Big rise in full-fee students in 2007 and effects (1 Viewer)

[klaw]

Big rise in full-fee students

THE number of students paying full fees at Australian universities this year is set to rise sharply as the funding squeeze on higher education continues to tighten.

Most universities are reporting big rises in applications from international and domestic full-fee students and this will translate into substantial increases in such enrolments.

There has been a particularly strong growth in interest from Australian fee-paying students who are not in the Higher Education Contribution Scheme.

Macquarie University has received a 75.5 per cent increase in applications from domestic full-fee students this year compared with 2006, preliminary figures show.

The University of Technology, Sydney, has experienced a 220 per cent increase this year compared with last year, the first year it accepted domestic full-fee students.

At Sydney University, Australian fee-paying applicants are up by 21 per cent.

But union representatives say there is a growing division between full-fee students, who are able to enter university courses using a lower university admission index rank as long as they have the funds to pay, and those who gained entry by academic ability alone.

Domestic students enrolled in full-fee courses can pay more than $20,000 a year.

At Sydney University the annual cost of a veterinary science degree this year is $32,256.

Growth in the number of international students also continues to rise.

There has been a 10.7 per cent increase in enrolments nationally from international students during the year to November 2006, figures from the Federal Government's Australian Education International group show.

The growth in international interest has been strongest at the University of NSW, where preliminary figures show applications are up by about 18 per cent this year.

At Macquarie University there has been a 5 per cent boost in applications from international students.

At the University of Western Sydney, applications from international students are up by between 2 and 4 per cent compared with last year.

More than 13,400 prospective first-year students changed their course preferences in the three days before the Universities Admission Centre's main round of offers deadline last week.

The first round of offers, in which most students find out which courses they have been accepted into, will be made on January 17.

Some universities have reported student confusion with some students putting down a full-fee place as their first preference to UAC when they should be putting down a HECS place first, using the other option as a back-up only.

Federal Opposition education spokesman Stephen Smith said Labor would not support full-fee domestic places if it were elected.

The issue has divided students, with those paying domestic up-front fees reluctant to admit it, Sydney University's Student Representative Council president Angus McFarland said. He said full-fee students were increasingly secretive about their status and could feel embarrassed.

"Students might feel ashamed that they got in a lot easier than others because of financial, and not academic, ability," he said.

National Union of Students national president Michael Nguyen said the increase in fee-paying places was a sign that universities were struggling financially.

"Universities are essentially strapped for cash and are struggling to maintain their budgets," he said.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/big-rise-in-fullfee-students/2007/01/06/1167777325490.html

Is it fair to assume that the CSP UAI cutoffs for most courses are going to rise due to this increased admission of full fee paying students? Should we expect the quotas for individual courses to rise in order to take in more fee paying students without sacrificing CSP places? Is this fair on CSP students who don't depend on their parents' income for university? How does labor plan to fund universities if they reject full fee domestic places?

 

[littlewing69]

This is fucked up.

 

[banco55]

I have no problem with this. We should have a smaller percentage of the year 12 cohort going to Uni anyway.

 

[klaw]

We should have a smaller percentage of the year 12 cohort going to Uni anyway.

Why do you say this? Even if that is the case, it should only have a significant effect on courses with low UAI requirements as people with high UAIs are far less likely to not go to uni.

 

[drewgcn]

I thought since DFEE students footed the whole bill, this shouldn't reduce the number of CSP places, only the DFEE UAIs (and/or quotas) would go up?

 

[Captain Gh3y]

The article states that universities have reported a rise in the number of people applying for DFEE places. It does not say anything about the change in the number of people applying for CSP places.

It does not say anything about a change in the number of DFEE or CSP places for any courses.

If anything that means it's possible that cutoffs for DFEE courses will rise. (It would be quite amusing if a course ended up with a higher DFEE cutoff than CSP)

It also gives no explanation as to why the number of people applying for DFEE places has increased. The first thing one might think of is that a larger number of people want to do courses that their UAI/equivalent does not allow them to gain a CSP place for, judging from previous years' cutoffs.

But this seems unlikely considering the UAI is a rank.

 

[volition]

If anything that means it's possible that cutoffs for DFEE courses will rise. (It would be quite amusing if a course ended up with a higher DFEE cutoff than CSP)

Is this even possible? What reason would anybody have for actually taking a DFEE spot if the cutoff was higher than the CSP one? I thought that the DFEE one would always be higher(even if only by 0.05).

This is, of course, assuming rational decision making (people preference the CSP course BEFORE the DFEE one), not that there's not much rationality in the HSC system anyway.

 

[klaw]

It does not say anything about a change in the number of DFEE or CSP places for any courses.

While the article doesn't say anything about changes in DFEE or CSP places for individual courses, it comments that there are increased places for courses overall:
"Most universities are reporting big rises in applications from international and domestic full-fee students and this will translate into substantial increases in such enrolments."
"National Union of Students national president Michael Nguyen said the increase in fee-paying places was a sign that universities were struggling financially.

I don't see how they can accept more DFEE students without sacrificing CSP places without more resources (lecturers, laboratories, equipment etc etc), and this is unlikely because purchasing new equipment is a long-term decision whereas this just recently came up but at the same time, I don't see why the media wouldn't highlight something like a decrease in CSP places.

 

[gerhard]

there wont be any less commonwealth places.
all that will happen is that more people will be going to uni.

the full fee paying people pretty much pay for the extra seat in their tutorial and lecture and someone to mark there exams + abit more, so the uni will take as many full fee paying people that apply. there isnt some strict quota on the amount of places which then gets divied up between hecs and full fee paying students. full fee paying students essentially create the extra space with the money they pay.

