|
|||
|
|||
|
|
| Key Sites |
| Statistics, Papers and Other Sites of Interest |
This brief contains background information on Commonwealth higher education funding policy, as well as providing links to relevant documents and sites on the Internet.
The most important sites on this subject are those of the Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST) and, in particular, the Higher Education pages. The following list summarises the higher education information available from the DEST site:
The single most useful source of information on current Commonwealth funding policy is the Higher Education Report for the 2003 to 2005 Triennium.
The Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee (AVCC) site provides access to:
The Government announced major changes to the higher education funding system in the 2003–04 Budget. Documents detailing these policies can be obtained from the DEST site, Our Universities: backing Australia's future. This provides a summary of the reforms, a policy paper, fact sheets and other information. The major funding decisions are described below. It should be noted that most of these proposals will require the approval of Parliament, as new legislation will be required.
From 2005 Commonwealth operating grants for universities will be based on a new funding formula based on student numbers and discipline mix. Funds per student place will be increased by 2.5 per cent in 2005, 5.0 per cent in 2006 and 7.5 per cent in 2007. These increases will be conditional on institutions complying with the Commonwealth's model for institutional governance ('National Governance Protocols') and workplace relations policies. Around 25000 marginally funded places will be converted to fully funded places in the three years to 2006–07. An additional 1400 places will be provided in 2007. The total additional cost of these measures will be $139 million in 2004–05, $252 million in 2005–06 and $384 million in 2006–07.
From 2004 the Government is providing $122.6 million over four years to incorporate a regional loading into the Commonwealth Grants Scheme. Students attending regional campuses will attract additional payments for the institution depending upon the location and size of the campus.
From 2005, institutions in receipt of Commonwealth supported places will determine their own student contribution level for each course they offer within ranges set by the Commonwealth. Currently there are three HECS bands, each with a fixed rate of student contribution. From 2005 these fixed rates will be replaced by ranges. The top of these ranges will be 30 per cent higher than the projected level of HECS for each band for 2005 under current arrangements. The bottom of each range will be $0. Institutions will be able to set the student contribution at any point within these ranges. In addition, a fourth band will be established called National Priorities, which will consist of education and nursing courses. The range for this band will be from $0 to the current level of HECS for Band 1 ($3854).
The minimum repayment threshold for HECS will be raised to $30 000 by removing the two bottom repayment bands. This means that those with a HECS debt will start paying 4 per cent of their income when they reach $30 000, whereas they now pay 3 per cent when their income reaches $24 365. In addition, the maximum rate of repayment will be raised to 8 per cent where income exceeds $60 000 (the top rate is currently 6 per cent where incomes exceeds $43 859). The Government has also reduced the discounts for upfront payments (from 25 to 20 per cent) and voluntary repayments (from 15 to 10 per cent).
Domestic students paying full fees for undergraduate courses will have access to an income contingent loan scheme (FEE-HELP). Loans will also be available for students who wish to study overseas (OS-HELP). There will be a scholarship scheme to assist low SES and indigenous students with higher education costs (the Commonwealth Education Costs Scholarship), and one to assist students from rural and isolated areas who have to move in order to study (the Commonwealth Accommodation Scholarship).
On 26 June 2003 the Senate referred the budget decisions to the Employment, Workplace Relations and Education References Committee. The terms of reference and other information can be obtained from this page. The committee is due to report by 30 October 2003.
The AVCC has issued a media release and a paper, Excellence and Equity: foundations for the future of Australia's universities (pdf file) in response to the Government's policy statement. The AVCC strongly endorsed the thrust of the policies, while identifying some weaknesses. These included the lack of effective indexation, the tying of funding to major changes in governance and workplace relations, the increased capacity for Government intervention in university decisions and autonomy, and the need for stronger equity initiatives.
The Group of Eight, an
association of
The National Tertiary Education Union has strongly criticised the package. Media releases on the subject can be obtained from this page. The NTEU also has a page of documentation relating to the Higher Education Review.
The Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations (CAPA) has opposed the increases in fees, interest rates and industrial relations measures. Media releases on these subjects can be obtained from this page.
The National Union of Students has announced a campaign to oppose the package.
The Budget decisions were informed by a review of higher education policy, which was announced by the Minister for Education, Science and Training, the Hon. Dr Brendan Nelson, in April 2002. The review carried out 49 forums in all capital cities between 13 August and 25 September 2002. Seven issues papers were published and a total of 728 submissions were received. The papers were as follows:
Media releases associated with the review can be obtained from this page.
In December 2002 the Productivity Commission released its research report, University Resourcing: Australia in an international context (pdf file). The report was requested by the Government as an input into the Review of Higher Education. It compared 11 Australian universities with 26 universities from nine other countries. Its major conclusions were as follows:
Under the Constitution the provision of educational services (including universities) is a responsibility of State Governments. Section 107 provides that the States will retain those powers that they had before the establishment of the Commonwealth, unless the Constitution exclusively vested the power in the Commonwealth. As the Constitution does not exclusively vest the power to make laws regarding education with the Commonwealth, this power remains with the States. However section 51 of the Constitution, which lists those matters for which the Commonwealth may make laws, does refer to the provision of 'benefits to students' (s. 51xxiiiA). This amendment to the Constitution was inserted in 1946 to enable the Commonwealth to continue to provide welfare benefits, including income support for students. Under s. 51xxxix the Commonwealth can also make laws with regard to 'matters incidental to the execution of any power' vested by the Constitution. The extent to which the 'benefits to students' head of power and the 'matters incidental' provision could be used as a basis for broad Commonwealth actions in the education area is a matter for debate.
Under section 96 of the Constitution the Commonwealth can grant financial assistance to a State on such terms and conditions as the Parliament thinks fit. This has been the traditional vehicle for Commonwealth assistance for educational activities conducted by the States. Grants to the States for universities commenced in 1951 and for schools in 1964. However, since the passage of the Higher Education Funding Act 1988 the Commonwealth has provided financial assistance directly to universities rather than through the States. The constitutionality of this arrangement has not been tested in the courts, although it would presumably be justified on the basis of the Commonwealth's appropriations power (s. 81).
The Commonwealth also has power to make laws with regard to 'trading or financial corporations' (s. 51xx). As universities are generally corporate bodies then it might be argued that this corporations power could be used as a basis for Commonwealth legislation concerning their activities.
In March 1950 the Menzies Government appointed a committee (the Mills Committee) to report on the finances of universities. It recommended that the Commonwealth Government contribute towards the universities' recurrent expenditure. This was accepted and subsequent States Grants (Universities) Acts of 1951, 1953, 1955, 1956 and 1957 provided financial assistance to the States for the running expenses of universities, on the condition that the level of university income from State grants and fees was maintained at certain levels. The Mills Committee, on the basis of weighted student numbers, allocated each university a 'first level' grant for which they could qualify by receiving a minimum income of State grants and fees. Universities could also qualify for a 'second level' Commonwealth grant equivalent to £1 for every £3 of State grants and fees above the set minimum income.
Continuing concern over the condition of the universities led Prime Minister
The creation of a permanent body to oversee the distribution of grants to universities resulted in a more sophisticated approach to recurrent funding. The method of assessment used by the Commission involved the estimation of the fixed elements of expenditure on the teaching and research components of total expenditure for each major faculty and the marginal expenditures (that is, the extra expenditure involved in enrolling an additional student) in major faculty groups. The remaining items of expenditure covering central administration, the library and the maintenance of physical facilities were assessed in terms of a fixed component and a component varying with expenditure on teaching and research.
The AUC developed a formula incorporating these factors and this continued to be used in the 1970s and early 1980s by the AUC's successor, the Tertiary Education Commission. The precise nature of this formula was not disclosed in the reports of these bodies and it was not until 1993 that it was published.
