Prev
Next

HELP me if you can I’m feeling dumb

Amanda Rishworth

by Amanda Rishworth

30 May 05:40am

Must Reads

The Punch is moving house - this is a caption

The Punch is moving house

385

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this? - this is a caption

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

122

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming” - this is a caption

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

251

Filed under: Education, Hecs, Higher Education, Society, Students, Study

54 comments

Access to post-secondary education should be based on merit and not ability to pay. We know that graduates of further education typically enjoy higher incomes over their lifetimes than non-graduates and that tertiary and further education is critical to personal growth.

Careful, my mortarboard's on loan! Pic: News.com.au

It is estimated that Australians without a Certificate III could be earning an additional $400,000 on average over the course of a typical working life if they attain a Certificate III qualification or higher. The benefits of higher and post-secondary education, however, historically have not always been shared widely and equitably in our society.

Instead, a disproportionately higher of number students from privileged backgrounds have enjoyed access to opportunities for further education while others have been left behind.

The fundamental principle that all Australians should have access to post-secondary education is not only about equity and fairness, but it is also about ensuring that we as a nation develop the skilled workforce we will need to continue to be competitive into the future. There is international consensus that a population with a high proportion of skilled and qualified individuals will be essential for national economic prosperity in a future which will be characterised by a rapidly moving global economy.

We need to break down barriers to participation in post-secondary education for individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds both to ensure equity of access for these individuals and to ensure the continued prosperity of our nation.

While the cause of the under-representation of people from disadvantaged backgrounds in higher education is multifaceted, it is widely agreed that the economic costs associated with attaining further education is a major barrier for these individuals. In the 1980s former Labor Minister John Dawkins began a national conversation about the inevitable need for the growth of our universities in order to remain internationally competitive. To fund this growth, the reforms called for improved efficiencies within the system but also necessitated student contributions.

At this time, there was a concern that introducing student contributions could erect financial barriers to participation for economically disadvantaged individuals. True to the core Labor values of fairness and equity, the Labor Government at this time chose not to impose a scheme whereby students would be forced to pay tuition fees upfront but rather to allow students to defer their fees through income contingent loans.

This meant that students would not need to pay the cost of their education until they entered the workforce and were earning a decent income - this way, upfront tuition fees would not become a financial barrier for students wishing to study at an Australian university. Income contingent loans have been vital to improving access to university education for individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds.

In much the same way as the Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) has opened doors to education for less privileged Australians, so too will the recent decision to transform vocational education in this country including by introducing income contingent loans for higher level VET courses. We know that people from disadvantaged backgrounds want to pursue further training, to upskill and to secure a better job and yet for some the cost of tuition fees has prevented them from doing so.

The skills reform package agreed to at the recent COAG will transform our vocational education and training system most importantly by making it accessible to many more Australians. The reforms include providing study-now-pay-later loans for government subsidised Diploma and Advanced Diploma students so that they have an opportunity to defer payment of tuition fees rather than having to pay upfront. This extension of study-now-pay-later loans to higher level VET courses will remove the financial barrier that upfront tuition fees can pose and open the doors to further education for many more Australians.

Another critical element of the reform package is the move to guarantee all working age Australians a government subsidised training place up to their first Certificate III. I believe that these two reforms will be critical to ensuring many more Australians are able to obtain post-secondary education, improving their employment opportunities and wage prospects.

Further education is a life-changing experience which should be available to all Australians and not just a few. Governments must not underestimate the positive impact on national productivity of improving access to further education and training to those who may not have had access in the past - it is in our country’s national interest. 

Most commented

54 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Nathan says:

      06:18am | 30/05/12

      ” it is widely agreed that the economic costs associated with attaining further education is a major barrier for these individuals”
      I am sorry but i hate this argument, in Australia you have access to student payments that you dont have to pay back and you don’t pay hecs until you earn a certain amount. It is one of the fairest systems i have heard of.

      Reply

    • KH says:

      07:56am | 30/05/12

      Isn’t that what the article is saying?  Its about extending the deferred payment option to certificate courses and higher level VET courses so that low income earners can improve their skills without the barrier of up front costs…..........

    • GetRidOfCommies says:

      06:41am | 30/05/12

      “Access to post-secondary education should be based on merit and not ability to pay.”

      That’s an opinion, not a fact.

      My opinion is if you can’t afford to pay for a service you are accessing, you have no right to access it it. Poor people need to learn to stand on their own two feet, instead of expecting the rest of us to fund their lavish lifestyles.

      Reply

    • acotrel says:

      07:32am | 30/05/12

      @GROC
      I agree, the system should be ‘user pays’.  The question is then who are the major beneficiaries when a worker becomes educated.  Who owns the intellectual property he/s he generates as a result of intellect ?  The compartmentalised approach to education does us all a disservice.
      At tertiary level, I always studied subjects relevant to my job.  Do you believe I was motivated by the prospects of promotion when I coughed up the fees every year ?
      My professional interest was exploited !

    • Leaping Tortoise says:

      07:50am | 30/05/12

      I’m a uni student who has a HECS-HELP debt and have been receiving centrelink payments for the last 4 years. For the year between my finishing secondary school and beginning university I worked full time and paid my taxes. Since beginning university, I have worked where I can, because centrelink payments barely cover the cost of rent + essentials, let alone public transport travel to my uni. However, when I can work, I do, and I pay tax on that income. When I finish my starting wage will be quite high and I’ll pay tax on that too. I think I’ve earned (and will continue to earn) my centrelink payments.

      Neither I nor my parents could afford to pay upfront, yet my enterscore was high enough for me to get a spot at the university. I think that merit should be a critera for entry, because at my uni we have a lot of (dare I say) foreign students who ride in on their parent’s money, don’t do the work, and buy their degree (if you think I’m being racist then consider that my uni, particularly my school, were bought before a senate inquiry to explain why they allowed foreign students to resubmit tests and assignments at a later date with no penalty, and in one case provided the final examination to foreign students BEFORE the examination, while this treatment was not (and should not have been) made available to local students.

      These students hold back group work and are detrimental to our own education. Now I’m not saying that all foreign students are like this. I have several in my groups at uni who put in a fantastic amount of effort, but if you can’t get in on merit alone, then you shouldn’t be allowed in. If you can’t pay upfront, there should be decent options to pay back later, and also to support you through your education, knowing that the tax you pay from your higher income will easily pay back what you’ve used.

      That’s my 2c, sorry for the rant

    • Inky says:

      08:49am | 30/05/12

      @Leaping Toroise

      Just remember that a lot of those international students who “buy” their degrees are often the only things keeping the institutes running. A lot of universities depend on that money to be able to operate and without it, could not offer as many places/subjects to local students.

    • miloinacup says:

      09:26am | 30/05/12

      Oh, Commies smile

    • Borderer says:

      09:34am | 30/05/12

      When I did my degree I ended up at a tipping point for HECS. I was doing my degree part time so 4 subjects a year and I was earning enough so that if I deferred my fees with HECS I would start paying straight away and paying most of it back within that year as well. Did this make me rich, not really, I was only just in the zone for HECS to be a costly waste of time and I needed to finish the degree to progress to the next career level. Paying up front was cheaper, I would get the discount and the fees would be tax deductible after the minimum amount, about 45% cheaper than using HECS. This would be hard financially, too rich to ride for free and too poor to coast along, I had to choose, instant noodles for 6 years or a second job. I chose second job, on balance it was the best solution, sure I didn’t have a lot of spare time (as in none), time for relationships or time to relax but I did pay all my fees and save for a holiday and house deposit by the time I graduated.
      There were times that I waivered during the six years and thought about chucking in the towel (70-80 hour weeks do that) but I cast my mind back to how much I’d endured and put up with that giving up was not an option, failure or not trying was not an option either, if I had the attitude of “I’ll do it again next semester”, that would be another $1200 of my money, another few months of no life.
      To put it another way, if I am paying out of my own pocket (not racking up a future debt to be paid off at a later date) I will make damn sure I turn up to every lecture and tutorial, hand in every assignment, pay attention and do my utmost to pass every exam. Allowing students to use HECS without making them pay something up front is denying them any appreciation of current value of their education.

