Author: Andrew Norton

Will demand driven funding for all Indigenous students make much of a difference?

Andrew Norton2 Comments

Yesterday the government introduced legislation to extend demand driven funding from regional and remote to all Indigenous students. Currently Indigenous students from major cities are funded from within each university’s capped maximum basic grant amount for higher education courses. If the legislation passes universities will get the full Commonwealth contribution value of all enrolled Indigenous students in demand driven funding eligible courses, with no funding cap.

What are current Indigenous enrolments by geographic category?

Demand driven funding only applies to bachelor degree students – of which more later – which makes it a funding category that is not also a publicly-reported statistics category. However a table in the annual equity statistics lets us calculate the number of undergraduate (ie bachelor + diploma + associate degree) Indigenous students by home geographic location. It shows that Indigenous students from the major cities outnumber regional and remote students. Enrolments from both groups have increased in recent years.

Read More »

The Universities Accord universal learning entitlement – how might it work?

Andrew NortonLeave a comment

One Universities Accord interim report suggestion is a ‘universal learning entitlement’. But what would this mean, and how would it differ from what we have now?

The first part of this entitlement is to support Australians in obtaining a tertiary qualification. But it aims to go beyond ‘traditional targets’, such as for higher education or VET, to meet ‘a range of skills and other objectives’.

The interim report defines entitlement funding as ‘an appropriate combination of a public subsidy, a student contribution that would be paid through an income contingent loan … and, for some lifelong learning, an appropriate employer contribution’.

Current limits on higher education enrolments

While no Australian citizen is specifically disqualified from accessing a funded place in higher education, in practice three admissions-related obstacles can stand in their way.

Read More »

For universities the Accord interim report proposes a more extreme version of Job-Ready Graduates

Andrew Norton6 Comments

The Australian Universities Accord interim report recommends overturning the most controversial Job-ready Graduates policy, using student contribution price signals to guide student course choices.

But overall the Accord interim report and Job-ready Graduates have strong parallels. They both take a utilitarian view of higher education, that its purpose is to provide benefits to others rather than being of any intrinsic value. Universities exist to meet skills needs, find practical uses for research, contribute to their local communities, and promote equity. The main difference is the interim report proposals are, with student contributions the main exception, more extreme and interventionist than Job-ready Graduates.

Substantially reduced university autonomy

Historically universities in Australia and other western countries have operated with a significant degree of autonomy from government. But despite using the word ‘autonomy’ a few times the Accord interim report shows little interest in this idea.

On my count at least 25 interim report proposals would reduce the scope of university-level decision making or are new reporting requirements that set universities up for future regulation. In my list these cover general mission direction, student admissions, the mix of disciplines and courses, curriculum and teaching, use of funds, and accountability.

Read More »

The decline of the humanities

Andrew Norton4 Comments

A couple of days ago the Sydney Morning Herald published an article on falling enrolments in university humanities subjects, with a focus on history and English.

I’ve converted the data into an index to make it easier to see the trends in fields with different absolute numbers of full-time equivalent enrolments. In the late 2000s and early 2010s the humanities shared in general enrolment growth, but after that went into decline. History’s growth and decline were greater than the humanities in general.

Read More »

Conflicting visions of higher education’s purposes

Andrew Norton3 Comments

I blurbed Mind of the Nation, Michael Wesley’s new book on universities in Australian life, with the statement that it ‘shows how rising and conflicting expectations of universities create controversies that will not go away’. His book is about the cultural and political position of universities rather than higher education policy as such, although policy provides evidence of how politicians and voters see universities.

University administrators – Wesley is a deputy vice-chancellor – are at the centre of these controversies, blamed by all sides for whatever is wrong with universities. Mind of the Nation explores why universities receive so much critique and so little love or (from a university perspective) public funding, despite many successes and contributions: life-changing experiences for students, moving from an elite to a mass higher education system, creating a new export industry, large increases in research aimed at solving practical problems, and engagement with local communities.

Wesley asks why Australians admire the successes of their sporting teams, musicians and actors but not universities.

Read More »

Free higher education as income and consumption smoothing

Andrew Norton2 Comments

The argument that free higher education would create additional higher education opportunities is empirically weak. History and international comparisons show that participation rates increase without it, and indeed due to budget constraints free higher education can lead to lower participation rates.

However there is another argument for free higher education which, while still contentious, has goals and likely outcomes that are consistent with each other.

Free higher education and income/consumption smoothing

The strongest argument for free (or cheaper) higher education is a better balancing of income and consumption over the life cycle. Needs are more consistent through life than income. Most people consume more than they earn when young and old and a large proportion earn more than they consume during their full-time working years. Smoothing these out is one of the principal functions of welfare states.

Compared to upfront fees or mortgage style student loans paid in instalments the HELP repayment system already has strong smoothing effects. It pushes the expense of higher education away from the years when full-time study limits scope for paid work. On low incomes no HELP repayment is required or repayments that are less than the minimum likely mortgage style loan repayment amount. On high incomes HELP repayments are more than the likely mortgage style loan repayment amount.