In August 1961, at the request of the AUC, the Government established
the Committee on the Future of Tertiary Education in
In March 1973 the Prime Minister wrote to the State Premiers proposing that the Commonwealth assume full financial responsibility for universities, colleges of advanced education and teachers' colleges. This would occur in conjunction with the abolition of tuition fees. At the Premiers Conference and Loan Council Meeting of 28–29 June 1973 the States accepted the Commonwealth proposal. There was no detailed published agreement beyond the Statement by the Prime Minister attached to the Proceedings of the Conference. This statement simply noted that the States had accepted the Commonwealth offer to take over full financial responsibility from 1 January 1974 and that an amount equivalent to the additional grants for tertiary education would be deducted from the general purpose funds provided by the Commonwealth to the States.
The agreement did not entail any changes to the relative constitutional responsibilities of the States and the Commonwealth regarding universities and other higher education institutions. However, the Commonwealth's assumption of funding responsibility gave it a dominant position in the development of higher education policy. Through the conditions it attached to university grants it was able to determine the nature and characteristics of the system—most notably with the establishment of the Unified National System (UNS) and the introduction of the Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) in 1989.
Commonwealth assistance for the university and advanced education sectors after 1974 continued in the form of triennial grants under States Grants legislation, with the level and distribution of grants based on recommendations by the University and Advanced Education Commissions. However, in May 1975 the Government announced that it would merge the two commissions. Another major change occurred with the 1975 Budget, when the Government stated that 1976 would be a year outside the normal triennial round and issued guidelines to the Commissions stipulating the funds available for the sectors.
These developments continued with the Fraser Government. In June 1977 the two higher education commissions (as well as the Technical and Further Education Commission) were abolished and replaced by the Tertiary Education Commission (TEC), with subsidiary Councils for the three tertiary education sectors. While the TEC, like its predecessors, advised the Government on matters relating to tertiary education and administered programmes of financial assistance, its recommendations were constrained by government guidelines setting out broad policy objectives and financial limits.
The TEC continued the approach developed by the AUC for assessing the general recurrent grant for each university. This involved consideration of the following factors:
In the advanced education sector TEC determined the total number of students and their mix in terms of institution and fields and levels of study after consultation with State authorities. The allocation of funds to institutions was generally in accordance with the recommendations of these authorities.
Most recurrent funds for institutions in both sectors continued to be provided in the form of 'block grants' for general purposes (i.e. subdivision of the allocation remained the responsibility of the institution itself), while capital grants were provided for specific building projects (whose priority was determined by the TEC).
In April 1988 the Minister for Employment, Education and Training (
The new Board would not make annual recommendations on the allocation of grants to institutions and would have no responsibility for programme delivery. These tasks became the responsibility of the Department. Only the Australian Research Council (ARC), with its specialist role of recommending grants for research projects, retained a direct role in higher education funding processes. NBEET was later abolished.
Since the Commonwealth assumed responsibility for funding higher education in 1974, responsibility for the allocation and administration of grants gradually shifted from statutory commissions representing the sector to the Minister and the Department. While this development has often been criticised by stakeholders in the sector, it has nevertheless continued under both Labor and Coalition governments as they try to ensure that higher education policy and funding requirements remain consistent with their overall social and economic objectives. Ministerial authority was ultimately entrenched with the passage of the Higher Education Funding Act 1988, which enabled the establishment of the Unified National System and this legislation remains the basis for Commonwealth involvement in the sector.
The Unified National System (UNS) was introduced in 1989 following the publication of the White Paper Higher Education A Policy Statement in July 1988. The distinction between the universities and colleges of advanced education was abolished. All institutions could become members of the UNS if they met certain size criteria (a minimum of 2000 equivalent full-time student units, or EFTSU). Membership of the UNS was necessary if an institution was to be eligible for the full range of Commonwealth grants. Non-members would be funded on a contract basis for teaching purposes only. This led to a significant reduction in the number of institutions through amalgamations: from 75 Commonwealth funded separate institutions in 1989 to 36 members of the UNS and 8 non-members in 1991.
