Red Alert

Archive for the ‘Tertiary education’ Category

Massey shuts off summer school enrolments

Posted by Grant Robertson on July 22nd, 2010

It seems that at about 4.30 today Massey University announced to staff that they were closing enrolments for their summer school at 5pm. They had been due to close on the 1st of November. Seems a bizarre way to do it, and I am not sure if there was a rush in the half hour that they remained open!

The reason as stated on the Massey website is that they have now reached their funded cap and could take no more students in 2010 (except of course full fee paying international students). According to Big News those who had already enrolled may not get to study if there have not been sufficient enrolments in particular courses. Those courses will be cancelled.

As with Victoria closing off enrolments for the second semester this is going to disrupt plans and add costs for students and their families.

But I understand the position the universities find themselves in. Steven Joyce is still not moving to address this issue, and next year will be far worse. He is sitting on his hands, because he actually wants to “dampen demand”, and thinks it will all calm down in a year.

There is a lot of ad-hoc decision making from universities which will be leaving students and parents confused. There really is a need for leadership from the government on this to ensure that we get and retain as many people as possible  in tertiary education over the next year.


Oh well, who needs tertiary education anyway?

Posted by Maryan Street on May 23rd, 2010

The news for tertiary education and students was all bad in the budget. I will do a specific post on the impact on students later, but I just wanted to address some of the headline effects of the budget on tertiary ed to start with.

There is about $99 million LESS going into the sector this year than last year. Say what?  How is the economy going to get a “step change”, let alone the quantum leap we actually need, without investing in knowledge and skills?

The government will make much of the 1735 extra students they are funding in universities and the 3173 they are funding in polytechs. But these are not new students – they are simply funding the students already there whom the institutions are currently carrying as unfunded students. Steven Joyce says there will be 765 new students at universities. Divide that across 8 universities and you get fewer than 100 new students per university.  Take the 455 new polytech students and divide them across the 20 polys – and you get 23 new students per polytech.

This simply won’t cut it. The government wants a step change to occur through science – who grows scientists? Universities and some polytechs, that’s who.

And don’t get me started on the cuts of $3.4 million to Adult and Community Education delivered through high schools. They only had about $3.3 million left last year………


BUDGET 2010: Neither Fair Nor Fixing

Posted by David Cunliffe on May 20th, 2010

It’s Budget Day.  You’ll be hearing lots from us over the next few days and I hope many of you will join our Finance Team live here on Red Alert tonight at 8.30 pm.

Most New Zealanders already understand that a Budget that (at best) delivers only marginal gain to middle and lower income earners and a whopping great windfall to the top end, is not fair.  It is however, precsely what you would expect from National.

Equally important, the Budget as it has been foreshadowed will not fix the underlying problems of this economy: lack of savings, skills, innovation and exports.  These are exactly the themes Labour is pushing – as reflected in todays Dominion and Herald (note the Herald got the headline wrong).

If you don’t believe me on this – just refer to Swtizerland’s IMD World Competitiveness Ranking, which shows NZ slipping back for exactly the reasons Labour has been saying. 

Think about it, if the problems are insufficient savings, exports, skills and innovation, how on earth is raising GST and an income tax windfall for the wealthiest possibly going to address that?

It proves our underlying critique of this visionless National Government -  they had “nine long years” to think up policies to take the country forward, to deliver on the step change they campaigned for – and so far, nothing.


Are you reading this Mr Joyce?

Posted by Grant Robertson on May 8th, 2010

I hope Steven Joyce reads the feature story in the Dom Post this morning (not on-line so far as I can see). It is a story about the emerging importance of the Pasifika population in New Zealand to our future society and economy. Its an interesting read, but I was particularly taken by the story of Tristram Lupo-Samoa, a 23 year old of Niuean descent who is studying electronic engineering and computer systems at Victoria University.

He failed many of his core subjects in the first two years of a science degree. He’s now three years into a four year degree but it will take five years to complete as he had to repeat a first year paper.

This is the reality for many people, especially those from a background where there is no family history of tertiary education. Steven Joyce’s proposal to cut access to student loans (which Tristram relies on along with part-time work) if you fail more than half your course for two years is just too blunt an instrument. I am all for a merit based system, but not everyone starts from the same place. As Tristram says

Its pretty tough to be honest. I try to get help from everyone that I can. It was an unknown subject for my family, learning a whole lot of new things. It takes a lot of my time because it takes me a lot of time to understand concepts. Its hard for me but I am willing. I would rather have it hard than easy because I know it will pay off in the end.

Tristram sounds like a really sensible young man, but he says he sometimes asks himself why he is doing his study.

Because I want to achieve something, something great in my life. Something my parents and family can be proud of.

As a country we need to support and invest in Tristram, and not try to apply a one size fits policy that will deprive him and us of a great future.


Lockwood and me in 93

Posted by Grant Robertson on April 6th, 2010

I spent a bit of time over Easter cleaning out the basement and going through some boxes.   One of the gems I came across is this clipping from the Otago Daily Times in 1993.  (click the picture below for the full-size image). Lockwood  looks much the same. Not sure about me.  In my defence it was the 90s, big  glasses were in, ok? 

At this point in time Lockwood was refusing to go on to campus, so we had driven to Lincoln the week before to find him, but he cancelled the visit.  To his credit he eventually did agree to meet with us.  At the time I would never have believed him that he was “our best friend in Cabinet”, now I think he might have been right!

Picture 107


Another case of pulling up the ladder?

Posted by Maryan Street on March 20th, 2010

Steven Joyce, new Tertiary Education Minister, has floated the idea that a portion of universities’ funding should be pegged to pass rates or course completion rates. That way, taxpayers are meant to know that they are getting value for the heaps of money they are pouring into students by way of allowances and loans.

But hang on a minute – just look at his own tertiary education record. By his own admission in a recent interview, he enrolled in vet science at Massey, failed everything (or “didn’t make the cut”) in his first year, enrolled in Chemistry for two weeks and decided he didn’t like that either, then  enrolled in Zoology, which he eventually did go on to complete some years later. By current standards, he would probably go down as THREE ‘did not completes’. How would Massey feel about enrolling him for another chance if 10% of their funding were to be dependent on students passing??

But he went on to be a valuable contributing member of society – and make a lot of money as well. So why is he looking at pulling up the ladder and not allowing other people to do the same as him? People’s lives, like his, do not always follow a linear path but often unfold with age in a series of ever widening circles. Reminds me of Paula Bennet, the gutsy solo mum who pursued tertiary education successfully with the help of the state, axing the Tertiary Incentive Allowance for those solo mums wanting to do degrees like her.

So ladders are OK when you’re climbing them right? But there’s no use for them once you have got to the top?