One step too far

20 comments on “One step too far ”

• Comments are now closed

1. karol 1

   20 November 2012 at 10:41 am

   Good post.  I totally agree on the need to maintain educational independence: a democracy thrives on free and open debate, based on sound research and enquiry.

   Joyce’s approach is just another neoliberal push to make education subservient to the market.  Education is not just for jobs.  It is to enable democratic participation, social inclusion, life-long learning and informed citizenship.
   • euboulia 1.1

     20 November 2012 at 1:32 pm

     This fight was lost a long time ago. As I understand it, the long term plan is to have Auckland and Otago have a small core of traditional university subjects, while the other “universities” (Vic to a lesser extent) become vocational schools. The UK is going the same way. There’s no point fighting this when you already lost a long time ago.

     People who want to learn about things like the Liberal Arts will no doubt be directed to free online courses of the type currently being run by Stanford (among others). Some of these are quite good.

     This may not be a bad thing in the long run. Having these areas subject to an increasingly hostile authority has not been good for them.

     Sure, Joyce is a resentful oaf, but he’s only getting to do this because a sufficient number of voters are resentful oafs who’ve long wanted to stick it to the cultured and educated.
2. kiwicommie 2

   20 November 2012 at 10:47 am

   Well National has been undermining tertiary education for a long time, it hasn’t provided needed additional funding so the course fees have been forced to rise (which has hurt students in the pocket) and courses have been cut; the worst case being the university of Canterbury. NZ is going to slide internationally, unless moves are taken to substantially increase funding; which will never happen under an austerity government like National.
3. Stephen Day 3

   20 November 2012 at 10:56 am

   Check out our TEU petition ( http://teu.ac.nz/2012/11/academic-freedom-petition ) which we have set up to tell the minister he can’t threaten universities into doing what he says.
4. Stephen Day 4

   20 November 2012 at 11:01 am

   Check out our TEU petition (at the link above) which we have set up to tell the minister he can’t threaten universities into doing what he says.
5. r0b 5

   20 November 2012 at 11:03 am

   Thank you Sandra – great to see you posting here – and you are representing my union very well on this issue.
6. Ant 6

   20 November 2012 at 11:10 am

   Sounds more like an attempt to drive down the cost of employing engineers by increasing supply – which is classic Joyce stupidity, we’ll just end up exporting our graduates.

   From what i’ve seen it doesn’t look like there’s an actual shortage of people graduating – most engineering grads I have spoken too have said that finding a job is pretty competitive as it is.
7. Rogue Trooper 7

   20 November 2012 at 11:47 am

   Joyce will get more joy from the Canterbury VC

   If the salaries for recent graduates identified in the Herald are representative of actual New Zealand incomes, then I am horrified; mechanics can easily attract and earn 150% of those salaries. I hope, like me, most people do not enter university study primarily for employment and income; disappointment awaits.

   however, the professional capture of capital by the medical, legal, commerce and consulting sectors, for example, now that’s another matter….
   • Colonial Viper 7.1

     20 November 2012 at 12:26 pm

     And a grad mechanic won’t have a $30K student debt to start life off with…

     University is a shit career choice for many nowadays.
   • McFlock 7.2

     20 November 2012 at 12:44 pm

     The distinction between professions and trades has steadily diminished over the last 20 years. True, you might get BComs or lawyers who make a mint, but then you also get builders or plumbers who leverage, get lucky (i.e. don’t overplay their hand or get their arse sued by a customer) and end up with a sizeable business to retire on.
            
          
     A mate of mine has a story about how he was working in a factory that got shut down. He was offered the chance to relocate and drive forklifts, but he said “nope I’ll take redundancy, go to uni and better myself”. One MA later, his colleague who took relocation was ≈$400k better off than the one who chose education. True, he’ll eake it back over the next 20 years, but really there’s not much difference between the two at the end of the day. 
     • bbfloyd 7.2.1

       20 November 2012 at 1:11 pm

       I have to ask, is the person who chose to re-educate himself in a happier place? As in, is he happier with the career he is pursuing now? Is it in an area that he feels more appropriate for his particular skill set, and personality??

       And if he is, is that not more important in the long run than just chasing the money?

       Consider the example he sets for his children by making the effort to position himself in a more natural setting for himself…. one that allows him to be the person he should be, rather than one having to deal with the imbalance that an inappropriate career path ineviably induces…..

       Is the money the only thing that counts anymore???
       • McFlock 7.2.1.1

         20 November 2012 at 2:20 pm

         Difficult to tell, really. 
                
         I know a few folk who are builders, plasterers etc but read in their spare time. On the flipside, I recall reading Plato’s Republic some time before doing a paper on it, and realised in the paper that I’d missed 90% of the nuances.
               
         Not to mention that sometimes varsity politics can get absolutely vicious – much more than I’ve ever encountered elsewhere. Even the current BS in Labour and TS kommentariat is minor compared to some of the stuff I encountered at Uni.
                  
         So really, it could be either way. Tertiary education is not always the road to happy enlightenment and fulfilment that liberals often believe it to be. But it <strong>is</strong> a right that should be taxpayer funded, be it metaphysics or welding.
8. JonL 8

   20 November 2012 at 4:18 pm

   “Is the money the only thing that counts anymore???”
   Since when has it been any different……..to 90% of the population, anyway.
9. DS1 9

   20 November 2012 at 5:18 pm

   So much for the invisible hand of market forces.
   • IMESSAGE 9.1

     20 November 2012 at 5:42 pm

     The ‘invisible hand of market forces’ applies to the private market only and has nothing to do with this. If the UoA were a private university then the government would have no influence over what they choose to teach. However as the UoA requires tremendous amounts of taxpayer funding to support their activity, the taxpayer, via their elected Minister, should be entitled to guide their activities with a completely ‘visible hand’.
     • felix 9.1.1

       20 November 2012 at 5:52 pm

       Same goes for every business in the country then.

       Unless of course you can think of one that doesn’t rely on enormous amounts of state funding…
     • McFlock 9.1.2

       20 November 2012 at 5:58 pm

       Nope.
                
       Paying money does not entitle a government to guide tertiary education. Just as it does not entitle the government to “guide” which people are prosecuted because it funds the police. 
          
       And the stakes are the same.

Links to post

1. One step too far | NZ Education | Scoop.it: posted on 20 November 2012 at 11:50 am
2. Autonomy debate at University of Auckland | TEU - Tertiary Education Union: posted on 22 November 2012 at 10:06 am
3. GPJA #446: Part 2/3 – News from Aotearoa New Zealand « GPJA's Blog: posted on 27 November 2012 at 6:24 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS