Strings,
Yes, the micro needs substantially more work, its mearly an idea ive been toying with over the last few days, that was the first time i had written it down .

Yes, the 12,000 was mearly an example, how much it would need to be would depend on the subsidy rate of courses in general. My reasoning for the different lengths was that since the full time military are full time the length should be decreased to incentivise over the territorial option, the main purpose, as with most bonding schemes, being to get them established and glued into the feild I imagine the full time would mostly be taken up by those seeking officer training.
My reasoning for the civilian bonding being longer is that the other two options require substantial time investment and have the risk of going to war, though it be small.

Admittedly I got the idea mostly off the swedish and german systems of conscription (having had many nordic flatmates whom have served in their armies). I frame it in this fashion though as I do not beleive that compulsary military service is politically plyable. However I agree there would be some benefits. The main purpose of the territorials under the bondign schemme would be a ready supply of disastor releif as well as a mechanism of allowing education to be easily accesed regardless of financial background but still with associated costs.

If I didint make this clear, I apply this to vocational, university and ‘technology’. If an individual finds themselves still unable to pursue such after the trainign the chances are that they still would have benefited. Although I beleive that after the training most would be able to pursue such education as many of the skills that allow one to excel in teritary e.g. dedication, self control, endurance, etc are an important part of military training.

And of course for U.E different levels would suit different levels of study, eg if acheive is one point, merit is 2, and exalance is 3 then you may require different total scores for different institutions. But that is also what the one semester entry thing is all about; with a universal allowance too, to even outthe playing feild alittle.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Sapient
An interesting set of concepts, which I agree with in macro and would tinker with in micro.

For instance, assign a value to a year of participation in the TA, (say for a starting point, $15,000) and reduce the loan by that amount, as well as the year’s interest, for a calendar year of full participation.

Do the same with the regular army bonding, though because the ‘soldier’ (or sailor or ‘flier’) is paid a “normal” wage, halve the credit (i.e. in this case from $15k to $7.5k plus interest).

I have a more aggressive approach than you to entry qualification. Though I would accept your approach for a new NCEA standard for entry to Tertiary Education, I think you are being too restrictive in making it a U.E. standard, as there other levels might be more appropriate for Polytechnics and kiore1′s concept of a “School of Technology” (my term) to sit alongside medical, dentistry, law and accounting schools (clearly not at the same Masters and Doctorate post-grad level). If a secondary education graduate does not achieve the standard for entry to their tertiary education of choice I would suggest they be given an extra year of secondary education, at their cost and subject to the same bonding as tertiary study, in which to achieve the necessary standards. If they do not do so, they go get a job suitable for their ability.

With regard to an initial full-time and payed year of basic military training being required prior to commencement of study – something tells me that the ones who do not qualify for tertiary study are the ones who would most benefit from this, and it’s possible that the country might benefit from such ‘national service’ quite substantially too. I would therefore make this MANDATORY as a learning experience for all who leave secondary education without having a guaranteed place in tertiary education, and make the first (additional to current requirement) year of tertiary study a ‘general’ year that includes 2 days a week in a ‘national service’ format but also develops self-learning, writing, researching and time management skills in students so their formal qualification work is more productive and graduation standards can be raised to equal the top decile of the OECD standards – which I have a VERY STRONG gut feel we do not do now.

Your thoughts ladies & gents?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

And of course bonding schemes shouldint be in years but in the proportion of fees a standard individual would incur.
Eg if your course a standard course costs 30,000 per year and it was a 2.5 time length return including years during study, then it would be 12000 per year paid off. however if your course cost more then it would take longer to pay off at that rate and if it cost less it woudl take shorter. In this way we could change the levels of subsidiy for courses we want to produce more or less graduates in.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Should a bonded individual choose to leave the territorials they will hav to pay the portion of fees remaining given the time served

Oh and for that I did not mean up front, i ment as a normal student loan.
Additionally, beign territorials they wouldint be sent off to timor, etc unless they desired or consented to such, though we would need a way to stop them from all leaving if it look like a war was on the horizon

