Some things just take time

Tertiary Education Minister Steven Joyce’s recent policy announcements  have received a generally positive welcome.  Tying an element of institutional funding to students’ course and qualification completion, requiring a reasonable pass rate for continued access to student loans, and rationalising the many redundant or overlapping qualifications; all seem to have gone down well.  Even the usual naysayers have been muted in their response.

I find all this both gratifying and somewhat ironic. In 2001/2, the reports of the Tertiary Education Advisory Commission effectively recommended doing the same things.  In July 2002, the people named to be the board of the Tertiary Education Commission (including me) reiterated their support for such initiatives.  However, some were ruled out of bounds for TEC, eg. student support was deemed to a welfare issue not an education issue. Some we didn’t have the funding mechanism to implement (and for nearly 3 years we weren’t allowed to address that either, even though we rated it the number 1 problem to fix). Some the institutions weren’t ready to concede there were problems - eg. qualification rationalisation and completion rates.  Some, like polytechnic governance, were, frankly, just too politically difficult for the then Labour-led government.  However, we’ve been jawboning away on this stuff for all of the last decade and, like water on stone, we’ve worn down the obstacles.

Given the name of this weblog - Isambard Kingdom Brunel’s personal motto En Avant or “Get Going” - you’d be right to assume that I have been very frustrated by the time taken for all this. Smart policy development and implementation seemed often to have been trumped by the need to not upset anyone.  To be fair, all the ministers I’ve dealt with have had their merits, and we’ve made increasingly faster progress.  However, there’s a palpable difference when dealing with confident and capable ministers who understand the big picture and can drive through policy change, despite the naysayers inside and outside government and the bureaucracy.  Governments can implement sweeping change quickly if they so chose and have the right people on the job.

There are still some big issues to address, not least being pricing - how much, how it’s presented, and who pays what to whom.  Any good marketer knows the importance of price presentation.  The new minister has already stated he’s interested in price as an issue, although he acknowledges this might take a little more time to work out.  Given the current pace, that shouldn’t be another decade.

Declaration: I am a non-executive board member of the Tertiary Education Commission, and was recently reappointed for a third term. 

Trackback uri

4 Responses to “Some things just take time”

  1. Jason Says:

    Why is anything which encourages grade inflation a good thing?

    I would expect that linking pay to completion will result in students who shouldn’t graduate, graduating.

  2. Jim Says:

    Good question, Jason.

    Firstly - for institutions, it’s about completion rates, not pass rates, ie. addressing the drop out factor and the huge waste in taxpayer funds, student time and student debt. England has been using completion rates as a key performance indicator for over a decade and it’s had a dramatic effect on lifting institution’s retention of students - particularly those from deprived neighbourhoods and communities.

    Secondly - discouraging institutions giving soft grades, so students can stay on, requires regular independent moderation and accreditation of course and institution. TEC uses NZQA to provide that, through university and polytechnic qualify audits. For lower level (foundation) learning, we look at progression rates to higher qualification learning and employment outcomes.

  3. Dave Guerin Says:

    You’re right Jim - it’s a good thing and has been a long time coming. Good luck with your part in it.

  4. Josh Says:

    Jim,

    It sure would be easy for you to throw your hands in the air and say ‘I told you so’. Surely the civil service is full of people who have nous and wish to do good, what do you think would be the key to raising the quality of the debate (and I posit the quality of the outcomes and scrutiny)?

    Is it a culture thing? Seems a soft answer but what do you do about it?

    My personal suspicion having been out of the country 4 years is a case of general public being detached from the issues, not contributing to the debate and leaving a void of leadership which gets filled by paper and procedure. Am curious in terms of what could be done.

    As a meme on policy debate, it seems to me the US financial blogoshpere is very effective at debating and presenting policy movements. Doesn’t appear to have had much influence on actual policy.

    Even in a small country NZ debate over policy and politics appears to rapidly become polarised and less focused on incremental improvement.
    that’s my rant for the day, thanks!
    Josh

Leave a Reply