    • Leaping Tortoise says:

      09:58am | 30/05/12

      @Inky, I understand that. I do. The uni is essentially a business, one that has to turn a profit, but when I’m referring to literally buying their degree, not earning it and being able to pay upfront, then that annoys me. That’s what happened at my uni, the local students became disadvantaged due to the uni giving exceeding advantages to the foreign students. Again, going to say that some of them do legitimately earn their position there, and that’s fine. What I disagree with are the ones who show up in the course because of their money, not their merit, don’t do anything towards the course and still get high marks due to their favour.

      For example. I’m in final year engineering, one of these foreign students couldn’t even define center of gravity! Even without learning that (which is one of the first things taught in first year) an engineering student should be able to figure out what it is from the name.

    • me my mo says:

      01:48pm | 30/05/12

      @GetRidOfCommies, it is far better for Australia, as with any nation, that access to post-secondary education be based upon merit. In fact, I believe the single, greatest issue the United States faces is the difficulty those in the poor demographic have in gaining post-secondary education.

    • acotrel says:

      06:49am | 30/05/12

      The peer group has a major effect on who goes on to tertiary studies.  People who become qualified in the trades often take the attitude ‘when I done me time’, which indicates a mindset that study ends after a couple or three years of an apprenticeship.  The best and the worst engineers come from trade backgrounds.  The best because they are in touch with reality.  The worst because they carry the old trades culture with them with all of its negativity and acceptance of things such as bullying, and the old ‘she’ll be right, mate’ stuff.
      Anyone can pursue tertiary studies.  There is adult entry to courses, and most employers are supportive of part time students. It is when the expectations of marriage partners don’t align that the study road becomes difficult or impossible.
      I was still attending classes at age 57, and now living in the bush, I miss the opportunity to continue.  The local TAFES and Unis near Benalla don’t have many customers for advanced maths, so they don’t bother to include it in what they offer.

      Reply

    • Tator says:

      06:50am | 30/05/12

      Amanda,
      “The benefits of higher and post-secondary education, however, historically have not always been shared widely and equitably in our society.

      Instead, a disproportionately higher of number students from privileged backgrounds have enjoyed access to opportunities for further education while others have been left behind. ”  Could the main reason for this be that the people with “priviliged backgrounds” care about their childrens education and promote the value of a good education.  We have had HECS in place for over 20 years and the main criteria with gaining entry into University has been your year 12 academic achievement for school leavers or STAT scores for mature age entrants.  Socio-economic status has nothing to do with admittance criteria.  There are enough examples of people from disadvantaged backgrounds working their way through tertiary studies to say that there is no social class barrier to tertiary education as the only way to gain entry is to score a high enough ATAR through year 12 or via STAT test system.
      I would be more concerned with the main reasons for social disadvantage with issues such as substance abuse and generational welfare dependancy being bigger issues of concern to the majority of those languishing in poverty.

      Reply

    • Nathan says:

      07:09am | 30/05/12

      Have to agree about the reasons for privileged backgrounds going to university. I am sure that not that many people from privileged backgrounds are not tradies either.

    • GetRidOfCommies says:

      07:16am | 30/05/12

      Exactly right. People deserve the economic position they are in.

      The poor have only themselves to blame.

    • acotrel says:

      07:22am | 30/05/12

      ’ Could the main reason for this be that the people with “priviliged backgrounds” care about their childrens education and promote the value of a good education. ‘

      There are two ways of getting kids a good educa tion - spoon feeding, -  or motivating them.  All your money won’t make a champion if your kid is not motivated.  That is the reason that the kids who attend Melbourne Boys High School, and MacRobertson Girls High School always take the top honours at HSC level !  - Many of them are from ‘underprivileged backgrounds’.