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Well, for the sake of debate how about I say this:
Reduce the level of subsidisation of teritary education.
Reduce the Military Bonding scheme from twice length of study plus two years to one point five times length of study plus two years. Fractional pay rate to represent costs incurred.
Create a new Military bonding scheme with a length twice that of study plus two years. The bonded act as territorials and are given basic training and a heavy emphasis on civil defence and disaster releif. The bonded are required to maintain minimum fitness levels and to attend a paid training review once or twice a year. Should a bonded individual choose to leave the territorials they will hav to pay the portion of fees remaining given the time served. time may be reduced by paying off fees. Should an individual fail to meet fitness requirements for reasons other that new physical disability then individual will be discharged until such point as physical standards are met, should standards not be regained within two years the remainign cost of study will be born by the bonded. There will be no pay for territorials whilst bonded save the reviews and initial training. Following ceasation of bonding the territorials may continue to serve and receive full territorial pay should the higher physical standards be met.
In both military bonding schemes an initial full-time and payed year of basic training shall be required prior to commencement of study.
Introduce a civilian bonding scheme equal to two point five times length of study conditional on working in new zealand and at a pay rate above the lower quartile for a given profession. Again, time may be shortened by paying back part of the loan.
Not living in new zealand for a period greater than two years will result in the remaining loan being charged to the individual, with interest, where living within new zealand is defined as residing here for more than six months of a year.

Increase U.E. standards and modify the NCEA system so that a merit is worth more than a acheivement, so instead of needing so many marks in different subjects in different years you need a average mark of say merit for entry in to university.
Since most disadvantaged students will merge with non-disadvantaged students after a short period of study those whom do not acheive the new U.E. standard will be required to fulfil a one semester comprehensive course in basic matters fo the desired feild of study (like those without U.E. in desired feilds are required to in many uni’s anyway) and acheive a mark of atleast B or above the mean for entry to that course of study.

Make a C mark satisfactory for using a paper for a prerequisate but a B mark sufficent for crediting a paper towards ones degree.

Thats all that comes to mind for now

Kiore,
Whilst I agree with you, most engeeners I have had the pleasure of interacting with show much more understanding and knowledge of physics, etc than those whom specialise in the degrees. Though Clinical Psychology certainly belongs in that third teir rather than at university.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Sapient, kjuv & kiore1, thank you – it’s nice to have it confirmed that there are things we can agree on.

Personally, I would be very saddened if it were true that discussion on this subject faded away on the Frog-blog. It is, at least, a place where there are people with direct experience of the topic and whose contribution to the debate on where to from here adds significant value.

I believe a complete overhaul of the tertiary education system, a transformation (caterpillar to butterfly) rather than extension (tadpole to frog) is needed if New Zealand is to have the minds and skills to contribute to meeting the challenges humanity faces in its dealings with its environment. At some time, the Green Party must take on a general policy area that is not going to generate heated ideological debate, and that can contribute quickly to a better overall New Zealand; perhaps this is such a policy area.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Strings:

Just a ‘thank you’ for such an informative and thoughtful outline of the status (actual or desired) of tertiary education. There is no disagreement on my part. The sad fact is that we seem to be moving away from the treasured ideal of encouraging the most talented in society to freely and deeply reflect on the various aspects of the apparent chaos that is the modern society.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Strings

A thoughtful analysis of tertiary education and one I cannot find much to disagree with on. I do however think you could add another category, the university of technology. This would teach subjects that require both a theoretical and practical component, are largely vocational, but do require a reasonable level of academic achievement. Engineering would come in here.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Strings,
As much as I would love to debate this I dont really see any points there that I disagree with strongly enough to bother debating them. Besides, I think this thread is more or less dead.
There are afew ideas I would like to table but they are not yet sufficently formulated to do so.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

AS Plato is credited with saying – too many entrants to our advanced studies structure do not have the basic skill of writing cohesive, well structured and punctuated prose.

