💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › anarchist-affinity-attacks-on-higher-education.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 06:24:07. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Attacks on Higher Education
Author: Anarchist Affinity
Date: July 26, 2014
Language: en
Topics: education, austerity, Australia
Source: Retrieved on January 18, 2021 from https://web.archive.org/web/20210118070454/http://www.collectiveaction.org.au/2014/07/26/attacks-on-higher-education/
Notes: By Mali. Published in The Platform Issue 2.

Anarchist Affinity

Attacks on Higher Education

The current Liberal government’s changes to higher education reflect a

neoliberal agenda, in that they are attempting to change the entire way

that higher education is thought of and organised in a ‘prosperous’

society like Australia. They are positing a series of radical right-wing

reforms that aim to create a market of universities, this will create a

class divide, largely excluding the working class.

To put it simplistically, the previous model worked in the way that once

a previous student earned enough, they could pay back their loans and

pay tax which would pay for the next generation, then that generation

would pay for the next through their taxes and then it would be paid

back, and so on. While this system still involved debt and an assumption

that all people who have a degree will earn more, it was superior to

what is suggested through the new system. This new system will create an

even worse debt burden for students.

However, it is not impossible for education to be free under capitalism.

It should be an expectation that the government make higher education

free. There are any number of fields where excessive government spending

are prevalent; the military budget is an example. Or the excessive

funding of the Australian Ballet School. The next obvious answer is tax

on the ruling class and corporations. The suggested new, de-regulated

system assumes that people attend university purely to earn more money

in their careers. This neoliberal conception of the individual pursuit

of education is at odds with reality, as people attend university for

various reasons. It also ignores all the manifold forms of oppression

that affect outcomes for students, placing all blame, and pressure

around failing or succeeding upon the individual.

If it is assumed that students only study to earn more, degrees that

lead to higher earning potential will be prioritised and those which do

not will decrease in quality or be cut altogether. We have already seen

the kind of choices made by universities with this in mind, what has

been devalued, defunded and threatened to be cut has been units such as

gender studies and indigenous studies. This is not a coincidence. It is

obvious that the system this government is working towards is one where

all universities are private companies with no funding from the

government that compete with each other in a market system.

De-regulation of fees is just the thin edge of the wedge. Supporters of

this have, and will, continue to argue that this will bring prices down,

however, the reality is that our university system will divide along

class lines. Currently Australian universities are of a high standard in

world terms, once deregulated, there will be a divide between “good”

universities and “cheap” universities. The quality of education will

decrease at these “cheap” universities, yet the quality will not

necessarily increase at the “good” universities. This is where the class

divide will exist.

As we have seen in recent years, all universities will cut costs by

mistreating staff; they will further casualise positions, keep wages at

a minimum and attack working conditions. This divide been “good”,

expensive universities and their “cheap” counterparts will create a

further class divide where only the rich will be able to afford the

“good” education. In contrast, the social mobility of those from low and

middle-income families will continue to be wrecked. The most alarming

part of this plan for higher education is CSP places for private

institutions, it is clear that this government want to make private and

currently public universities part of the same market. This is more than

likely to create what they call in the UK “cashpoint” colleges, rather

than improving the quality of education for the most people. These

“cashpoint” colleges take public money and abuse the loan system in

place to use students like ATMs; the result being empty classrooms in

some universities and over-crowded ones in others. As once students have

taken out loans to attend university it is only in the university’s

interest to keep them so long as they are getting fees: there is little

incentive for students close to burning out to continue. Thus, these

institutions value courses that will make money over providing a

quality, well-rounded education. The current model that is being pursued

by the Liberal party, is to take us as far down the market route as the

American university education system. We do not want neoliberal

education in Australia. We are all well aware from the American system,

the cost of higher education in America stops people from attending a

quality university, or going to university at all.

We reject that this is the best model, that Pyne idealises as the best

model for Australian higher education. At the moment, according to

analysis by the National Tertiary Education Union, a medicine degree

costs the ridiculous sum of $60,000, however with deregulation and

interest rates, it could cost up to $200,000. It is hard to work exactly

how much a degree will cost as it will be up to the discretion of each

university, but it guaranteed to be to the detriment of university

students and staff.

This new model will reinforce the growing disparity between Group of

Eight universities, and other tertiary institutions. Universities such

as those in the Go8 can more readily capitalise on a prestigious

reputation and will outpace other universities in a price gap, narrowing

the options low-income students have as prices diverge. This, in turn,

will cause inequality between universities, not only in what is

available to students, but also in funding to these universities –

universities with higher fees will be better funded, however, better

resources cannot be promised, as universities will consider themselves

more of a company, therefore their concern will be in profit not

education quality.

There is also a less publicised aspect on the issue of privatising

education in Australia, that is how women will be affected with these

changes. Due to the socialisation of gender in relation to work, women

currently dominate total enrolments in the humanities compared to other

degrees such as engineering and the sciences. As outlined above, the

systemic undermining of less profitable degrees such as the humanities

will lead to the disproportionate decrease in women who attend

university. Plus, as total debt increases with time, this will

negatively effect women, who are more likely to take time off work due

family commitments (also due to socialisation), which will increase the

amount and amount of time to pay off their debts.

The move to this explicitly neoliberal mode of tertiary education may

fall under the radar of many Australians: this is because changes to

student loans are expected, going by international trends, the main

concern is the privatisation of education. We can see that there is an

underlying agenda to move to a model which exacerbates unequal

opportunities for a broad range of students, particularly those who come

from low income, rural, indigenous backgrounds and international

students (who are already treated as “cashpoints” and forced to live in

poverty). Education needs to be preserved as an opportunity for all.

Education should be free for all.