    • Tubesteak says:

      07:46am | 30/05/12

      “We have had HECS in place for over 20 years and the main criteria with gaining entry into University has been your year 12 academic achievement for school leavers or STAT scores for mature age entrants.  Socio-economic status has nothing to do with admittance criteria.”

      Not exactly, or maybe not when I was going to school.

      I had some friends who went to the same public school I went to for a while. I used to comprehensively beat them in every subject. Then they switched to the local grammar school in their final years of high school and the TER they achieved were well beyond what anyone in my school got.  This is mainly because your school was ranked by the performance of all students and your TER reflected this.

      As a consequence I was denied entrance to the university and course of my choice. Still, it hasn’t stopped me from getting 2 Bachelor’s degrees and three Masters degrees and due to degree and career selection out-earning them. But that’s a different story. Essentially, it isn’t a level playing field and should be made to be so. It should be based on individual performance on standardised exams. Not on school or region performance. It may be different now because, as you can see, I went to school when it was the TER which was some time ago.

      Our entire education system needs an overhaul. We have a 19th century approach. We should be aiming to develop real-world employable skills in professions and trades that our country needs. They should be more vocationally focused.

    • Joan says:

      08:43am | 30/05/12

      Nathan : Tradies are doing very nicely financially in fact plumbers, carpenters, plasterers etc hourly rates are often higher than many univeristy graduates.  The priviledged background belongs to children whose parents recognise a childs talents, and through encouragement and direction, develop a work ethic in child. The best thing to do is make the best of the ones talents, and the best way to live is to live without envy of the guy living next door cos life dealt him perhaps a `better`  set cards at time of birth. Nothing wrong with paying for higher education.Give it free and people are careless and show no respect - even those with higher marks. Prior HECs many students would swap and change and stay forever in the system as if Uni was a free bus ride. Yes cost can be a barrier- I was thinking about adding a speciality in my area but changed my mind when I found out the ridiculous cost of the course -  and with no added financial gain it wasn’t worth pursuing at my time of life.  Decisions are made according to age - being in last quarter of career,choices made are different to those made at the begining.  And you bet family conversation around dinner table are quite different and influence life choices. So one family will talk about centrelink money , pokie wins, loses another family may talk about shares, property values , career directions. yet another worrying about world coming to end via carbondioxide, food scraps straight in the compost bin.etc etc.  The biggest single impact on any person is parental attitude on how to live life, how to make life choices, and how to face life obstacles. In the end people end up where they are by choices made along the way and its not fault of Tom Dick or Harry down the road or the cost of higher education - those that want it early will strive for it.

    • Tim says:

      10:22am | 30/05/12

      Tubesteak,
      How do you know they didn’t improve their performance once they went to the local Grammar school?
      I know that at my private school we were drilled on the importance of the tests far more than friends I had at the local public school.

      The school distributions were used to slot each individual into the overall TER mark, so if you were well ahead of the curve at your school you still would have received a high TER but obviously you could be dragged slightly down if your school was very low achieving overall.

      Anyway, I thought the system has changed significantly since then but I’m not completely sure.

    • Tubesteak says:

      12:13pm | 30/05/12

      Tim
      “How do you know they didn’t improve their performance once they went to the local Grammar school?”
      That is one variable I cannot acocunt for.

      “but obviously you could be dragged slightly down if your school was very low achieving overall”
      My school considered it a success if they had less people in the <15 mark than another nearby public school. There were only several people in my year of about 100 that got over 50.

      I’m not sure how much the system has chenged. But I just see ranking schools as really silly. Students should be ranked on individual performance. I think they ranks schools as part of an effort to take into account their yearly marks and not just one test at the end. Perhaps ongoing state based tests would be better.