However, the main arguments developing here seem to me to be threefold, i.e.
1. What is the role of a university in today’s society?
2. What is the role of a polytechnic (or Institute of Technology as some of them like to be called these days,) in today’s society?
3. WHO should be entitled to free (or heavily subsidised education) at either.

I will suggest answers but expect them to be debated enthusiastically.

1. Universities.

A University has traditionally been a place where the sum of human knowledge is extended, explored and transmitted to others on scales that make sense to those with funds to subsidise those activities. I see no reason why any aspect of this tradition falls down in today’s society, and would encourage its pursuit full on. The real question for today is really around who has the funds to subsidise the activities.

A visit to some old Universities, (lets take Cambridge and – to stay geographically consistent – Harvard,) will show that there are demonstrated academic achievement constraints on entry to both. However, where there are financial constraints on otherwise acceptable applicants, these constraints can be, and are, easily removed.

Harvard has exceptionally high SAT (Scholastic Assessment Test) requirements, and so limits its intake to academically exceptional students; except, when an applicant is the child of an alumni with significant donor behaviour, in which case the SAT requirement may be waved (informally of course). Harvard’s Alumni do not fund many “athletic” scholarships, but they do fund significant numbers of academic scholarships to make sure gifted but poor students can develop their intellects without financial hardship. This results in a university with an exceptionally strong academic reputation, as well as one that generates leaders in the fields it chooses to pursue through its research and teaching. These leaders may not be high earners – intellect is highly valued in Harvard and Egyptology (at Masters and Doctorate level study) is as valued as Medicine at the University – though not in the world of financial reward. Those who achieve high financial as well as intellectual reward are EXPECTED to contribute to the perpetuation of THEIR Alma Mata, and do so in vast numbers of dollars.

The University of Cambridge also has high academic standards for entry, contending for the academic cream of the annual British academic crop with Oxford and limiting its intake to those with appropriate scores in the GCSE Advanced and Scholarship examinations. (Like Harvard, there are ways and means by which less academically gifted students may end up in a Cambridge College, establishing a “feast” fund, the interest income on which pays for a dinner for the entire college, including four courses and wines, in perpetuity, might just do it – but there is no guarantee – paying for a new chapel, total renovation of an existing edifice or even endowing a perpetual chair, are other explorable avenues for the parent of a less gifted but socially adequate student.) Just like Harvard, there are bursary funds available for exceptional students of meagre means and an infrastructure of support for them.

The purpose of these universities existence, however, is not to generate jobs for academics and administrators, but to perpetuate a constant search for excellence and adventure in intellectual and academic advancement. New ZEaland Universities could do much worse than adopt this as their singular goal.

2. Polytechnics/Institutes of Technology

Multiple Technical Applications (Poly Technic s) – a wonderful concept that over the years has become lost in the desires of many to rule and/or govern an ever expanding domain. As far as I can ascertain, the original purpose of a polytechnical college was to bring together from the original trades-schools development and transfer of a theoretical understanding and underpinning, of the practical skills of trades-people (i.e. those who practiced a set of skills recognised and certified by the Companies and Guilds of the City of London). This role was expanded over the years to embrace ‘trades’ that have not formed city companies or guilds but which instead formed ‘colleges’ that governed their standards of practice, e.g. the Royal College of Nurses.

In more recent times, Polytechnics in New Zealand have expanded into the realm of granting degrees, and some ‘colleges’ have extended their reach to the point of requiring a degree prior to being licenced by them to practice, as opposed to the more traditional ‘apprenticeship’ approach to learning. This has led to confusion between the role of University and Polytechnic, and even caused competition between them for students of the same subjects, a condition far from desirable in a society as small as ours. One almost catastrophic effect of this approach to qualification has been the number of people who study a subject academically, to gain the appropriate degree, and subsequently find that the practical application of that learning is, for whatever reason, repulsive to them and so find themselves looking for a career for which their tertiary learning provides no foundation. Again, nursing is a very simple example of this, where the academic study of how to treat acute constipation, projectile vomiting and bed-sores is very different to the experience of actually undertaking that treatment. Many is the nurse, male and female, who on their first experience of being the recipient of a substantial ejaculation of blood or vomit on their person decide to change careers immediately.