The White Paper also introduced significant changes in funding procedures:
The statutory basis for the Unified National System was the Higher Education Funding Act 1988. The Act provided grants of financial assistance to higher education institutions, and established the Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS). The Minister's Second Reading Speech can be obtained here. The Act remains the basis for Commonwealth funding of higher education institutions.
The Act represented a fundamental change in Commonwealth funding policies. It made institutional funding a direct Ministerial responsibility and established a structure to ensure that institutions were responsive to policy guidelines (the 'education profiles' process). Under this process, individual institutions negotiate agreements with the Department which form the basis for their funding. Section 14 of the Higher Education Funding Act requires higher education institutions to submit education profiles in an approved form as determined by the Minister after consultation with the institution. Whereas the States Grants (Tertiary Education Assistance) Acts had stipulated specific operating grants for individual universities, the Higher Education Funding Act 1988 simply provided that an institution should receive 'such amount as the Minister determines having regard to the education profile of the institution' (s. 15), and set global maxima for this discretionary funding.
The new system was also open to the charge that it could be subject to political manipulation and a lack of accountability. Unlike Commonwealth funding for schools, which is governed by known formulae and public processes, grants for higher education institutions were to be determined largely in confidential negotiations without the benefit of fixed arithmetic criteria. To safeguard against possible abuse of this process the Senate amended the Employment, Education and Training Act 1988 to require the Higher Education Council to report annually on the operation of the education profiles process after consulting with institutions. All of these reports can be accessed from this page. However, the Employment, Education and Training Amendment Act 2000 removed this reporting requirement when it abolished the Council.
The White Paper on Higher Education had made it clear that there would be a new method for allocating grants to institutions that would remove the funding inequities that had arisen over time. It foreshadowed an analysis to identify those institutions that were significantly over-funded or under-funded under current arrangements, followed by phased adjustments to the level of funding.
The analysis of the relative funding position of institutions was finalised in August 1990. The report, Assessment of the Relative Funding Position of Australia's Higher Education Institutions, compared the actual operating grants received by institutions with notional allocations derived from a Relative Funding Model. The Model was a simple matrix comparing relative teaching costs across disciplines and course levels. The application of the model revealed a huge variation in grants per student across institutions, from 20 per cent above the model allocation (Northern Territory University) to 22 per cent below (University College of Southern Queensland).
The model was applied to the funding process by means of an 'adjustment package' negotiated with each university. These packages contained a mixture of funding and student load increases/decreases (depending upon whether an institution was over or under funded according to the model) that would bring each institution to within a specified bandwidth of the model's funding level by 1994. The bandwidth was set at plus or minus three per cent. Two institutions that remained outside the bandwidth in 1995, the Northern Territory University and University of Tasmania, were accepted as special cases.
The model was designed for a once-only application to redistribute recurrent funding between institutions. Since this base level was established, approved funding for growth has been added as appropriate. Once growth has been allocated it becomes part of the 'base' for the following year of the rolling triennium.
With the abolition of tuition fees in 1974, higher education institutions became almost wholly dependent on the Commonwealth for their operating expenditure. Funding legislation prevented institutions that received grants from charging tuition fees, and the Higher Education Funding Act 1988 in its original form continued this prohibition. However, student charges of various kinds reappeared throughout the 1980s:
HECS was established by the Higher Education Funding Act 1988. Under section 38, financial assistance is granted to higher education institutions on the condition that institutions comply with the requirements of the HECS. The scheme requires students to make a financial contribution towards the cost of their course. Students can pay up-front and receive a discount, or they can elect to have the Commonwealth pay the contribution for them and repay the debt through the tax system as their income reaches certain levels. A detailed brief on HECS prepared by the Parliamentary Library is available at this page.
The Higher Education Budget Statement of 9 August 1996 announced that universities would be able to charge full cost fees for Australian undergraduates from 1998 onwards. This only applied to students above the target number of Commonwealth-funded places, with the number of fee-paying Australian undergraduates being initially limited to 25 per cent of the total enrolment of Australian undergraduates in any one course.