    • Willie says:

      02:12pm | 30/05/12

      I know for the WA TER your schools rank made no difference to your final mark. The difference was if the average final mark from the school was 80% but the same students could only get 60% in the external exam then the final mark from the school was scaled down. This only happened if the school marked too easy or too hard not if all the students were stupid.

    • Admiral Ackbar says:

      02:21pm | 30/05/12

      “Exactly right. People deserve the economic position they are in.

      The poor have only themselves to blame.”

      Wow. I’m working full time on a below average wage and the only way to earn more would be to get extra qualifications through a tertiary institution, which I can’t afford but could quite easily achieve. But according to you I deserve not to be able to access further education. Ok, cheers, dipshit.

    • jade (the other one) says:

      03:56pm | 30/05/12

      The trouble with your summation is that it does not take into account the serious disadvantage of many disadvantaged students. In my local area, there was a noticeable difference between the wealthy private school, John Paul College, and the state high schools. That difference was chiefly in the subjects the school offered.

      Woodridge State High School barely offered enough Authority subjects to allow students to sit for an OP. They were not allowed to, because less than 12 students applied to study those subjects. Students who wished to study Physics, Mathematics B or C, Chemistry, Authority business subjects, Geography, or a number of other subjects could not. Therefore, students who wished to study engineering, science-related subjects, or business courses ended up at a serious disadvantage. Contrast that with John Paul College who barely offered a vocational subject, but virtually every Authority subject available.

      Further, the lack of opportunity to study those subjects which form pre-requisites for these university courses tells disadvantaged students that they are not welcome or entitled to study these courses in the post-secondary environment.

      I believe that all high schools should offer classes in any Authority subject that is available. For any number of students who wish to study it.

    • craig2 says:

      06:59am | 30/05/12

      Now with the increasing number of students going to university, the government should consider axing some degrees i.e Arts and some alternative medicines, and keep those that can be used by employers right here and now (there might be the issue of little work experience) and this way students can start paying off their degrees and not have to start another one because the current degree is useless. I’m also for women aspiring to achieve educational success as we should not underestimate their worth to a growing economy.

      Reply

    • Macca says:

      08:02am | 30/05/12

      This post sounds like a complete troll.

      1. For one reason or another Arts students and alternative medicine students do find succesful occupations
      2. More women attend Uni than men

    • Inky says:

      08:52am | 30/05/12

      I certainly hope it’s a troll.

      I did an arts degree. I am in a career not relevant to my degree. However, what I learned in my degree still helps. Remember that article a week or so ago, about how Arts helps you in more than just a highly specialised area?

    • craig2 says:

      11:44am | 30/05/12

      Macca and inky: not trolling. You don’t need an arts degree to make you better adjusted in this society, that comes back to your upbringing and ive lost track of the number of grads who progress to a more practical degree ie teaching, after the completion of an arts degree. Macca, successful living peddling pseudoscience, great to know, feel so much better!

    • acotrel says:

      07:36am | 30/05/12

      @craig2
      ‘this way students can start paying off their degrees and not have to start another one because the current degree is useless.’

      So the reason you are studying is to make money ?  You’d make more by going down to Fowles Auctions, buying cars and selling them on.  A much better use of your money than HECS.

      Reply

    • craig2 says:

      11:35am | 30/05/12

      Acrotel, a degree is not the be all end all and I agree, a car salesman will make more money then some degree specialized jobs but a degree allows a greater wage opportunity, no issue with me.

    • Emma says:

      07:38am | 30/05/12

      A society needs people to do all sorts of jobs. We need executives and we need taxi drivers. I dont think it makes sense for everyone to obtain a degree. What should change is how we value and perceive certain professions. A taxi driver does not need a degree in English literature. But he should be respected and earn enough to feed himself.
      I talked to a taxi driver in London. He said, he and his wife (a maid) are expected to work in the city but they cant afford to live there. So they travel 3 hrs every day. Some people have full on jobs 40 hrs a week but dont earn enough with it to pay the rent. The solution should not be to make scientists of them, because who is doing their job then? They should be paid appropriately for what they are doing. I dont understand that I pay 208 NZD for a haircut, which takes the girl less than 60 min (excluding the time I sit there with the colour in my hair) and she doesnt earn enough to move out of her parents home.

      Reply

    • Inky says:

      08:55am | 30/05/12

      ” I dont understand that I pay 208 NZD for a haircut, which takes the girl less than 60 min (excluding the time I sit there with the colour in my hair) and she doesnt earn enough to move out of her parents home. “

      Now that takes me back to my first part time job, working at a fast food place at age 16. Where I got paid less by the hour than the cost of the average meal for one person.

      Still, you have to admit, a Bachelor in Applied Street Navigation and Transportation sounds like a hilarious degree.

    • Ray says:

      07:51am | 30/05/12

      I LOVE the argument: “Access to post-secondary education should be based on merit and not ability to pay.”

      Can I please extend it a little?

      I can’t afford it but I am a really good driver, give me that Porsche. Now!!!

      Reply

    • acotrel says:

      08:03am | 30/05/12

      You could get Mark Webber’s job !

    • Ray says:

      07:57am | 30/05/12

      “... guarantee all working age Australians a government subsidised training place up to their first Certificate III ...”

      I am reminded of a statement on my once favourite coffee mug.

      “Don’t try to teach pigs to sing. It wastes your time and makes the pigs angry.”

      Reply

    • TracyH says:

      08:02am | 30/05/12

      I used to work in Voc Ed…organising work experience placements…the amount of times I’d have to drive to a kid’s house and take them to their workplace, or find correct boots for them, or plead with the host to allow them to stay on after the kid’s second ‘sickie’ in a week, etc, is pretty sad. Might have something to do with all of this! Not isolated experiences either…on conferences I found this to be a common problem amongst other colleagues. lso, talk to tradies and really listen to their concerns about the across the board poor attitudes of so many apprentices. The ‘self esteem’ movement of our youth has a lot to answer for.

      Reply

    • Chris says:

      08:04am | 30/05/12

      “We know that graduates of further education typically enjoy higher incomes over their lifetimes than non-graduates and that tertiary and further education is critical to personal growth.”

      OK so I don’t agree with either of those premises.

      Firstly, trade-qualified people in this Country are extremely well off in many instances.  They also often have the benefit of flexible/shorter work days, allowing them to spend more time with family or socially.  To suggest that somebody with a generic arts or science degree is going to do better over their lifetime than a tradie is, I suspect, incorrect.  Although some well-off professionals require degrees, the numbers are no longer tilted heavily in favour of going to university over learning a practical trade.

      I also do not accept that significant personal growth comes from education.  We should be wary of putting too much of our personal identity into what our education (or our job, for that matter) is.  Education may, sometimes, broaden our perspective, but fundamentally it is designed only to improve our knowledge or ability to find knowledge.

      Personal growth comes far more from life experience than it does from education.  Experience in the work force is an eye-opener for many young people who come out of tertiary education with a slightly skewed view of what real life is like.

      Education has a valuable place - but I don’t think we should overstate what that place is.  Character, esteem, reputation, values, morals and work-ethic all contribute critically to a person’s life.  These things are ordinarily neither taught nor learned in university or TAFE.


      C

      Reply

    • Mayday says:

      08:48am | 30/05/12

      Well said Chris.

      My son now earns a six figure salary after finishing his apprenticeship, his peers who attended Uni are still struggling to find part time work.

      His experience of working while learning has given him greater insight into his future prospects and made him a far more knowledgeable person than his mates who frankly still behave like teenagers with the me, me, me attitude to match.

      There is a tone in this article that screams entitlement, the author needs to get off campus for awhile and get some life experience before writing such predictable waffle.

    • Jimbo75 says:

      10:37am | 30/05/12

      Mayday,

      I suggest you click on the blue text at the top left hand side of the articelthat says “Amanda Rishworth”.

    • Blind Freddy says:

      12:08pm | 30/05/12

      @Mayday

      “There is a tone in this article that screams entitlement, the author needs to get off campus for awhile and get some life experience before writing such predictable waffle.”

      I hope that he has better research skills than his father (see Jimbo75). Arts degrees are good for teaching research skills.

    • Pete says:

      12:15pm | 30/05/12

      @Mayday
      That’s a temporary thing: your sons educated friends might be less mature now, but your son has probably hit his peak. To suggest educated people don’t grow up eventually is inane, and I would argue they end up with a far broader view of the world than those who chose not to further their education.

    • Nick says:

      08:10am | 30/05/12

      Sorry Tubesteak, the TER was never based on the moderated or scaled scores of the candidacy. The Universities Admission Centre calculated the TER from the raw scores students achieved on their exam. These raw scores were then put through a re-iterative process to give a rank reflecting the relative merits of exam performance in each subject with each other subject. It was an attempt to see if a score of say 60 in the Drama exam had the same value of the same score in say, Physics. Anyway, congratulations on your later successes!

      Reply

    • Tim says:

      10:25am | 30/05/12

      Depends what state you studied in. Different states used different methods.

    • Daylight robbery says:

      08:19am | 30/05/12

      I asked a mates kids why they arent going to uni.  The boys answer was “Thats for rich kids”.
      What are his teachers doing?  This is a culture.
      Where based on who you come into contact with do you not understand that Australias education is accessible to everyone. There are many politicians that represent the opportunity here.
      If university was free then unfortunately some never leave, consuming capacity of the system that provides education for all.

      Reply

    • Emma says:

      09:34am | 30/05/12

      Its the parents too though. Not all parents encourage their children to pursue higher education.

    • Daylight robbery says:

      12:30pm | 30/05/12

      @Emma Your right Emma, though if they are embedded in a culture the parents think exactly the same.
      Little understanding of the HECs scheme doesn’t enlighten them. Of course whether you do a degree in surfing or mega-tronics your not guaranteed a job. Demand has to be there.

    • Anna C says:

      09:09am | 30/05/12

      I don’t really see any major barriers to people pursing a tertiary education.  From what I see people who are intelligent and conscientious who want to go to university or TAFE already have many opportunities available to them to do this.

      Reply

    • Rosie says:

      10:21am | 30/05/12

      Totally agree!

      I really don’t know how anyone in this country with a ‘go out and achieve what you want if you are prepared to work for it attitude’ fail in obtaining their goals. If the rich wants to pay for it, so be it. Money goes around and it is a good thing.

      I just wish Labor Govts would stop this division thing and concentrate on the unfortunate ones that don’t realize that a good education is a requirement for their well being in the future.

      People have huge mortgages just so that they can send their children to the best state schools which are mainly situated in the top end of the real estate market. This is so because of the zoning - you can only send your children to these schools if you live in that zoned area!

      Perhaps Amanda could think of something to allow anyone to attend the top state schools and it doesn’t matter where they live!

    • Jimbo75 says:

      09:10am | 30/05/12

      Amanda,

      A good article selling reforms being introduced by the Government. Congratulations on doing do without using it as an opportunity to have a go at the opposition.

      Perhaps you can talk to your caucus colleagues about them being similarly positive.

      Reply

    • Rosie says:

      09:32am | 30/05/12

      “Access to post-secondary education should be based on merit and not ability to pay.”

      What is it with this country when the Labor Party is in power we have this division thing happening in just about everything?

      Australia is a lucky country and education is there for everyone if they want it. If you are prepared to work hard for it you will achieve whatever you set your mind on. If you have the money and you think it will make it easier for you, why not? I call BS that access to post-secondary education can only be achieved by the ability to pay and not on merit. We are so lucky in this country we can afford for Labor Govt to use this division thing as a political tool.

      I have never ever complained about obtaining a good education in this country but I certainly feel very sorry for those that don’t realize that without a good education these days there can be no worth while future.

