Education

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/63938/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Six Australian universities made the top 100 best global research institutions in the 2016 Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), released today – two more than the previous year.
Monash University and the University of Sydney were the two newcomers to the top 100 club, joining Melbourne, Queensland, Western Australia and Australian National University.
More than half of Australia’s public universities now feature in the world’s best 500 research institutions.
This year marks a change in the methodology to the ARWU rankings, which is based purely on a university’s research performance.
“The ARWU is noted for the stability of its methodology, which means that normally, unless an institution won a Nobel Prize or recruited a large number of Highly Cited Researchers, large movements did not occur,“ said Natalie Mast, associate director for performance analytics at the University of Western Australia.
“The main driver of movement this year has been a change in the methodology used to determine highly cited research criteria,” she said.
“Previously, ARWU utilised both the old and the new highly cited researcher lists, and this is the first year that only the new list was used.”
The old list included anyone who had been named a highly cited researcher up to 2011, and included publications going back to 1981. The new list, which was developed in 2014, is updated annually, and focuses on publications from the last decade.
Mast said: “This has allowed Chinese universities – Tsinghua and Peking – to break into the top 100 for the first time."
Within the ARWU rankings, 50% of the total score of an institution is determined by a small number of individuals, made up of Nobel Prize winners (staff and alumni) and highly cited researchers.
Mast noted: “The ARWU has traditionally favoured established universities, as Nobel Prizes awarded to alumni and staff, which can provide a value for up to 100 years, have a significant impact. By changing the highly cited research criterion, newer universities have an greater opportunity to rise in the ranking.”
“There had been agitation from ARWU and universities, which urged Thomson Reuters to clean the list. It was advantageous to older researchers because they had a longer body of work. Now it allows high-performing mid-career researchers to be classified as highly cited,” said Mast.
The rankings point to some interesting global trends. While older universities in Europe and the US seem to be falling in these rankings, those universities in Spain, China, South Korea and Australia are on the rise.
She added that, through increased investment, Chinese universities were likely to continue to improve in these rankings.
Mast noted that the rankings needed to be viewed in perspective. “The score assigned to an institution in the ARWU is a percentage of the top-ranked institution, which has always been Harvard. This year, the university ranked 100. The University of Utah, attained a score of 25.4.”
According to Tony Shiel, deputy director of the office for research at Griffith University, these results show that you get a consistently good university education in Australia.
“The rankings show that Australia has a good top end, and middle end, meaning that quality runs deeply across the sector,” said Shiel.
Western Sydney University and RMIT made the top 500 list for the first time – both have recently invested in research.
QUT, which now features in the top 300, wasn’t even in top 500 two years ago.
“There are a few making quick rise,” said Shiel. “Whether that continues or not will be interesting to see.”
“Research is important as it enhances the brand, which then in turn attracts international students,” said Shiel.
These rankings place Australia in a good position in a fast moving part of the world, he added.
“It positions us well to have better collaborations with Asian partners, especially in China, as we will be taken more seriously,” he said.
Howerver, Shield said these results were just another indicator and we should not place blind trust in these outcomes, no matter how positive.
Harvard, Standford and UC Berkeley universities gained the top three spots for being the best in the world at research.
While the US had 50 universities in the top 100, the UK featured the second highest with eight universities.
Claire Shaw is education editor, The Conversation and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/team#claire-shaw" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Six Australian universities make the global top 100 list

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/57114/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The world of work has become an increasingly difficult environment for young people. Youth unemployment in Australia is persistently higher than for other age groups.
In response, our governments have delivered one-size-fits-all policies that focus on national targets encouraging education programs to make unemployed young people more “work ready”.
These approaches assume that, with the right education or training, a young person will be able to get a job. However, this is not the case, especially for young people who live in areas of high youth unemployment.
To reduce youth unemployment, education and labour market policies must go beyond a focus on individual young people to offer solutions at a community level.
Rural and regional areas hit hardest
Youth unemployment has been a feature of developed economies since the 1980s. As the Australian economy continues to open to global competitive pressures, the decline in the availability of manufacturing work and the growth of the services sector have changed the nature of work.
However, as recent research has highlighted, youth unemployment rates vary in different places and local communities.
Rural and regional areas are among the hardest hit by these changes. Places such as outback Queensland and the New South Wales Hunter Valley have youth unemployment rates of 28 percent and 22 percent respectively.
These levels of youth unemployment reflect these regions’ reliance on industries that are changing rapidly and may no longer provide reliable local employment.
These powerful shifts are not adequately recognised at a policy level.
Policies targeted at youth currently encourage the development of individual human capital. This takes place through a one-size-fits-all approach focused on increasing levels of educational qualification, with the promise that young people will find professional work.
This kind of future is not available to all young people, no matter how “work ready” they may be, especially for those in areas with high youth unemployment.
Again, these policies ignore the reality of the forms of work available in different local communities.
Does this matter in a world where young people are encouraged to be as mobile as possible in search of work and a fulfilling future?
The answer to this question is a resounding yes, for reasons connected with the role of local communities in shaping young people’s identities and pathways through work.
The critical role of local communities
Australian and international research has shown the critical role that processes of identity construction play both in young people’s engagement with work and in the strategies they use to survive unemployment.
Rural and regional young people are key examples of this process. Research has demonstrated the importance of local community connections for young people’s orientation towards their future in work. This applies even to those whose imagined futures take them beyond the boundaries of their local communities.
In one example from this research, a young man who imagines a future as a teacher described his plans in terms of existing family connections to the profession and the availability of accommodation with family members who lived close to the nearest regional university.
This process, in which young people imagine futures around established community connections and ways of life, is common in regional areas. While schools encourage young people to plan their own individual futures, the lives of relatives and other community members continue to shape their desires and perceptions of what is possible for them.
Community support in tough times
These communities may also be zones of high youth unemployment. Research conducted in former manufacturing centres of the UK with high unemployment shows that local community relationships provide critical support when times are tough. These local networks may also provide access to casual employment.
However, these communities operate as both resources and limits to young people’s biographies. The resources they offer may not provide opportunities beyond their local place, and young people may be personally invested in forms of work that reflect the history of their community. For example, young men may aspire to futures in manufacturing that are no longer locally available.
Similar <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.palgrave.com/us/book/9781403939326">results</a> have been found in rural Australia, where established expectations about suitable work may not reflect actually existing opportunities available to local youth.
As a consequence, people must re-evaluate who they are and who they can become. This re-negotiation of personal identity is a key aspect of navigating changing labour markets in areas of high youth unemployment.
A complex policy issue
Youth unemployment is a complex policy issue with no silver-bullet solutions. Simple approaches based on individual employability are destined to fail.
Local communities and young people themselves are grappling with rapid economic change.
To be successful, education and training programs must work with local communities alongside investment in regional economies aimed at creating new employment opportunities when established industries leave.
Only in this way can education and employment policies support young people to navigate regional Australia’s changing labour markets.
David Farrugia is lecturer, School of Humanities and Social Science, University of Newcastle and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-farrugia-243862" target="_blank">here</a>.
 
</body></html>

Youth unemployment: local communities essential for helping young people find work

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/74614/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Selective high schools in Australia are both popular and controversial. Many more children seek enrolment in them than gain entry. 
Public commentary since the late 1990s has accused these schools of being both hijacked by private coaching colleges, and racially unbalanced — enrolling disproportionate numbers of “Asian” students.
To properly understand the nature of selective schools today, you have to go back to when they first opened. 
<h2>Why do we have selective schools?</h2>
Selective schools have never operated in isolation from broader historical forces — including Australia’s connected histories of racial exclusion and immigration.
The selective school system in New South Wales, for example, which has the largest concentration and longest history of selective schooling, is a relic of when secondary schooling was the destination of only a minority of young people, mostly from the middle or upper classes.
Secondary schooling was not universal in Australia before the 1960s, and it was only in the 1980s that everyone had the opportunity to complete Year 12.
The NSW selective high schools system was founded between the 1880s and the 1910s. 
The schools were to offer students a meritocratic “ladder of opportunity”. That is, they would be open to everyone, regardless of wealth or social class, so long as academic entry requirements were met. This, and the absence of religious criteria, set them apart from private schools. 
<h2>Selecting whiteness</h2>
However, the foundations of selective schooling in Australia were always deeply raced and classed. 
Despite being accessed by many working class students, their credentials were geared towards middle class occupational groups. And their essential whiteness was ensured by several factors:
<ol>
<li>
Their establishment period coincided with the establishment of the White Australia Policy, which restricted non-Europeans from migrating to Australia.
</li>
<li>
Aboriginal children could be legally excluded from the feeder primary schools and often were.
</li>
<li>
White Protestant middle class cultures of the time dominated both the entry tests and the curriculum inside the schools.
</li>
</ol>
Non-British migrants arrived in Australia in larger numbers from late 1940s. As early as the 1930s, many children of European Jewish refugees attended selective high schools. 
But from the 1960s to the 1980s, the children of non-English speaking migrant families were more often categorised as educationally disadvantaged, and rarely seen as “displacing” the academic opportunities of Anglo-Australians.
<h2>Falling out of favour</h2>
During the 1960s and 1970s, selective schools fell out of favour with policymakers and many parents. They were mostly replaced by comprehensive high schools, which enrolled all students within a given area, no matter their test scores. 
Selective high schools were disparaged as old fashioned and elitist. It was also argued that selection at the age of 11 or 12 was too young to set children on a certain path. 
<h2>The revival</h2>
The revival of selective schooling from the late 1980s accompanied a new commitment by the NSW state government to the education of the “talented” child. 
Academically gifted children, it was argued, were neglected in the one-size-fits-all classroom. 
During the same period many white, middle-class families moved to private secondary schooling, responding to policies of “school choice”. 
Both these developments coincided with increased middle class migration from east and South East Asia. 
<h2>Coded racism in media commentary</h2>
By the late 1990s, Australian print media began focusing on the dominance of Asian students in selective school entrance examinations, and on the impact of “too many Asians” on schooling cultures. 
The resurgence of white nationalist politics at the time was relevant to these debates. Such politics sought to normalise the whiteness of institutions like schools. 
Our analysis of media coverage in the early 2000s uncovers the coded racism that underpinned public anxieties about selective schools. 
Media commentary focused on the “fairness” of the selection process itself, indicating that Asian students were using coaching services to gain an unfair advantage. 
Our research into the use of academic coaching by Chinese-Australian families demonstrates that far from “gaming” the system, parents were attempting to mitigate the disadvantages produced by a competitive, marketised, and culturally biased school system.
<h2>The need for historical awareness</h2>
Since the late 1990s, public commentary about selective schooling has often failed to address historical complexity in at least two ways. 
Firstly, it tends to use the category of “Asian” in sweeping cultural terms rather than in reference to historically differentiated people. 
Asians are cast as a singular group who are then made an easy target of blame for the unfairness of the system. 
Secondly, the history of selective schooling is often misunderstood, containing uncritical assumptions about the “good” of a meritocratic system. There tends to be a silence around the histories of racialised exclusions in education and in selective education in particular. 
“Asians” in selective schools are positioned as interlopers or breakers of heritage, and other non-white groups including Indigenous Australians tend to be rendered invisible altogether. 
We need public debate that challenges - not normalises - the conditions of white privilege in a multicultural settler-colony, not least within our education system.
Helen Proctor is associate professor, University of Sydney and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/helen-proctor-2646" target="_blank">here</a>.
Arathi Sriprakash is lecturer in Sociology of Education, University of Cambridge and author for The Conversaiton. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/arathi-sriprakash-225113" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Selective schools’ long and tangled history with race and class

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/57114/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The literacy levels of construction workers are low relative to other industries, and yet prescriptions about how to work safely are often buried inside long and complicated documents.
Our research suggests workers may not even read these documents before they commence work. Also, no matter how complex they are, documents cannot cover all eventualities. There’s a gap between the way work is described in formal health and safety documents and the way it is practised on site.
Visual methods, including video, can overcome some of these difficulties. For a long time videos have been used to communicate health and safety information to workers. But safety training videos are often produced by technical experts or media companies and shown to workers in stand-alone presentations. In such uses, workers are passive audiences to generic video materials.
Construction companies are legally required to consult workers on health and safety issues, but this is often done in a very formal top-down way, rendering it meaningless.
This is a missed opportunity because construction workers possess a wealth of knowledge based on their practical experience, often gained over many years. Research conducted at RMIT University (undertaken in partnership with Melbourne-based firm CodeSafe Solutions) examined the potential for digital and mobile technologies to be used to access, capture and share workers’ health and safety knowledge.
In the research, construction workers were involved in making films about their everyday work practices. Unlike documentary, in which subjects have little or no say in how they are portrayed, participatory video engages people in making films about their everyday experiences.
Construction workers received basic media training before making digital videos about their work practices. The video making enabled workers and managers to understand and reflect on the way work is routinely done and, in doing so, identify constraints and enablers of safe and healthy ways of working. Only when watching the video footage did managers and workers identify problems inherent in standard operating procedures that were either poorly understood or impractical due to physical features of the work environment.
Gaps were identified between the way work was documented and the way that it is routinely practised. Understanding these gaps meant they could be discussed and collaboratively resolved.
In several instances work equipment, processes or procedures were redesigned to improve safety. In some instances tasks that had been undertaken the same way for many years were redesigned to make them safer. Both workers and managers described how watching the video footage gave them a different perspective and enabled them to view and understand work in new ways.
In one example an access platform erection process was redesigned after workers were seen working adjacent to an unprotected edge.
The collaborative redesigning of a long established work task reveals how workers’ tacit knowledge – which is not easily captured or written down - was made explicit and usable through the participatory video activities.
Once made, the digital videos are disseminated at participating worksites using quick response codes, accessible via smartphones. Some workers share these videos with workers outside their organisations, while others show them to builders and principal contractors to explain why they need to work in certain ways to remain safe.
The workers described video as being a powerful way to share “know how” as opposed to “know what.”
Digital and mobile technologies are now an integral part of everyday life. Using a smartphone to capture and share knowledge, experiences and ideas in video format is not only possible, but now second nature to many. The research shows it can also improve construction workers’ health and safety.
Helen Lingard is professor, Construction Occupational Health and Safety, RMIT University and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/helen-lingard-170971" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Construction workers safer when they ditch the manual: study

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/62964/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
A university education is a highly valued commodity in Asia. Australia has benefited from this in terms of the economic advantages international education has brought.
In 2015, there were 272,095 higher education international students in Australia who contributed almost A$12.5 billion to the economy. The vast majority were from Asia.
They also supported thousands of jobs and businesses across the property, hospitality and retail sectors in cities and regions.
However, developments in the higher education sector in a number of Asian countries may threaten Australia’s billion-dollar education industry.
<h2>Who are the rising Asian players?</h2>
The US and UK dominate the international education market in Asia, hosting 19% and 10% of the global share of international students.
More recently, however, China, Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Indonesia, Singapore and Malaysia have become more attractive destinations for Asian and non-Asian students, including those from the Middle East.
The attraction is due to a variety of factors, such as scholarships, job opportunities in the region, cultural and geographical advantages, and governments investing in higher education.
In 2013 these countries combined hosted 7% of the global share of international students, edging out Australia, which has 6% of the market share.
Many are looking to reform and improve their higher education sectors. Some have plans to almost double their international student intakes over the next four years. China is seeking to grow numbers by 500,000, Japan by 300,000 and Malaysia by 200,000 by 2020.
While Australia also aims to almost double its intake to close to a million by 2025, the Asian countries' targets may well prove formidable competition.
Malaysia and Singapore are attractive because of the availability of local jobs after graduation. Regardless of where they are from, international students on Singapore government-funded tuition grants are contractually obligated to work for locally based companies in the republic for three years. The aim of the scheme is to meet labour shortages and harness the skills of the graduate workforce.
In Australia, however, international students have few scholarship opportunities, and no local jobs specifically waiting for them after graduation.
Having an Australian qualification does not necessarily mean an international student will be employed in Australia. Here any foreigner – which is how international students are regarded once they finish their studies – must possess the skills Australia needs and/or undergo a skills assessment by the relevant Australian authority before they will be granted permission to work.
The movement of international students from developing nations to developed nations is no longer the norm within the region.
In South Korea, for instance, students are studying in Indonesian universities with the prospect of gaining employment with South Korean-based companies in Indonesia.
<h2>Moving up the global rankings</h2>
Asian universities are also punching their way up university rankings.
In the Times Higher Education World University Rankings for 2015-2016, Asian universities outperformed Australian universities in the top 100 list.
Nine Asian universities in comparison to six Australian universities made the top 100.
The top Asian university, the National University of Singapore (NUS), ranked 26th, above Australia’s best performer, the University of Melbourne, which is 33rd.
And while there are more universities in Asia than in Australia, what is significant about such rankings is that key Asian universities are fast becoming globally recognised as premier research and teaching institutions. They are overtaking Australian institutions in the competitive higher education space.
The QS World University Rankings place Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University as the leading institution for universities under the age of 50 years.
Asian universities again dominated, with 16 institutions in the top 50 under 50. Australia had six universities in this category, with 14th-ranked University of Technology Sydney leading the pack.
Together with robust funding support from the government, NUS strategies for simply being the best include high calibre-recruitment, a commitment to innovation and collaborations with overseas partners such as the Singapore-based NUS-Yale College.
Asian education hubs have ambitions not only to maintain their positions but also to increase the number of their institutions at the high end of these rankings.
In 2013, Japan for instance launched its Top Global University Project to place ten or more of its universities in the global top 100. Like Singapore, the Japanese government has been providing generous funding to its premier universities to achieve this goal. The government invests millions of dollars in annual subsidies for its leading research and education institutions.
<h2>How can Australia stay competitive?</h2>
What can traditional players like Australia, the US and the UK do to maintain their competitive edge?
With Asian universities becoming some of the best in the world, it is vital that the traditional markets provide strong research funding support to their universities to build up their research and innovation strengths.
In 2013, according to the OECD, Australia invested 2.112% of its GDP in research and development. This is marginally more than the UK (1.664%), China (2.015%) and Singapore (2%), yet significantly less than Japan (3.482%), Korea (4.149%) and the US (2.742%).
Asian students and their families value quality education. Eventually they will look to universities that have globally recognised quality brands, which would help students with their own professional mobility.
A way for Australia to stay competitive would be through research collaborations and partnerships with Asian institutions.
If traditional and emerging markets are competing for students, it is imperative that strong research and teaching links be formed between universities from both sides of the divide.
One aspect of this discussion policymakers might want to consider is becoming host to satellite campuses from world-renowned universities.
So far only Carnegie Mellon has an offshore campus in Australia.
Having such satellite campuses creates not only diversity and internationalisation in the Australian higher education space, but also provides other benefits. These include more competitive choices of institutions on Australian soil, as well as greater opportunities for students to move between countries on exchange.
Having top Asian universities set up campuses in Australia promotes increased flows of top students and staff. This would help strengthen Australia’s position in the region as a high-quality education hub.
Catherine Gomes is senior lecturer, RMIT University and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/catherine-gomes-12634" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Rising players in higher education: the countries to watch out for

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER
The property industry has warned the Federal Government that proposed tax changes will jeopardise the international education sector – Australia’s third largest export earner worth more than $30 billion.
The Treasury Laws Amendment (Making Sure Foreign Investors Pay Their Fair Share of Tax in Australia and Other Measures) Bill 2018 will be the subject of a Senate Inquiry to commence in November, 2018.
If passed, the Bill will result in offshore capital providers to the education sector facing a 100 per cent rise in their withholding tax rate, as the meaning of the words “residential dwelling asset” will include tertiary off campus student accommodation.
This last minute change differs from the exposure draft of the bill released earlier this year, which featured a tax exemption for assets comprising “commercial residential premises”, including student accommodation.
If passed, the bill will severely hurt the international student sector as accommodation for them will dry up quickly. Almost all of the investment in this sector is coming from overseas, yet the government wants to change the rules mid-stream and penalise them for investing in Australia.
Foreign investors have effectively created this property asset class, with 71,000 beds for local and international students have been supplied or being developed by them to date, supporting substantial local jobs in the design, construction and hospitality industry.
The Property Council of Australia has also made a submission to the Senate stating the higher tax rate would have “unintended consequences for the tertiary education sector, which relies on international capital to provide purpose-built student accommodation.
The proposed increase in the tax rate also did not provide any relief for investors who have committed to developments having entered into contracts to acquire sites, prior to September 20, 2018, when the amendments are dated to come into effect.
Not only will the proposed tax changes damage an important export earner for Australia, they will also inflate the rents in the broader rental market as students will be competing for a more limited supply of accommodation.
The sudden changes to the proposed laws will also affect Australia’s reputation with foreign investors who are seeking stability in the rules when they commit capital offshore.
According to the Department of Education and Training, there were 626,988 international students in Australia during July 2018 up 11% on last year.
Trevor Hardie is the CEO of Intergen Property Group, a company which represents overseas investors in student accommodation.
</body></html>