And higher education is already free for HELP debtors who persistently earn less than the first repayment threshold.

Read More »

Would free university increase or decrease higher education participation rates in Australia?

Andrew Norton5 Comments

In a previous post I argued that Australia’s practice of charging fees for higher education reflects its broader patterns of taxation and public funding of social services.

But we have had free higher education before, 1974-1988. For a government already spending over $600 billion a year the cost of free higher education is not beyond the feasible range. I estimate costs at $4.6 to $5.9 billion a year on status quo numbers of student places in public universities. The range reflects uncertainties about how domestic students currently paying full fees would be handled. The $4.6 billion transitions currently Commonwealth supported students to free, while the $5.9 billion fully compensates universities for lost fee revenue.

Of the arguments for free higher education the one that people find most intuitive is that it would increase higher education participation. People consume more when prices go down. But somebody is paying – the government on behalf of taxpayers – and so how they would respond is the key variable in whether the number of students would go up or down.

Debt aversion

Supporters of free higher education often make demand-side arguments, that fees or loans are a deterrent to higher education participation, especially to people from disadvantaged backgrounds.

As someone with working class origins free higher education advocate Duncan Maskell says he would not have gone to university if he had to take out a loan. Occasional school student surveys have picked up similar sentiments. But the ‘debt aversion’ hypothesis has always had trouble distinguishing between sensible prudence around taking out debt that probably is not worth it (good debt aversion), and over-caution in taking out debts that would probably lead to significant long-term benefits (bad debt aversion).

Read More »

Why do Australian university students pay fees?

Andrew Norton2 Comments

University of Melbourne VC Duncan Maskell secured some not always entirely positive media coverage today for his call to make university education free for domestic students.

University education is free or very cheap for students in some European countries and was also free in Australia between 1974 and 1988.

Why do countries differ on university fees?

My theory of why countries differ on this issue draws loosely on the work of Julian Garritzmann. We observe broad coherence between higher education finance systems in each country and their overall tax and social service/benefits systems. The chart below shows patterns in the OECD. Australia is in a cluster of countries in our region with government expenditure below 40 per cent of GDP and quite similar fees in $USD purchasing power parity terms. The countries with free higher education tend to have governments that consume more than 50 per cent of GDP.

Read More »

Is the NTEU exaggerating student debt repayment times?

Andrew NortonLeave a comment

The NTEU has a new report out today forecasting some alarmingly long HELP debt repayment times, including over 40 years in some high student contribution courses. While I agree that this issue needs attention – and have proposed linking student contributions with expected repayment times to narrow the course-linked differences between them – I think the NTEU forecasts are much longer than will typically happen in practice.

The key problem is how the NTEU models expected graduate income. In their report they take starting salaries and then increase them each year by average wage growth over the last decade, 2.3 per cent on their figures.

However graduate incomes usually increase by much more than that. Indeed, the financial value of a degree is opportunities for continuing income growth when the wages of people without degrees tend to plateau after a decade or so in the labour force.

Graduate career wages

Recently the ABS added ATO and DSS derived income data to the Census dataset, allowing more detailed analysis of income than was previously possible. As the chart below shows for graduates at the median and 75th percentile income does not peak until age 45-49 years, after doubling between the early 20s and late 30s.

The next chart looks at median income by single year of age in the early career period when most HELP debt is repaid. Initial income levels look affected by people in jobs that don’t require degrees, but as professional careers start and graduates are promoted or switch to better jobs income increases rapidly.

Read More »

Time to change the timing of HELP debt indexation?

Andrew Norton3 Comments

HELP debt indexation media attention has highlighted arcane aspects of student loan administration. One of these is that HELP debtors in repayment mode are indexed on debt they have already repaid.

To simplify – the processes outlined in division 140 of the Higher Education Support Act 2003 are convoluted – I will give the example of a graduate with no new HELP debt.

How HELP debt is indexed

HELP indexation occurs on 1 June each year, so it will next happen on 1 June 2023 at the controversially high rate of 7.1 per cent (see this earlier post on possible alternative ways of setting the indexation rate).

To calculate the amount to be indexed on 1 June 2023 the ATO:

i) takes the person’s HELP debt for the ‘immediately preceding financial year’, ie 1 July 2021-30 June 2022;

ii) subtracts any voluntary repayments made between 1 June in the immediately preceding financial year, ie 1 June 2022 and ending immediately before the next 1 June, ie 31 May 2023;

iii) subtracts any compulsory repayment amounts ‘assessed during that period’, ie between 1 June 2022 and 31 May 2023.

The trap is that HELP compulsory repayments for 2022-2023 will not be ‘assessed’ between 1 June 2022 and 31 May 2023, because the 2022-23 tax year does not finish until 30 June 2023. Instead, compulsory repayments for the 2021-22 tax year will be deducted.

The issue here is that by 1 June 2023 HELP debtors in the PAYG system will, in cash terms, already have paid about 90 per cent of what they will eventually owe for the 2022-23 tax year. Effectively, HELP debtors will be indexed on debt they have already repaid.

Read More »