      Reply

    • Paul says:

      01:08pm | 30/05/12

      Look I love bashing the ALP as much as the next man but you are selectively quoting. The author is highlighting the fact that the subsidised deferred payments for University education has been a success in eliminating the financial barriers to Tertiary education. The same system should be applied to the VET (TAFE) system to allow financially/socially disadvantaged get that first step in the education pathway. Certificate III is followed by Cert IV or Diploma and so on, if they want they can carry on to University. The system would still require payment once earnings have reached the designated level.
      Somebody from an environment that hasn’t placed value on education is most likely not going to consider University an option for them, however by having access to the lower requirements of Certificate Level courses they can get themselves started on the path to better education, step by step.
      Its a good idea and I’m to the right of political persuasion.

    • AdamC says:

      09:54am | 30/05/12

      In this case, as in most, the call for equality is simply an outstretched palm. I do not agree that other people paying for someone’s higher education leads to ‘equality’. It simply encourages entitlement.

      However, if governments must spend money on something, education clearly provides the best social returns.  That only works, though, when education is high-quality, relevant and corresponds with societal need. That is not always the case.

      Reply

    • Robert S McCormick says:

      03:32pm | 30/05/12

      ...and I thought the whole idea of HECS was to enable those without Mummy & Daddy’s financial resources to get into Uni, study, get their Firsts, Honours etc. & take their place in the wider, competitive world of Commerce & Industry. I also thought the only difference was that, once qualified - no matter if your Degree only qualified you to become a Sales Rep for a pharmaceutical company- if Mummsie & Daddsie actualy owned the company then nepotism & that sort of garbage took over and darling Daughter/Son was appointed to some Senior Management position for which they were totally unqualified & unsuited!
      I know of a family who were very wealthy. They had created their own wealth through hard work. Before their children, though they had the right marks, were allowed to go to Uni both parents insisted those children completed a Full Apprenticeship in some trade - be it plumber, electrician, mechanic, bricklayer, carpernter, nursing - once they had those qualifications under their belts then they were allowed to go to Uni & study any subject they liked.
      The result was a family of boys & girls who were fully trained, experienced in the idea of “A Work Ethic” and all of them eventually took their place, without expecting or being granted special treatement, in their parent’s or some other business arena.

      Reply

    • Gomez12 says:

      04:12pm | 30/05/12

      “Instead, a disproportionately higher of number students from privileged backgrounds have enjoyed access to opportunities for further education while others have been left behind”

      I might have missed the explanation of “Privileged”, but given that those with tertiary education earn more on average and have less children on average, those children would considered “privileged”?

      So would it simply be easier to say that those who have attained tertiary education and benefitted from it, want the same for their children and have the resources to pay for it?

      But that takes all the class-war fun out of it doesn’t it?

      Reply

    • Ben says:

      06:47pm | 30/05/12

      Not to worry, Amanda. By 1990 no Australian child will be living in poverty.

      Reply

    • Joan Bennett says:

      12:57pm | 21/06/12

      Everyone can afford to pay for their tertiary education because of HECS (borrow off the tax payer and pay back later), so not sure what the point of this article is?  I really don’t see why I have to pay for someone else’s uni degree…

      Reply
 
Sorry, comments are now closed for this article.

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Paul Colgan

Colgo 22 May 13 09:41PM

RT @businessinsider: Man Being Questioned For Boston Bombing Connection Shot And Killed By FBI by @paulszoldrahttp://t.co/OtypP2PRgI

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 22 May 13 09:19PM

This is a must read @TheAtlantic. Whether you think you know everything or think you know nothing http://t.co/naoUutCoWF

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 22 May 13 07:53PM

RT @JoshuaWithers: Have you seen the Australian version of Breaking bad? He get's cancer and Medicare covers his costs and the series ends.

Paul Colgan

Colgo 22 May 13 05:45PM

How the totally awesome weather in Australia recently is hurting retailers http://t.co/4dvDwDlNZG

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

by The Punch Team

385

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

by Hannah Harborow

122

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

by Sarrah Le Marquand

251

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter