs to go to.”
It was elitist, simply because back in those times, one could literally walk out of school and into a job, and one with a chance of working your way up. One simply didnt need to go to university, or polytech even. You only needed to go to university if you wanted to be doctor, lawyer, or to get into science or engineering.
@millsy – but we just seem to have replaced that situation with one where today’s kids have to stay on at school for an extra two years, then go to university for four, exchanging six years of earning for six years of debt accumulation, in order to proceed into the same sort of job that they managed years ago.
This hasn’t necessarily been a good thing for those being forced to play the game.
Uhhhhmmmm, Kelvin, since when have we had a “cradle to grave” Education system?
The only people who would remotely qualify under that description are school teachers. They get born, they go to school, they go to university, they go to teachers college,, then they go back to school, retire, then die. The closest anyone is going to get to a “cradle to grave” education system.
@Whaleoil, so are you saying people don’t go to university later in life to try something new, or that they shouldn’t go to university later in life?
People going to university later in life is hardly ‘cradle to the grave’. And people receiving automatic entry is something I personally have never agreed with because people require a certain level of education to complete a lot of these courses to a satisfactory standard, otherwise they are just being doomed to fail. Many tertiary institutions run bridging courses for exactly this reason, so that people can prove they have the academic ability to complete these courses.
And by saying that you are particularly concerned about Maori being ‘booted out’ you seem to be suggesting that Maori people cannot achieve the same academically? Perhaps is it this attitude toward Maori (oh they don’t achieve therfore we must lower the bar) that causes a wide raft of problems in the first place.
I think the issues exist in the Primary and Secondary school sectors, not the Universities.
Ever conisder the possibility that NZ universities are filling up with overseas students, thereby reducing the number of seats available for kiwis?
@Thinker – As I understand it Non-residents pay higher fees to attend University here than NZ Residents/Citizens so may not be such an issue in terms of if the institutions can afford to keep them going.
so are you saying people don’t go to university later in life to try something new, or that they shouldn’t go to university later in life?
Kelvin,
No one is going to begrudge an ‘older’ person the right of going back to university if they so choose, but this strikes me as a matter of cost-benefit.
A government cannot pay for everything it might like to pay for in the education system, and on balance of probabilities the (substantial) subsidy provided to an ‘older’ student is less likely to be returned to the government later on, in the form of higher taxable earnings.
Who cares? They’ve paid decades in taxes, let them have their education!
Right, so if I choose to start smoking, eat bad food, and have unprotected sex… you’re ok with paying for my Chemo, Lipo, and Viagra because I’ve already paid my taxes?
Good to know.
LOL
You’re going to be one trim, studly, bald dude. 
Actually that sounded dodgy,
, Arrgh I didn’t say it, I didn’t mean it like that!
Rewrite: You’ll be one bald, skinny, stiff!