jrobinson-rf4aSBido9

Proposed Federal tax changes to hit $30 billion international education sector

<html><body>
Australia is the the third most popular country for higher education among parents considering international university education for their children, a new survey by HSBC reveals.
In all, 38 percent of parents from 15 countries rated Australia as one of their top destinations from a list of 50 countries, according to HSBC’s The Value of Education - Foundations for the Future report.
Australia is also a cheaper education destination compared with several countries such as the US, with the average annual tuition fees for international university students being US$26,136 per year. 
The number of international students enrolled in universities outside their home countries is expected to rise to more than 8 million worldwide by 2025, up from 4.5 million students now, according to the Institute of International Education.
This presents Australia with a clear opportunity to cash in on the growing education market.
Graham Heunis, head of Retail Banking and Wealth Management for HSBC Australia, said, “This data underscores the contribution that education makes to the Australian economy. It is already Australia’s third largest export earner - behind only iron ore and coal – and is expected to grow further as parents from the Asia Pacific, in particular, seek an international university education for their children.” 
The number of international students in Australia is up by 11% from 2015 with almost half a million enrolling here so far this year. Better job prospects, exposure to new cultures, international experience and language skills are considered to be among the benefits of study abroad. 
“However, offshore education comes at a higher cost, with living expenses and air fares on top of tuition fees. Early planning and taking advantage of foreign exchange movements can help parents overcome these financial barriers,” said Graham. 
The HSBC research shows Australia was the preferred choice of Indonesian parents, with 14,833 Indonesian students currently enrolled to study here. A fifth of all student visas for Australia are issued to Chinese nationals (Department of Education and Training 2016). 
</body></html>

jonathanchancellor-7SQnKwU6yx

Australia is No. 3 country of choice for international studies: HSBC survey

<html><body>
The first sod at South Australia's King George Avenue site in North Brighton has been turned to create the state's largest disability precinct.
A partnership between Minda, a non-government disability support organisation, and the AEIOU Foundation for children with autism.
The $2.3 million AEIOU centre, is funded by a $891,000 grant received through the National Stronger Regions Fund (NSRF) and donation of land by Minda under a long-term lease.
When built, the 720m2 purpose-built centre will feature four classrooms, therapy rooms, a motor skills room, parents’ retreat, and 160m2 roofed outdoor play facilities.
Stage 2 of the development will include 11 single-story group dwellings, four single-storey residential flat buildings, and two three-storey residential flat buildings as replacement accommodation for people Minda support.
A lifestyle precinct will be built with four buildings offering medical suites, day programs, child care and recreational facilities.
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2017/03/14/Adel_AEIOU_Cam2.jpg" alt="">
Alan Smith, chief executive officer said the precinct will respond to calls by South Australian families for greater access to vital early intervention, in order to create positive lifelong outcomes.
“With 1 in 100 children diagnosed with autism, the clock is ticking on the short-term development window where we know a true permanent difference can be made," he said.
“Since opening our first AEIOU centre in Adelaide in 2014, we have provided affordable and effective autism early intervention to more than 40 South Australian families.
"Our new centrally located Brighton centre will ensure even more children will have access to life-changing early intervention programs each year and receive the ongoing support they need.
“AEIOU sincerely thanks the National Stronger Regions Fund (NSRF) for its significant financial contribution to this project, and to disability support partner Minda for their generous donation of the parcel of land on which we will be located.”
Cathy Miller, chief executive officer, Minda, welcomed the start of construction of the AEIOU Centre and Stage 2 of its broader $160m+ Master Plan development.
“Minda’s Master Plan aims to create a vibrant community hub that offers leading edge accommodation and support for South Australians of all ages with disability, and we are pleased to align with AEIOU Foundation because it shares very similar values and opens up the prospect of future collaboration in areas such as research, training and development,” Ms Miller said.
“With the introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme it is now more critical than ever to establish partnerships with other sector-leading organisations like AEIOU to complement our own support model, and ensure that South Australians and their families receive whole-of-life support over time if they need,” she said.
AEIOU Foundation’s centre is expected to be complete in late 2017, with Stage 2 of Minda’s Master Plan expected to take about 18 months.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