Because of these developments, the university sector is now more reliant on student contributions than it was in the years before the Second World War, when the system was quite small and the Commonwealth was not involved. This is illustrated in the table below.
| 1939 |
1951 |
1961 |
1971 |
1981 |
1987 |
1991 |
1994 |
1996 |
1998 |
2001 % |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HECS |
11.7 |
12.8 |
11.6 |
17.2 |
17.4 |
||||||
| Student Fees and Charges |
31.7 |
16.7 |
8.6 |
10.4 |
0.0 |
2.3 |
9.8 |
10.8 |
13.4 |
16.0 |
19.8 |
| Commonwealth (excl. HECS) |
0.0 |
20.5 |
43.9 |
43.0 |
89.3 |
82.9 |
61.7 |
60.1 |
56.7 |
50.8 |
43.8 |
| State Governments |
44.9 |
43.7 |
36.3 |
35.7 |
0.8 |
1.0 |
5.1 |
1.9 |
1.4 |
1.1 |
1.7 |
| Other (a) |
23.3 |
19.0 |
11.2 |
10.8 |
9.9 |
13.7 |
11.7 |
14.4 |
16.9 |
14.9 |
17.5 |
(a) 'Other' includes donations and bequests, investment income, other research grants and contracts.
Sources: Selected Higher Education Statistics 1992; Selected Higher Education Finance Statistics (annual); National Report on Australia's Higher Education Sector, 1993, p. 75.
The Higher Education Budget Statement of 9 August 1996 introduced some major changes to funding arrangements for higher education. These were as follows:
The Coalition Government's 1996 Higher Education Election Policy stated that it would wind up the National Board of Employment, Education and Training (NBEET), while maintaining the Higher Education Council as an independent body reporting directly to the Minister. The Australian Research Council (ARC) was also to be restructured as an independent body.
In June 1996 the new Government introduced the Employment, Education
and Training Bill 1996 to abolish NBEET. Background on this legislation
can be obtained from the Bills Digest.
The
In March 1999 the Government again introduced legislation to abolish NBEET and its Councils, with the exception of the Australian Research Council, stating that its preference was for advice to flow directly to the minister, rather than being filtered through NBEET. The Employment, Education and Training Amendment Act (No.10 of 2000) received assent on 15 March 2000.
The Annual Reports and other publications of NBEET are available from this page.
The Government established a major independent review of higher education
policy with the focus set on the future of the sector over the next 10
to 20 years. The review was chaired by
The Report of the review, submissions, media releases and other documents can be accessed from this page.
The review process culminated in a Cabinet submission, which included the following proposals:
Dr Kemp's former higher education adviser, Mr Andrew Norton, has stated that the Minister 'thought the funding and regulatory system so bad it needed to be almost entirely scrapped, but regrettably, when he put his proposal to Cabinet they decided against any structural changes'. The Norton article is available in the Autumn 2000 issue of Policy, the journal of the Centre for Independent Studies, which also contains a number of other articles arguing for a more deregulated system.
On 18 October 1999 Dr Kemp issued a media release 'Higher Education Funding', in which he re-affirmed that the structure of tertiary education would remain unchanged.
In December 1999 the Government released Knowledge and Innovation: a policy statement on research and research training. The main features of this White Paper were:
The Minister issued a media release on the White Paper on 21 December 1999.
The AVCC
has responded to the statement, arguing that the policy statement
is flawed because of the Government's refusal to accept the need for major
additional investment in
The White Paper was informed by several reviews of DETYA research programmes and processes, namely:
The White paper decisions were implemented by the Australian Research Council Act 2001 and the Australian Research Council (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Act 2001. The legislation was the subject of a report from the Senate Employment, Workplace Relations, Small Business and Education Legislation Committee in November 2000.
In January 2001 the Government announced its innovation policy, Backing Australia's Ability. This contained a large number of funding initiatives relating to research programmes, including:
Descriptions of current DEST higher education research programmes can be obtained from this page.
On 9 November 1999 the Minister issued guidelines for the Workplace Reform Programme. The programme provided up to $259 million over three years to fund pay rises for university staff if the universities implemented significant reforms in workplace relations arrangements, management and administration. Guidelines, grants and media releases relating to the programme can be obtained from this page.
The Australian Higher Education Industrial Association was established in 1990 by higher education institutions to protect their industrial relations interests at State and Federal levels. Its web site provides access to a number of DETYA documents on the Workplace Reform Programme.
The Commonwealth monitors the financial situation of universities through assessments of their audited financial statements. Since 1997 it has contracted the accounting firm Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu to analyse these statements.
The initial report Financial Analysis of Universities' Financial Statements, 1993–1996 is available as a separate publication. The results of subsequent analyses have been reported in the section on 'Prudential Assurance' in the annual higher education triennial funding reports. These are available from this page.
Financial data for the universities is also reported in the annual Selected Higher Education Finance Statistics, the most recent of which relates to 2001 and is available online from this page. It provides a breakdown of revenue and expenditure for each higher education institution.
On 18 September 2002 the Senate referred an inquiry into the financial state of universities to the Senate Employment, Workplace Relations and Education References Committee.
In December 1999 the Minister announced the establishment of a new quality assurance framework for the higher education sector. The Australian University Quality Agency was established in March 2000 as an independent body to audit institutions and issue public reports. The Commonwealth, States and Territories consider the reports of the Agency in determining the accreditation status of higher education institutions and their eligibility for public funding.
Information about the framework and links to relevant reports can be obtained from this page. A history of the Commonwealth role in this area is also available.
The Higher Education Report for the 2003 to 2005 Triennium has many tables giving funding levels for individual programs for the current triennium.
The funding tables provided by the Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee (AVCC) are particularly useful because they present figures for the period 1982 to 2005 adjusted for cost factors. There are also a number of tables which contain per student funding figures. This permits a more accurate assessment of the actual resources available to higher education institutions and funding trends over time. The AVCC publication, Key Statistics on Higher Education (November 2002) reproduces some of this data. The following table summarises the AVCC's table showing Commonwealth resources for higher education since 1983, in constant prices.
| Type of grant |
1983 |
1988 |
1996 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Operating Grants |
3496 |
3878 |
5623 |
5576 |
5629 |
5706 |
5685 |
5694 |
5704 |
| Research Programmes |
89 |
121 |
440 |
479 |
474 |
563 |
690 |
755 |
829 |
| Capital Programme |
59 |
117 |
42 |
42 |
42 |
42 |
42 |
42 |
42 |
| Total |
3644 |
4116 |
6105 |
6098 |
6144 |
6311 |
6417 |
6491 |
6576 |
Source: AVCC, Funding Tables, Table 1. Operating grants include the capital roll-in, Research Training Scheme, and the Institutional Grants Scheme (excluding small grants). Research programmes includes ARC grants.
DEST, Selected Higher Education Finance Statistics contains a breakdown of revenue and expenditure for each higher education institution. The most recent issue, relating to 2001, can be downloaded from this page.
DEST, Selected Higher Education Research Expenditure Statistics contains a breakdown of research expenditure, by institution, field of research, type of activity, source of funds and socioeconomic objectives. The most recent issue, relating to 2000, can be downloaded from this page. Other data in this area is available from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, Research and Experimental Development Australia 1998 Higher Education Organisations (April 2000), although this is not available free online.
Appendix A of Statement 6 of Part 3 of Budget Strategy and Outlook 2003–04 (Budget Paper No.1) contains expense estimates by function. This provides a figure for the Commonwealth's total higher education expenses for each year, 2001–02 to 2006–07. Budget papers for earlier years can be downloaded from this page.
The actual unit costs of higher education courses vary according to the institution, discipline and the level of the course. The Relative Funding Model provided one method of calculating these costs. The paper by Sally Borthwick, Overview of Student Costs and Government Funding in Post-compulsory Education and Training (October 1999) revisited this approach to derive notional teaching unit costs for 1997.
