Standing Committee on Employment, Education 
        and Workplace Relations 
      
      This document has been scanned from the original printed submission. 
        It may contain some errors 
      
Submission 17
      THE AUSTRALIAN ACADEMY OF THE HUMANITIES INCORPORATED BY ROYAL CHARTER
       
      Dear Mr McMahon
      INQUIRY INTO THE APPROPRIATE ROLES OF INSTITUTES OF TECHNICAL AND FURTHER 
        EDUCATION
      In response to the Committee's invitation of 17 September 1997, this 
        Academy provides the enclosed written submission on the above topic.
      As the Committee may be aware, the Australian Academy of the Humanities 
        has recently submitted to the Australian Research Council a Strategic 
        Disciplinary Review on Research and Research Training in the Humanities. 
        Our Strategic Review contains further information on the role of a 
        university with reference to the Humanities. In particular the essay on 
        The Idea of a University addresses what a university is and gives 
        indications of where the lines of demarcation might fall.
      If you require any further information please contact me.
      Yours sincerely
      Dr David H Bennett
      Executive Director
      22 October, 1997
       
      INQUIRY INTO THE APPROPRIATE ROLES OF INSTITUTES OF TECHNICAL AND FURTHER 
        EDUCATION
      Submission by the Australian Academy of the Humanities
      to the
      House of Representatives Standing Committee on Employment, Education 
        and Training
      Introduction
      The Australian Academy of the Humanities' Royal Charter states, "The 
        objects and the purposes for which the Academy is hereby constituted are 
        the advancement of scholarship and of interest in and understanding of 
        the Humanities... and for that purpose (a) To advance knowledge of the 
        Humanities." Our concern for the Humanities extends to all levels 
        of education and extends to Humanities courses in institutes of technical 
        and further education as well as universities.
      Distinctions and Similarities
       
      The distinctions and similarities that can be made regarding the roles 
        of institutes of technical and further education (TAFEs) and the roles 
        of universities are of kind and degree, but do not provide a sharp line 
        of demarcation. Primarily this is because TAFEs and universities both 
        provide tertiary education and because both provide a range of overlapping 
        courses and topics.
      If there was ever a sharp line of demarcation, the amalgamations of the 
        late 1980s and early 1990s blurred it. The abolition of the binary system 
        and the establishment of the unified national system overlapped the roles 
        of TAFEs and universities to a greater extent than ever before. For example, 
        this policy resulted in a number of colleges of advanced education, institutes 
        of technology, or other institutes of technical and further education 
        amalgamating with universities (eg, Roseworthy Agricultural College becoming 
        a campus of the University of Adelaide) or converting these institutions 
        into new universities (eg, Canberra College of Advanced Education [CCAE] 
        became the University of Canberra).
      Despite the overlap blurring the distinctions in the roles of universities 
        and TAFEs, distinctions can be made, particularly distinctions of degree. 
        Starting with an overall characterisation of the role of universities, 
        the Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee (AVCC) makes the following 
        generic statements about Australian universities.
      1. The role of Australia's universities is the creation, preservation 
        and transmission of knowledge.
      2. Besides undergraduate teaching, the universities' roles include research, 
        postgraduate education, consultancy and the provision of expert advice 
        and comment on issues of national and international importance.
      3. Australia has a unified national system of universities, of which 
        diversity and autonomy are central features. Each institution has the 
        freedom to specify its own mission and purpose, modes of teaching and 
        research, constitution of the student body and the range of educational 
        programs. (AVCC WWW Home Page, numbers added)
      Point 1, universities and TAFEs share the roles of preservation and transmission 
        of knowledge, but universities either distinctly or to a greater degree 
        create knowledge. If the creation of knowledge is a product of research, 
        universities have a greater role in research than TAFEs, if for no other 
        reason, than that universities have a broader range of research areas, 
        the strongest defining feature of university research is its diversity 
        of form and outcome.
      Point 2, universities and TAFEs share the role of undergraduate teaching 
        (nevertheless, even within the realm of undergraduate teaching distinctions 
        can be made as indicated in point 3), but postgraduate education is predominantly 
        a role of universities. Postgraduate education involves providing supervision 
        to appropriate standards, a conducive research environment, and research 
        infrastructure. Few, if any, TAFEs are equipped to provide this combination 
        of qualities.
      Point 3, the diversity and autonomy of universities is greater than TAFEs, 
        although the mergers greatly eroded the autonomy of the pre-1987 universities. 
        Among other reasons, this is because, in the words of Department of Employment, 
        Education, Training and Youth Affairs (DEETYA):
      
        The Commonwealth Government's higher education program is designed 
          to support a diverse and accessible higher education sector of international 
          standing meeting Australia's social and economic needs. Australian higher 
          education institutions are the principal providers of education in professional 
          and academic fields. (DEETYA Home Page)
      
While it is the case that international students attend TAFEs, the international 
        standing of Australian higher education is founded on its universities. 
        The provision of education in "professional and academic fields" 
        is the role of universities, whereas, the mission statements of TAFEs, 
        for example the Hobart Institute of Technical and Further Education (HIT), 
        are more oriented to vocational education and training:
      
        The Institute's primary role is as the largest provider of vocational 
          education and training to Tasmanians at trainee, apprenticeship, certificate 
          and diploma levels. It also has an articulation arrangement with the 
          University of Tasmania. (HIT Home Page)
      
The role of universities is to provide the bulk of education in "professional 
        and academic fields", while the role of TAFEs is to provide the bulk 
        of education in "vocational education and training".
      The level of certification between TAFEs and universities illustrates 
        another difference of degree. TAFEs normally provide certificates and 
        diplomas, whereas universities provide diplomas and degrees, including 
        postgraduate degrees. Even this distinction at the undergraduate level 
        is becoming blurred, at least some TAFEs are moving in the direction of 
        awarding diplomas. Flinders Street TAFE in Adelaide is offering degrees 
        to Honours level in a variety of musical fields.
      Taken together these last two points make an important assertion about 
        the appropriate role of institutes of technical and further education. 
        They meet an important and significant need to provide "vocational 
        education and training" at the appropriate level and duration. Many 
        students neither want nor require the types or range of proficiencies 
        taught by universities nor to spend the time normally required to obtain 
        a degree. This difference is brought out in Arvid Petersen's (Managing 
        Director, Education and Training Australia Pty Limited) submission to 
        the Review of Higher Education Funding and Policy:
      
        A university is not a training institution and service provider of 
          vocational skills and should not aim to be. Fundamental differences 
          exist in the objectives of each. A university is locally based but globally 
          connected to peer groups concerned with the advancement of knowledge. 
          A university thus contributes to the generation of new knowledge and 
          thinking, wherever it is.
        A vocationally-oriented training college, ... on the other hand, concerned 
          with the applications of technologies and knowledge in the interests 
          of local commerce and industry. The test of their success is in meeting 
          the changing skill needs of industry through the successful placement 
          in employment of their trained graduates. Vocationally-oriented institutions 
          are thus positioned at the entry level to various career paths. In this 
          way, they may, along with other school-based routes, also provide training 
          and course content which is at an appropriate entry-level for universities 
          themselves.
      
The last point brings out a significant contrast between the roles of 
        universities and institutions of technical and further education. TAFEs 
        are often channels or training grounds for entry into universities, as 
        in the example of HIT, whereas the reverse is not the case, although a 
        student who has completed a university degree may attend a TAFE.
      In turn, this highlights another contrast between TAFEs and universities. 
        The type of study is different. If, among other things, TAFEs are channels 
        into university, then credit transfers from TAFEs to universities would 
        make no more sense than credit transfers from secondary level institutions 
        to university would and for the same reasons. At best, credit transfers 
        in either direction would have to be considered on a case-by-case basis.
      Nevertheless, now, more than ever before, opportunities exist for increasing 
        collaboration between universities and TAFEs. Articulation between the 
        two sectors is a fact of life in the 1990s, and present indicators suggest 
        that this will grow markedly over the next few years. We must remember 
        that articulation is a two-way street:
      
        - 10% of TAFE students have a university degree; and 
        
- 30% of university students have a TAFE qualification. 
      
This trend can only be seen as a positive development for both universities 
        and TAFEs. In the current changing fiscal and operational environment 
        for higher education in Australia and overseas, the sharing of resources 
        and skills can only benefit our students.
      Furthermore, this trend is matched by the development of courses in universities 
        that are increasingly seen as 'vocational', as opposed to purely 'scholastic', 
        in nature. Again, this must be seen as a positive step, since it cannot 
        help but dissolve the false dichotomy between teaching and scholarship.
      There will always be a place for the kind of education, however defined, 
        provided best by TAFEs, but the demarcation between TAFEs and universities 
        is no longer a clear border, but rather overlapping areas of influence.'
      Concluding points
       
      In conclusion, we make the following points:
      
      Dr David H Bennett
      Executive Director
      Australian Academy of the Humanities
      22 October, 1997
      
      
Back to top