In 1992, the Netter Centre for Community Partnerships at the University of Pennsylvania was created to connect knowledge to the interconnected challenges confronting the University of Pennsylvania, the city of Philadelphia, and American society. In 2006, the Eidos Institute was established to connect the complex research of the Eidos Network of member universities to Australian politics and policy. Both the Netter Centre and the Eidos Institute consider collaboration crucial to confronting the economic, political, social, and cultural challenges of this century. I congratulate the Netter Centre on their 20th anniversary and thank the Centre for the invitation to speak at this plenary session on the current challenges for Australian and Asian schools, universities and communities.
There are considerable, complex and inter-connected challenges for Australian and Asian schools, universities and communities in this century. Today, I will consider three of those challenges, and comment on the relationships between schools, universities and communities.
The first challenge is responding to the Asian Century. As the Chinese economy continues to industrialise, democratise and liberalise, a growing middle class recognises the importance of education. In May 2012, the Asian Development Bank released the Shadow Education: Private Supplementary Tutoring And Its Implications for Policy Makers in Asia Report. The report considers changes in Asian cultural conceptualisations concerning the value of education and ‘shadow education’; currently, in Hong Kong 85% of senior secondary students receive tutoring, in South Korea 90% of elementary students receive tutoring, and in Singapore 97% of all students receive tutoring. How do Australian students compare, in this competition with not just their classmates, but their regional counterparts? According to the December 2011 Gonski Review of Funding for Schooling, commissioned by the Federal Labour Government, Australia, in the period from 2000 to 2009, Australia fell from second in reading literacy and third in mathematical literacy to seventh in reading literacy and thirteenth in mathematical literacy. Australian students are not so literate in languages other than English, either. In May 2010, the Asia Education Foundation released The Current State of Chinese, Indonesian, Japanese and Korean Language Education in Australian Schools Report, which indicated that the proportion of students at all levels studying one of those languages had dropped from 24 per cent to 18.6 percent. Relatedly, in October 2012, the Federal Labor Government released the Australia in the Asian Century White Paper. The White Paper concerns Australia’s political, economic, social, and cultural connections with Asia to 2025, and concludes that education in Asian languages and culture are crucial to Australian capacity-building. Consequently, government funding for Australian primary and secondary institutions will be conditional on school students having the capacity to continuously study a ‘priority Asian language’: Mandarin Chinese, Hindi, Indonesian or Japanese. Further, in tertiary education, the government will continue to financially support Asian studies courses, and Australian university students studying in Asia. Clearly, this compels a reconsideration of cultural and community attitudes towards education and foreign languages.
The second challenge concerns educational globalisation, internationalisation and digitalisation. Five years ago, the Eidos Network hosted a forum as our member universities commenced preparations for a ‘perfect storm’ of a comparatively high Australian dollar, increased competition in the international tertiary student market, and tighter visa restrictions. Those preparations were crucial, given that according to an International Education Advisory Council Discussion Paper released in 2012, international education contributed $16 billion to the Australian economy in 2011/12, and created over 100,000 jobs – and this was a considerable decrease from 2009. As universities respond, though, the challenges continue. In October 2012, the international accounting firm, Ernst and Young, released the University of the Future Report. The Report considered the continued democratisation of knowledge through digital technologies and the constant competition for students, academics and funding characteristic of a globalised education industry as considerable challenges for Australian tertiary educational institutions. Consequently, the Report claimed that the current Australian public university business model (a broad-based teaching and research institution, with a large base of assets and back office), would be unviable in all but a few cases within 10-15 years. It concluded that there were just three viable business models for Australian public universities: a rationalisation of the status quo, a concern with niche subjects, or a transformational partnership between universities, governments, communities, industries, venture capitalists and media. Universities cannot continue to be sandstone buildings with ivory towers, occupied for two 13-week semesters each year; in the other 26 weeks, universities must engage with their communities, industry and government to increase the productivity of their physical and intellectual assets.
The third challenge relates to university funding models. In an April 2012 speech to the London Institute of Economic Affairs, Australian Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey heralded the end to what he characterised as an ‘age of entitlement’ in Australia, calling for a change in the social contract between citizens and the State. That approach was evidenced in August 2012, as Australian think-tank The Grattan Institute released the Graduate Winners: Assessing the Benefits of Higher Education Report. Controversially, the Report claimed that higher education subsidies cost seven billion dollars annually, and contended that tuition subsidies should only be paid for courses that create public benefits that would otherwise attract insufficient students. Increasingly, government policy is characterised by demands for accountability, efficiency, and adherence to market-based principles. Although Americans may find this difficult to relate to, in the 1970s and 1980s, tertiary education in Australia was free at public universities. Consequently, this public discourse is a considerable change for Australian universities. Chancellors don’t come cheap: if government funding is reduced or made contingent on certain criteria, universities will be compelled to radically alter their business models.
These three challenges have considerable implications; in this context, the school-university-community trialectic is increasingly critical. In relation to the first challenge, communities must continue cultural support for literacy, numeracy, and foreign language courses and curricula.
Universities must construct relationships with prospective, current, and past students; connect with the local and regional communities in which they are located; and continue government involvement to ensure both their financial viability and maximal contribution to the public good. Of course, digital communications technologies and social media facilitate connections across geographic, social, and cultural boundaries. The opportunities for collaboration and co-ordination are there for the taking. Yet, the communication must go beyond Facebook friending, Twitter following and website hits; these challenges compel meaningful engagement with stakeholders. Conferences and panels such as this are a crucial first step.
To continue to exist in an environment which the Ernst and Young report has labelled as undergoing a ‘fundamental transformation’ universities must continue to diversify their business models. The current model must evolve. By choosing particular customer markets to focus on (e.g. mature age distance learning students or industry professionals) universities are able to carve out market positions which will ensure their survival.
Thirdly, universities can look to diversify their funding streams through positioning themselves more effectively within the Australian national innovation system. Professor Denise Meredyth, academic leader within the Eidos Network and current Deputy Pro Vice Chancellor Research and Innovation at RMIT University argues that what works best is longer-term partnerships which are able to be renegotiated as the partners come to understand each others’ concerns. An ideal model is one in which there is mutual intellectual work and joint ownership of engagement, influence, change. That can be broadened to include cross-institution collaboration – and work across public, private and not for profit networks.
Third party organisations such as think-tanks used as a mechanism for leveraging influence and translating research in a timely, easily digestible manner are also rising in influence. Collective problem solving, building political influence through cross-sector collaborations and engaging with the community can be facilitated via think-tanks designed to exist at the intersection between the academic, political and community sectors.
As a representative voice of the Asia-Pacific region on this panel, our current national context in this area is underscored by an Asian centric forward outlook. The recently released White Paper encourages all sectors of the community – business, government and education to engage with the region in order to increase Australia’s ability to utilise the opportunities (economic, political and cultural) that Asia’s transformation creates.
In conclusion, the relationship between schools, universities and communities is complex, contested and changing. It is also clearly more crucial than ever. Advances in communication technology and a greater understanding of complex issues surrounding sustainability and innovation allow geographic, social and cultural boundaries to be broken down on a daily basis. The opportunities to work together – across academia, government, business and community sectors – are there for the taking.
Yet, if such benefits of the modern age are not utilised in a collaborative and coordinated way, they will likely sit dormant like stately university grounds for half of the year.