First sod turned on SA’s largest disability support precinct

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
The 30% of Australians who live outside a capital city are experiencing a period of rapid change. A new era of food and crop production prosperity is being driven by technological disruption and farm business consolidation. This is occurring alongside ballooning unemployment, poorer health outcomes, and social dislocation in regional communities. We need to find long-lasting solutions to this disparity.
Last financial year, agriculture was the largest contributor to Australia’s GDP growth and the fastest-growing sector in the nation. Meanwhile, in October 2017, youth unemployment in outback Queensland hit 59.2% at a time when employment rates in inner Brisbane for 15-24 year-olds were hovering at 6%. Youth unemployment sits around the 20% mark in many regional areas across Australia.
The challenges facing regional Australia will not be solved by a single new mine, a quick job-creation scheme, or a flurry of bus tickets to the city. Instead, we need sustainable solutions that give regional Australians the chance to leave welfare behind, transform their job prospects and contribute to society as skilled workers. The best first step would be to give regional Australians better access to tertiary education.
A problem for everyone
The majority of Australia’s 40 universities operate regional campuses. From Broome to Burnie to Bundaberg, 25 Australian universities have them. There are 68 regional campuses in total, located in every state and territory, with the exception of the ACT. Most of these campuses undertake research in areas like precision agriculture, organics, aquaculture, medicinal cannabis production, plant genetics and plant science. They’re building expertise relevant to our agriculture-driven economic prosperity. Yet the people living around those campuses don’t all benefit from them.
<hr>
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/197896/original/file-20171206-31114-whxkz2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
<hr>
Australia’s regional campuses educate 20% of the nation’s tertiary students – more than 280,000 people. They could enrol many more, but proposed federal government policies would shut the door on many promising students. For example, proposals to make students pay for enabling places would act as a strong disincentive to take up study in the first place.
The goal of providing university access to 40% of the population has largely been met in metropolitan centres. But most regional areas are well below that participation target. Often, they are barely halfway there.
Since budget loadings, benefitting all regional campuses, were introduced in 2004, reviews have recommended extra funding for students enrolled at a regional university. This was proposed in recognition of the extra costs of delivering appropriate learning and teaching and the need to deliver career opportunities to regional people. These loadings were applied but have been successively wound back since that time.
The whittling away of regional loadings means such universities are at a substantial disadvantage. The current tertiary funding formula is too uniform. Students receive the same base level of funding for their degree in almost every case. This may suit a university with 50,000 students in a capital city. But it simply doesn’t cover the cost of many courses on much smaller campuses outside urban areas.
Regional universities also find it hard to attract international students, who provide important additional revenue to many metropolitan universities.
These factors mean it’s essential to prioritise the promise of economic sustainability and opportunity over the notion of higher education policy equality. Regional students merit more specific, targeted support across a range of degrees.
A new regional deal
A new approach to regional higher education would address many of these problems. Based on our research at Southern Cross University, I’ve suggested such an approach to the current federal government review into regional, rural and remote education. It would include:
<ul>
<li>
10,000 Commonwealth supported enabling places for regional Australians, distributed according to regional need and demand
</li>
<li>
$50 million per year for four years to help all 25 universities with regional campuses catch up
</li>
<li>
a new regional loading, in recognition of the higher costs of regional education delivery.
</li>
</ul>
As the Regional Universities Network (the RUN group) has advocated, regional university campuses need a new policy approach. Only regional universities can provide education at a reasonable cost without forcing people to face the upheaval of moving hundreds of kilometres, leaving family members behind and competing in the unaffordable housing markets of Sydney and Melbourne.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/88537/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">Local start-ups, local businesses, local health providers, and local arts performers all deserve a chance to thrive. A new funding approach will empower regional campuses to create more opportunities for the people they serve. It will help reduce inter-generational welfare dependence among a significant cohort of families, and bring additional income into communities. It will enable regional universities to educate more teachers, nurses, engineers and small business-people to work productively in their own backyards. Above all, it will translate that talent in the backyard to the front yard and then to the rest of the world.
Adam Shoemaker, Vice Chancellor, Southern Cross University
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-new-approach-to-regional-higher-education-is-essential-to-our-economic-future-88537" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

A new approach to regional higher education is essential to our economic future: Adam Shoemaker

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
This is an edited extract from Jacqui Dwyer, head of the RBA's information department, address to the Business Educators Australasia Annual Meeting.
Education in Australia is receiving a lot of attention at present. Against the background of Australia's core learning skills at school, there is much debate among educators about what we should teach, how we should teach it and how we should assess it. In terms of ‘what’ should be taught, the current debate provides a good opportunity to raise awareness of economics as a valuable field of study.
Economics is relevant to us all. Every day our lives are affected by economic decisions – ones we make personally and ones that are made by others. Economics is about how individuals and societies choose to allocate their limited resources to meet their needs and wants. It's about how we respond to incentives, make trade-offs, weigh up costs and benefits – and how we decide what is efficient and what is fair. Economics contains some powerful concepts and useful frameworks. It can help us better understand the choices involved in many personal decisions we make, and better understand the economic conditions and policies that affect our lives.
Given the relevance of economics, and the social benefits of economic literacy, how widely is it studied? Be it at high school or university, economics was once widely offered and widely chosen – but that is no longer true. This is weighing on both the size and diversity of the student population, with implications for economic literacy and the longer-term health of the economics discipline in Australia.
The High School Scene
First, I want to remind you of some of the key features of the economics landscape at Australian high schools.
Nationally, there has been a dramatic decline in Year 12 economics enrolments over the past 25 years of around 70%. Our case study of enrolments in New South Wales (for which we have the most detailed data), shows an even greater fall of 75% over the same period. This fall was concentrated in the early 1990s when economics was displaced by the introduction of business studies in 1991 – arguably a less analytically demanding and vocationally oriented subject (Graph 1).
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2018/5/29/G%201.gif" alt="">
In 1991, economics was the third most popular subject choice in New South Wales, surpassed only by English and mathematics. It was also taught in nearly all schools. These days, we find that it is taught in less than one-third of government schools and a little over half of non-government schools. Consistent with economics now being less available as a subject choice in government schools, there are sharply declining economics enrolments, especially in the comprehensive schools that the majority of students attend (Graph 2).
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2018/5/29/G%202.gif" alt="">
Another defining feature of the high school scene is the fall in the share of female students enrolled in economics. Again, in the early 1990s, there were roughly even shares of male and female students in economics classrooms, whereas these days there are roughly twice as many male students as female students (Graph 3). This gender imbalance is more pronounced than for STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) and contrasts with the high and stable ratio of female to male students in the rival subject of business studies.
 
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2018/5/29/G%203.gif" alt="">
So over the course of a generation, there has been a pronounced fall in the size and diversity of the economics student population at Australian high schools. Has the same pattern been evident at universities?
The University Scene
In looking at university enrolments in economics, it is necessary to first establish what we mean by economics. At university, economics can be taken as a degree, a major or a subject within many different courses. We rely on each university's judgment about ‘how much economics’ counts as an economics enrolment when they report on this to the Department of Education and Training (DET).<a id="r2" href="https://www.rba.gov.au/speeches/2018/sp-so-2018-05-26#fn2"> </a>
Graph 4 compares economics enrolments in Australian high schools with university enrolments. It shows that while there has been a large fall in the level of economics enrolments at high school, economics enrolments at university have been fairly constant since the early 1990s and have fallen slightly since 2001 (when we have a series break in our data because the classification structure of subjects changed).
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2018/5/29/G%204.gif" alt="">
But how does this compare with growth in other subjects and the overall student population at university? Since 2001, while economics enrolments have edged down, enrolments in rival subjects have expanded, as has the total student population. In other words, economics is also being displaced at university by business-oriented subjects (banking, finance, management and commerce) and is lagging STEM in its ability to attract students (Graph 5). While these courses teach valuable skills, and some include similar skills to those learned in economics, economics students are a declining share of the university student population.
 <img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2018/5/29/G%205.gif" alt="">
One question that my colleagues ask is whether the declining share of students studying economics at uni reflects declining demand for economists in the job market. We actually don't know much about the level of demand for economic skills. But we do know that fewer universities are offering economics and half of those that do are in New South Wales and the ACT (Graph 6). Institutional concentration is not necessarily a problem – those universities that continue to offer economics may have high-calibre programs and attract high-calibre students. However, such concentration will weigh on the diversity of the economics student population if these universities do not have inclusive approaches to accepting students. Furthermore, the need to relocate to study economics will be a barrier for some students who might otherwise have chosen the subject.
 <img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2018/5/29/G%206.gif" alt="">
 
So let's look at some explicit indicators of diversity in economics. At university, there are more than twice as many male students as female students who study economics. And while there has always been a gender gap at university (unlike at high schools where gender balance once existed), this gap has widened over the past decade and is even more pronounced than presently at high school (Graph 7).
 <img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2018/5/29/G%207.gif" alt="">
Another important element of diversity is socio-economic status. A striking feature of the university data is the share of students studying economics who come from high socio-economic backgrounds – currently over 55%. This share has been increasing over the past twenty years, just as it has for economics students at high school (Graph 8). Furthermore, the share of university economics students from backgrounds of high socio-economic status exceeds that for rival subjects, and it significantly exceeds that for STEM students and the student population overall (Graph 9).<a id="r4" href="https://www.rba.gov.au/speeches/2018/sp-so-2018-05-26#fn4"> </a>
 <img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2018/5/29/G%208.gif" alt="">
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2018/5/29/G%209.gif" alt="">
 
