Comments on: New Tertiary Education Minister – What’s Your View?

By: Paul Williams

Paul Williams — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 22:58:26 +0000

David, the advent of separate agencies is also a relevant consideration although I’m not entirely clear that it’s helped or hindered cross sectoral policy development. Perhaps portfolios are more likely to be divided up as a consequence of coalition governments too? Either way, my point was that the appointment of Joyce appears to confirm the trend that no single minister will have the full spectrum of education responsibilities.

At least in NZ, the NCEA prepares students for a range of post-school destinations whereas I don’t think the NSW Higher School Certificate does (that’s a personal opinion, and not in any way a professional representation).

Incidentally, I note that Grant Robertson’s taken Key’s comments on Sunrise this morning to mean that Joyce’s appointment signals changes to student loans. That’ll be a fractious debate.

http://blog.labour.org.nz/index.php/2010/02/02/what-is-national-planning-on-student-loans/

Also, I don’t know that savings should be the goal, I think it should be improving performance and getting clearer about the contribution of outcomes (and particularly research/tech-transfer). This ought to be something Joyce is suited to.

By: David Choat

David Choat — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 19:51:34 +0000

I’m not sure I’m convinced Paul’s point about Tertiary being a separate portfolio, either. I’ve heard the ‘loss of interface’ argument before and agree it’s a risk to be guarded against, but I don’t think it’s an inevitable consequence.

I would also argue that there are problems with having Tertiary as the (almost inevitably) poor cousin within the Education (a.k.a. Schools) portfolio. I think we saw that with the marginalised role that tertiary issues (and particularly non-university tertiary issues) had within the Ministry of Education ten years ago. I’d also very tentatively suggest that it has become a risk with NZQA now that oversight of the NCEA has become its make-or-break responsibility.

I also think the sheer breadth of the full gamut of Education (and the amount of face-time required) is beyond all but the most exceptional of ministers to manage successfully.

Moreover, we had decades of the portfolio being held in common – did that really achieve better interface than we’ve had more recently?

What do other readers think?

PS interesting challenge Darel, – maybe you could kick it off with YOUR top (bottom?) five?

By: Dave Guerin

Dave Guerin — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 19:24:40 +0000

Thanks for the challenge Darel. I will do something similar later in the month, along with some reader participation. This is a soft launch this week so I can try a few things before promoting the blog more widely and getting a bigger readership. By the end of the month, there should be enough reach to support a good conversation on spending priorities.

I’m not so sure that we’re missing out on that much on the school/tertiary split as it has been in place for a long time now. Tolley has been the only Minister to hold both areas since the 1990s, as far as I can remember – the last one was probably Wyatt Creech.

By: Darel Hall

Darel Hall — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 09:22:59 +0000

Welcoming new ministers is de rigueur. Then you should mention your top priority that is likely to align with the minister’s imperatives. Extra money, per se, seems unlikely. Me, I’d focus on a policy outcome that was cost-neutral or could save money – oh, and not some mythical amount in distant future-land. I mean next budget year because this gives you an opportunity to re-litigate for this budget round.

Following up on Paul’s comment, there are plenty of good issues in the secondary – tertiary interface area worth another look. One small one might be making it easier for good trades people to become “technology” teachers.

Maryan’s approach wasn’t too bad then. I agree that ACE is gone as far as this government’s concerned so her point may be taken as political positioning, but I’d argue entirely reasonable given she is Labour.

I also think there still is money to be saved in tertiary education. So my challenge to you Dave is to name the five areas where you think money should be saved. Perhaps not because they are the biggest dollar amounts, but because they are the lowest priorities.

By: Dave Guerin

Dave Guerin — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 05:40:23 +0000

Thanks Paul – great to have you launching the comments. That scores you a free beer from me in Wellington (pity you’re in Sydney!)

By: Paul Williams

Paul Williams — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 05:21:58 +0000

I welcome this blog.

I know little of Joyce, having not followed his career closely (from a far) but it nows seems likely the Education portfolio will be forever divided. That’s unfortunate since the intersection between schools and post-compulsory is where too many learners miss out.

Let’s hope he’s strong enough to withstand the inevitable pressures to simply increase the money.