The idea that a polytechnical college provides an underpinning of statutory and theoretical learning for those skills which are vital to our functioning as a society, in combination with on-the-job development of practical skills under the guidance of a mentor, is one that has significant value to New Zealand, and one that should be supported and subsidised by us for our own benefit. The idea that polytechnics should compete with universities for students of purely academic or intellect based subjects should be anathema to us.

3. Funding
Academic and intellectual excellence cannot be achieved in a circumstance which provides cash for a warm-body sitting in a lecture theatre or learning workshop/laboratory. The incentive is swayed from quality to quantity, and reduces rather than creates value. IN the same way, skilled artisans are not created from a purely academic base, they require development of practical skills in a real-world situation, which in turn requires an employer willing to teach and develop those skills.

The subsidy-for-all to tertiary education results in unrealistic income expectations as well as a supply mis-match of required skills. We have young people with the practical skills and desire to become nurses, a career suffering from a significant shortage of followers, who do not believe they have the intellect or desire to undertake a three or four year course of study for a degree. There are many potential artisans of other ilk in the same situation. We also have people of low academic interest and achievement (those who do not attain the level of qualification formerly referred to as ‘bursary level’,) who take themselves to university at significant cash-cost to society through subsidies and loans; while they will thoroughly enjoy their tertiary-student life-style experience and many will scrape a passmark, they will not add to the true skill or capability base of the country through their course of study, yet will expect incomes and life-styles commensurate with that of any other ‘graduate’.

Compare this with other, “less developed”, countries where tertiary education is viewed as a privilege to be earned, not a right to be taken up. Sri Lanka is an example of this, in that it is a country that despite significant financial challenge offers FREE university education to the intellectual cream of each year’s school graduates, and heavily (95%) subsidised education to trade/craft apprentices. They have a severely limited number of places in their universities, with the size of each course intake tightly controlled to reflect their national forecast of labour market demand, resulting in heavy rolls for pre-professional undergraduate studies (e.g. pre-medicine, pre-law, pre-accounting, etc.,) and smaller rolls for intellectual futured subjects (e.g. philosophy, art history, classics, etc.,). Perhaps the most important aspect of their approach to education of “professionals” (doctors, lawyers, architects, accountants, etc.,) is their view that such professional learnings must be done at Graduate Student, not undergraduate, level; akin to the philosophy of universities in The United States, The United Kingdom, Canada and, more recently, Melbourne University, thereby ensuring a full intellectual platform for these academic based professions. Certainly there can be no doubt that the competition for places in Sri Lankan, and other ‘developing country’ universities is intense, AND that their product is viewed as exceptionally valuable in other English speaking nations, such as our own. Indeed, it would be interesting to research the extent to which New Zealand benefits from the education system of Sri Lanka, especially as regards the import of their doctors to our health service.

Only when we as a nation see the QUALITY of our tertiary education system graduates as the measure of its worth, and are prepared to once again fully subsidise, with appropriate skill retention strategies in place, the attainment of excellence in academic and formal trade(*) qualifications, will we see our tertiary system fulfill our society’s true and total need for leadership in the professions and trades.

(* It must be noted that our current certification processes do not come close to being held in the esteem of the City & Guilds certification of the UK which is pursued by tens of thousands in non-UK commonwealth countries. Something which substantially depreciates the value of our societal investment in these courses of study.)