What's Wrong with This Picture?
It is of concern to see the drift toward a smaller and more homogenous population of economics students – both at school and university. The number of students who study economics influences the level of economic literacy in society. And the diversity of those students ultimately influences the collective ability of the economics profession. Diversity has bearing on the economic questions that we ask, our approaches to answering them how we action solutions. Because those who study economics shape the discipline and determine economic policies, there are wider social benefits when the population of economics graduates is broadly representative of society.
The importance of diversity in the study of economics is increasingly being voiced by central bankers. The Chief Economist of the Bank of England, Andy Haldane, has been vocal about this issue. So too have researchers Amanda Bayer and David Wilcox who, in a US Federal Reserve discussion paper, identify pervasive imbalances in economics education in the United States and argue that this is a matter that warrants urgent attention.<a id="r6" href="https://www.rba.gov.au/speeches/2018/sp-so-2018-05-26#fn6"> </a>
So what has been driving the fall in size and diversity of Australia's economics student population? A number of forces are at work. To help inform the Bank's public education program, we have done a lot of data analysis and liaison with educators, education authorities and students. There are some dominant themes.
Economics has become less prominent. In the 1980s and early 1990s, economics was the subject of national debate. There was the lived experience of recession and big economic events like the floating of the dollar and the deregulation of labour and financial markets. So prevalent was the discussion of economics that former Prime Minister Paul Keating once said ‘I guarantee if you walk into any pet shop in Australia, the resident galah will be talking about microeconomic policy’. With Australia having experienced over a quarter of a century of continuous economic expansion, there is now a less involving – and less mature – national conversation about economics.
A relatively benign economic environment appears to have reduced the curiosity of students in seeking to learn about economics. However, the single largest factor weighing on the study of economics appears to have been the emergence of business studies as a subject choice in schools, and the growing dominance of business schools at universities.
When compared with rival subjects, economics has an image problem. Too few students understand what economics is and how it is relevant to them. Consequently, in a cluttered curriculum – at both high school and university – they are less likely to choose it. And if economics is no longer a core subject in many courses, the incentives to choose it fall further.
A key consideration in making a subject choice is its employability, especially given the effort and expense involved in investing in education. Many students - and importantly their parents - consider economics to be less employable than business-oriented subjects. They value subjects and degrees with a clear pathway to a specific occupation (e.g. by studying accounting you can become an accountant). However, the data tell us that graduate starting salaries are higher for economic students than students who take business-oriented subjects and that full-time employment rates are broadly similar. In fact, the sorts of skills acquired in the study of economics – such as analytical and problem solving skills – are likely to be highly valued as the nature of work changes (as explained by the Bank's Head of Economic Analysis, Alex Heath, in her speech on <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/speeches/2017/sp-so-2017-12-01" target="_blank">Skills for the Modern Workforce</a>). It is perhaps because economics graduates are less likely to be employed in their subject field that the misperception about employability arises.
Role models are also important, and the lack of visibility of what an economist does results in a shortage of role models. Furthermore, to the extent that economists are visible, too often they are a homogenous bunch. This can have the effect of discouraging students, particularly females and those from minority backgrounds.
The lack of diversity in the economics profession speaks to implicit biases that also manifest themselves in the presentation of economic content – ranging from the lower rates of success in publication experienced by female economists, through to lower representation of females in economic examples in textbooks. Much has been made in recent years of the fact that females (or minority groups) rarely appear in textbooks, other than in stereotypic roles. This can be discouraging to female students and others who are not represented.
But in addition to all these factors that influence the choices a student might make, there are disincentives facing schools and universities in offering economics.
At the end of the day, schools and universities need to think about the value proposition of offering subjects. At high schools, where the fall in enrolments has been dramatic, principals need to assess whether economics enrolments are at a critical mass to support classes. They also need to have teachers who are equipped to deliver these courses. Over the past 20 years there has been a decline in the number of teachers who have themselves studied economics at university. With teachers increasingly teaching economics ‘out of field’, their confidence in delivering economics courses can be low.
Teaching economics at school is difficult. The concepts are analytically challenging and the script is always changing, given the need to include current economic conditions. The requirement for teachers to be across economic developments is demanding, especially if they are teaching out of field. Business studies, on the other hand, is easier to teach and has the (incorrectly) perceived benefit of greater employability. Consequently, in many schools, teaching resources have been allocated to business studies rather than economics.
Universities are faced with similar decisions about allocating resources. Additionally, their choices are influenced by government decisions that affect teaching revenue. Most domestic undergraduate students occupy ‘Commonwealth supported places’ where fee revenue is made up of a student contribution plus a government contribution. Economics is in the unfortunate position of being in the course group (along with law, commerce, accounting and administration) that has the highest student contribution and the lowest government contribution (Graph 10).
 <img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2018/5/29/G%2010.gif" alt="">
 
On top of this, analysis by Deloitte Access Economics suggests that, on average, universities only roughly break even in delivering economics to domestic students. But universities gain substantial revenue from courses offered to overseas students (where fees for economics and business courses can be twice those charged to domestic students). The business-oriented courses of commerce and management in Australia now attract around one-third of total overseas student enrolments; in fact, in 2015, there were 70 overseas students enrolled in commerce and management for every overseas student enrolled in economics. Consequently, business schools have been described as the ‘cash cows’ of Australian universities with large profits that are redistributed to fund other university activities, encouraging administrators to focus on offering business courses over economics.
The decision of administrators to favour business courses over economics is reinforced by lower completion rates in economics than in rival courses and university courses overall. Economics also disappoints on other metrics considered by administrators, such as rankings in research output.
A combination of these factors has left an entire generation of students less engaged with economics, less educated about it and potentially less equipped to understand or react to changes in their economic environment.
The Bank's Response
The Bank has always been committed to supporting people who want to learn more about economics and the Australian economy. Our observations about developments in economics education encouraged the establishment of the Bank's public education program. The program is still in its infancy, and we are grateful to you for the role you have played in helping us understand the needs of educators and students as we develop our educational resources and activities. In the course of doing this, we have learned much about how inaccessible economics can be and how much needs to be done to address that.
We have developed a series of resources that are designed to support students and educators, as well as being relevant for more general audiences. You can see these on the education section of the Bank's website. Our Ambassador program is well established with a group of young Bank economists delivering talks to students and educators across the country, including going into classrooms. We are out and about more, explaining what economics is, providing insights into what we do as economists and hopefully providing some useful role models. (This includes promoting awareness of role models outside the Bank, such as prominent Australian <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/education/resources/women-in-economics" target="_blank">women in economics</a>.)
On more formal aspects of our program, we have made a <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/submissions/education/submission-to-nesa-review-of-commerce-years-7-10-syllabus/" target="_blank">submission</a> in support of economics being included in the middle years of high school in New South Wales. And the Bank is now an accredited provider of professional development for economics teachers. In fact, we look forward to seeing some of you at our annual Teacher Immersion Event next month.
Economics is relevant to students in many ways that they may not explicitly recognise. Students have great interest in understanding their own material welfare and that of society more broadly. They are interested in the personal and collective choices that determine such welfare, now and in the future. This all relates to economics. We need to make students aware of the ways in which economics can inform and empower them.
From improved economic literacy in the community, through to improved design of public policies, economics education delivers significant social benefits. In other words, there are civic returns to studying economics. Your role in encouraging that study is very important.
Jacqui Dwyer is head of the Reserve Bank of Australia's information department.
For the original speech, <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/speeches/2018/sp-so-2018-05-26" target="_blank">click here.</a>
</body></html>

Education

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Education

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News