An indication of the relative costs of courses can also be obtained from
the annual
HECS
and Fees Manual published by DEST. This contains indicative minimum
course fees for fee-paying overseas students. Institutions are required
to charge fees designed to recover the full economic costs of a course
with regard to teaching services, administration and capital facilities,
including overheads and common services such as libraries. The indicative
minimum course fees approximate these costs for three broad ranges of
courses. The following table provides these figures for the 1995–2003
period.
| Categories of On Campus Courses |
Type of Cost |
1995 |
1996 |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 $ |
2003 $ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law, Economics, Business, Humanities, Maths, Social Science, Education, Computing, Architecture, Design, Nursing Arts, Science (non laboratory based) |
Recurrent |
6 540 |
6 630 |
6 800 |
6 930 |
7 030 |
7 140 |
7 270 |
7 420 |
7 580 |
|
Capital |
1 250 |
1 270 |
1 310 |
1 330 |
1 350 |
1 380 |
1 400 |
1 430 |
1 460 |
|
| Total |
7 790 |
7 900 |
8 110 |
8 260 |
8 380 |
8 520 |
8 670 |
8 850 |
9 040 |
|
| Science (laboratory based), Paramedical, Engineering, Pharmacy, Agriculture |
Recurrent |
9 860 |
9 990 |
10 260 |
10 450 |
10 610 |
10 770 |
10 960 |
11 200 |
11 440 |
| Capital |
1 770 |
1 10 |
1 850 |
1 890 |
1 920 |
1 950 |
1 990 |
2 030 |
2 070 |
|
| Total |
11 630 |
11 800 |
12 110 |
12 340 |
12 530 |
12 720 |
12 950 |
13 230 |
13 510 |
|
| Medicine, Dentistry, Veterinary Science |
Recurrent |
13 630 |
13 810 |
14 190 |
14 440 |
14 670 |
14 900 |
15 160 |
15 490 |
15 830 |
| Capital |
2 400 |
2 440 |
2 510 |
2 550 |
2 600 |
2 640 |
2 680 |
2 740 |
2 800 |
|
| Total |
16 030 |
16 250 |
16 700 |
16 990 |
17 270 |
17 540 |
17 840 |
18 230 |
18 630 |
Source: DEST, HECS and Fees Manual (annual). It should be noted that the annual increases in these figures are reflections of movements in the Higher Education Cost Adjustment Factors index maintained by DETYA and not the result of annual surveys.
Bob Lenahan, Gerald Burke and Hing Tong Ma, Selected
Asian Economies and Australia: an overview of educational expenditure
and participation (1998). This report was commissioned by DEST. Countries
examined were
Tom Karmel, Financing Higher Education in Australia (1998). This is a DEST paper prepared for an international conference. It contains a brief history of funding and a discussion of the current pressures on funding structures.
Ken Back, Dorothy Davis and Alan Olsen, Comparative Costs of Higher Education Courses for International Students in Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States (September 1997). This report looks at tuition fee costs, living costs and total costs in the five destination countries.
Phil Aungles, Tom Karmel and Tim Wu, Demographic and Social Change: implications for education funding (May 2000). A DEST paper containing funding projections for the next twenty years.
The Department for Education
and Skills administers education policy in the
The United States Department of Education does not directly fund American colleges and universities. Its focus is on promoting excellence in education by collecting and sharing information and on helping families pay for college.
The New Zealand Ministry of Education site has a Tertiary Education page with links to policy documents and other information. The Government is currently undertaking significant higher education reforms.
In
Council of Ministers of Education has a page on post-secondary education with
links to research documents and other publications.
The OECD Education page provides access to reports, reviews and other documents. Comparative statistics can be obtained from this OECD page.
The International Comparative Higher Education Finance and Accessibility Project is a three year, Ford Foundation-financed project to study the worldwide shift in higher education costs from taxpayers to students. The project is directed by D. Bruce Johnstone at the State University of New York at Buffalo. The site compares tuition fees and other student costs in various countries, including Australia.
For copyright reasons some linked items are only available to Members of Parliament.