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

>>I wrote an extensive reply to your comment last night, but it does not seem to ahve appeared

Not to worry. I’m sure the opportunity will surface again in due course. After all, this debate has been going on at least since Plato.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Kjuv,
opps, I wrote an extensive reply to your comment last night, but it does not seem to ahve appeared; prehaps i pushed preview but not post .
Im to lazy to write it again.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

And even the good teachers find it hard to give the kind of service they would like to in classes of 400 or more.

Thought provoking post. The outsourcing-to-tutors model seems to work pretty well, and FWIW classes tend to get a hell of a lot smaller every year you progress.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Sapient:

Me thinks you want to ban the use of ‘intrinsic’ as many athiests would like to ban ”soul’ or ‘life after death’ . I am interested to know in what circumstances would you accept that ‘intrinsic value’ makes sense?

Kiore1:
Point taken. And your suggestion of ‘universities for post graduates (only)’ makes a lot of sense. I do feel that society should make a distinction between its polytechs and universities so that only a relatively small percentage end up at a university. Not really elitist per se, just a different function requiring far less takers.
I guess a quality university should provide inspiration to its students whereas a school (and, to a lesser degree, vocational training facilities) should provide guidance to its pupils?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

>>When I was at university most of the teachers seemed to be a bunch of intellectual snobs who thought that students were an interruption to their work, not the purpose for it.

Got that right! Almost all of mine were out-of-touch, conceited wa**ers. .

There’s nothing wrong with vocational training. It’s just that it isn’t suited to universities.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Kjuv,
I do not disagree with your comment, only with your use of the word ‘intrinsic’. Education has no intrinsic value, it has value because through education people learn to learn and they obtain knowledge. The ablity to learn gains its value from the knowledge one obtains which in-turn has value because of its instrumental value and the satisfaction we feel in obtaining knowledge because evolution recognises such instrumental value; more often than not for people whom learn for the sake of learning it is because of that satisfaction rather than the immediate instrumental value that knowledge has value, it is not intrinsic.
Once again, i feel that you know and understand all this just as well as I do, if not more, but that we differ on what we consider to be intrinsic. As to the value of education on the rounding of the individual and their use to society; certainly society makes gains as an individual learns to think and to utilise their knowledge, even if not dirrectly for the betterment of society, but i dont beleive that the idea of intrinsic value is strongly linked to such a notion, infact in your second paragraph you pretty much show why it is not intrinsic but because fo the value to society.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

I’m teaching a degree level programme at a polytechnic, though the final year has to be taught in conjunction with a university, and I am somewhat disconcerted by some of the comments about dumping vocational training on the polytechnics and keeping universities for the elite. Most of my students could quite easily hold their own at Auckland university, but at the polytechnic they are taught both the theory and the practical side of their degree, which is why they chose a polytech not a university.

The other thing about polytechs is the standard of teaching is much better. When I was at university most of the teachers seemed to be a bunch of intellectual snobs who thought that students were an interruption to their work, not the purpose for it. And even the good teachers find it hard to give the kind of service they would like to in classes of 400 or more.

In my classes I know all the students by name, and I can give them personal attention; encourage the weaker students, challenge the stronger ones and generally help them to become well rounded members of society. I am not anti-intellectual or anti-university, in fact I am proud of gaining a doctorate from New Zealand’s most prestigious university. But I also know universities can be very intimidating places for a lot of people. I would encourage students to do their undergraduate degree at a polytech and their graduate degree at a university.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Give me a tradesmin over a graduate any day. Trades can actually achieve something.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

jarbury 11-08pm – good post. SOmething i’ve been hinting at throughout.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

When I am thinking of value, I am thinking not only of employment, but of general value to society. A philosopher provides benefits to society, and so while they might not necessarily get a job, nevertheless, they shouldn’t be discounted. The millions of Psychology Majors are going to find it difficult to get positions when they leave though

So you refer to the “general value to society” specifically not on the basis of employment, but then finish by dismissing psychology majors on the basis that they will have a hard time finding employment? (incidentally i don’t think they do have a hard time – low unemployment etc, but they probably have a tricky time figuring out what they want to do, if not psychology).

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)