Counter images of Australia's movement to an undifferentiated higher education system: An analysis |
| |
| Authors: | David Mahony |
| |
| Institution: | (1) Faculty of Education, Griffith University, Australia |
| |
| Abstract: | This article is concerned with reactions to systemic change as Australian higher education was transformed from a binary system (of Colleges of Advanced Education, CAEs, and universities) to a unitary system of universities. It, in turn, was part of the much more influential role which government now played in higher education affairs. The  counter images relate to the expressive positions of those who were either opposed to, or had deep reservations about, this transformation.The counter imagists offer a perspective, worthy of study, of the impact of profound change upon higher education. Further, since reform, in Australia, had similar causes to that in other OECD countries (the impact of mass higher education, economic rationalism, an official view of higher education as an instrument of national economic revival), its manifestations in one national setting, and reactions to it, are likely to be of international interest.More specifically, the counter imagists were concerned about the loss of differentiation in the new unitary system: To them, it would affect total higher education delivery by making is less specialised, introduce an artificial egalitarianism into higher education affairs and have an adverse bearing upon the effectiveness of traditional universities, particularly their research contribution. There was also anxiety about direct role played by government in institutional funding and related management decisions, as well as the setting of a wider higher education agenda, through measures such as national priorities and social equity goals.The counter imagists, then, are those who took a prominent, but conservative role, in the debates during the half decade of great change in Australian higher education, 1988–1993, and were vigorous in their defence of the autonomy of universities. The article is introduced by placing systemic change in its historic setting, including the rise and fall of the binary system and perceptions of the university legacy. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录！ |
|
