I wrote last week that the TEU was challenging the closure of Massey University’s teacher education course in Hawkes Bay (run from EIT’s campus). The details are below.

The union wrote to the chancellor last week saying that it believes the decision is primarily an “academic matter” as per section 182(2) (a) of the Education Act 1989 and thus a matter for the council to decide, rather than university management.

Dr Ryan says that there have been several similar instances where a management decision to close a course has been overruled by a council after the council ruled that the decision was an academic matter rather than a management one.

“We are requesting that the matter be put before the council,” said Dr Ryan. “And, until the council makes a decision no action should be taken to discontinue delivery of the primary teaching programme from the Ruawharo site in the Hawkes Bay.”

The background material  is quite interesting.  In Sep 2007 there was a stoush between then Massey VC Judith Kinnear and the Council over the closure of an engineering programme in Wellington (covered in NZ Education Review 21/9/07). The VC planned to close it, arguing that it was her decision, but the Council decided to reconsider it. Of course, the VC and Chancellor have moved on since then and delegations may well have changed.

The other reference is a 1999 High Court case taken by the AUS (the TEU’s predecessor) against the University of Waikato (reference is CP.12/99 I think). The 42 pages boils down to a decision that a restructuring of faculties was deemed unlawful because it was not referred to the academic board (after reading all 42 pages, I wish it said more!). The academic board was deemed to have a role in advising Council on academic matters, regardless of the VC’s own power. Now that decision depended in part on the terms of reference set by the University of Waikato Council, but also on the provisions in the Education Act.

Looking at the cases put forward by the TEU, I’d say that they have a reasonable argument, but it obviously has to be considered against the full facts in this Massey case. The TEI is basically arguing in their reference above to the Education Act 1989 that the academic board should have advised the Council on this programme closure and that, in the absence of such consideration, the Council should reconsider the closure. I haven’t yet seen any evidence that the matter has (or has not) been considered by the academic board at Massey. If it does go back to the Council, I hope they look into the treatment of students recruited for this year when closure was actively being considered.