 

[klaw]

Is this even possible? What reason would anybody have for actually taking a DFEE spot if the cutoff was higher than the CSP one? I thought that the DFEE one would always be higher(even if only by 0.05).

This is, of course, assuming rational decision making (people preference the CSP course BEFORE the DFEE one), not that there's not much rationality in the HSC system anyway.

Assuming that people put CSP courses over the DFEE equivalent higher on the preference list, this is impossible. However, the article does state that "some universities have reported student confusion with some students putting down a full-fee place as their first preference to UAC when they should be putting down a HECS place first, using the other option as a back-up only."

 

[klaw]

there wont be any less commonwealth places.
all that will happen is that more people will be going to uni.

the full fee paying people pretty much pay for the extra seat in their tutorial and lecture and someone to mark there exams + abit more, so the uni will take as many full fee paying people that apply. there isnt some strict quota on the amount of places which then gets divied up between hecs and full fee paying students. full fee paying students essentially create the extra space with the money they pay.

Hmm then why is Labor opposing DFEE places? Doesn't it directly contradict with how Labor said that Australia's number 1 obstacle for future economic growth is our lack of education? Afterall, less people will be going to uni if it weren't for DFEE.

Also, if that is the case, why are there UAI cutoffs for DFEE courses? Aren't UAI cutoffs based on supply and demand?

 

[Captain Gh3y]

They believe our number 1 obstacle for more education is the fact that it costs money. So I guess by transitivity they believe Australia's number 1 obstacle for future economic growth is the fact that education costs money. Afterall, DFEE places can easily be replaced by your taxes. They've made it completely free before, all CSP places should be easy.

UAI cutoffs for DFEE places work exactly the same way; there just tends to be more of them and less people wanting them.

 

[volition]

Assuming that people put CSP courses over the DFEE equivalent higher on the preference list, this is impossible. However, the article does state that "some universities have reported student confusion with some students putting down a full-fee place as their first preference to UAC when they should be putting down a HECS place first, using the other option as a back-up only."

Actually as far as I know, UAC gives you both your best(highest preference) CSP offer and your best DFEE option anyway.

So in my example above, students' decision making matters where people will accept a CSP spot rather than a DFEE one in the same course if given both options.

Also, if that is the case, why are there UAI cutoffs for DFEE courses? Aren't UAI cutoffs based on supply and demand?

The UAI cutoffs for DFEE courses are still subject to supply and demand, but only between people who are competing for those spots. (Which means it is possible that the DFEE cutoff is only a tiny bit lower than the CSP one, if it's in high demand)

 

[Sprinkles~]

anything that means it's possible that cutoffs for DFEE courses will rise. (It would be quite amusing if a course ended up with a higher DFEE cutoff than CSP)

I really, really hope not

 

[klaw]

UAI cutoffs for DFEE places work exactly the same way; there just tends to be more of them and less people wanting them.

Now I'm confused, if full fee paying students fully pay for all the additional uni resources they require + even more and there are no quotas, why are there limited full fee places? Wouldn't the unis want as many of those people as possible as it would give them more money to spend?

Actually as far as I know, UAC gives you both your best(highest preference) CSP offer and your best DFEE option anyway.

So in my example above, students' decision making matters where people will accept a CSP spot rather than a DFEE one in the same course if given both options.

Ahh.. that's true, I forgot about it

 

[Captain Gh3y]

Umm, if there were unlimited places there could be 1000 people sign up for DFEE medicine or law at one uni :/

I really, really hope not

I don't think it's really possible. The article did hint that some people were making ill informed decisions regarding fee paying vs commonwealth supported places, possibly due to poor understanding of how cutoffs work. For example they might only put a DFEE place for a given course on their preferences because its previous year's cutoff was lower than their UAI while the CSP place was higher. In reality there's no reason to do that, but it's one way that the number of DFEE applications might rise.

 

[klaw]

Umm, if there were unlimited places there could be 1000 people sign up for DFEE medicine or law at one uni :/

While it might sound quite ridiculous, it would give the uni much more money to work with. Although the academic ability of the students is likely to be far lower, it should not be a concern to the uni and should not affect the value of the degree to employers as long as they set minimum academic requirements for the degree at a sufficient level as to ensure a sufficient level of understanding and knowledge for those who pass.

 

[ZabZu]

Hmm then why is Labor opposing DFEE places? Doesn't it directly contradict with how Labor said that Australia's number 1 obstacle for future economic growth is our lack of education? Afterall, less people will be going to uni if it weren't for DFEE.

I think Labor is against DFEE places because they believe people should get into uni due to their academic acheivements not the size of their parent's bank account. Also, the people with the most to gain from full-fee places (rich people) are Liberal voters, making the relatively disadvantaged Labor voters worse off since there would be fewer HECS places.

The Federal Govt should put more money into tertiary education because so many of the unis are broke. Even with the dismal amounts they give out, they force the unis to undertake industrial relations changes to receive the funds.

 

[klaw]

I think Labor is against DFEE places because they believe people should get into uni due to their academic acheivements not the size of their parent's bank account. Also, the people with the most to gain from full-fee places (rich people) are Liberal voters, making the relatively disadvantaged Labor voters worse off since there would be fewer HECS places.

The Federal Govt should put more money into tertiary education because so many of the unis are broke. Even with the dismal amounts they give out, they force the unis to undertake industrial relations changes to receive the funds.

I thought we've established that DFEE places have no effect on CSP places?

 

[volition]

Wouldn't the unis want as many of those people as possible as it would give them more money to spend?

Don't quote me on this one, but I think the government might set the maximum number of full fee spots available as a % of all the spots available. It's a political thing, so that the political parties can look like they care about people who can't afford DFEE spots, while making life hard for the universities.