A competition

Posted By TEU on Feb 9, 2012 |


You may have noticed from reading this week’s Tertiary Update, that large parts of the official briefings to the Minister of Tertiary Education were kept from the public, “withheld under 9(2)(f)(iv) of the Official Information Act 1982”. We can only speculate what that advice may have been before it was blanked out, so that is just what we will do. E.g:

“The need to match tertiary education outputs to business requirements, and to generate greater business funding to replace dwindling public funding, creates the opportunities for many public-private synergies. For instance, the economy would be better served if businesses were able to require institutions to teach courses in ‘indentured servitude’.”

Send us your best guesses about what you think ministry or TEC officials consider too secret for us to read, and we might publish the best efforts next week (anonymously if you wish). Alternatively, we might withhold the best answers you send us under the Official Information Act. Either way, we will rustle up some prizes for entries that make us either gasp or giggle.

And now, for some of your entries:

(Feel free to add your own entries or comment on these current entries in the comments section below.)

[dropcap2]T[/dropcap2]ehehe if we pretend that something important has been hidden from them, it will divert their attention away from what we are really up to.

[hr]

[dropcap2]O[/dropcap2]ne of the Ministry’s goals is to break down the persistent myth that there are few early career employment opportunities, particularly for women. Of course, participation in the country’s oldest profession is demanding. A key challenge in tertiary education policy is matching the skills acquired by students with the demands of the job market. But if students can begin to develop practical expertise in venereal arts, it is clear universities can encourage students into well-paid and exciting job opportunities, where the benefits of workplace participation go beyond a short-term lightening of the Kiwi taxpayer’s load. The exercise involved will improve their physical fitness, saving the taxpayer even more in health costs in the years to come; while getting out of the dole queue will mean an opportunity to network, often with senior members of the establishment or influential young Turks. Since the work is a good fit with the demands of tertiary education; we recommend applying the principle to government’s student loan program. More business-friendly universities could incorporate procurement into their ‘career services’; retaining a percentage to offset the ever-mounting costs of study, while encouraging students to gain life experience. For students with children, the rise of the internet economy allows flexible work/study options from the comfort of home. Others, taking night classes, could call upon family members to provide childcare. In any case, since the wages are generous, childcare would be affordable. Nevertheless, we may wish to consider the 24% of youth who are currently unemployed. Perhaps sector employers could be induced to offer more work if the government mandated a lower ‘youth wage’. All in all, we need refocus education. No longer either a ‘hand out’ or a ‘hand up’ we should consider rebranding tertiary education as a…

[hr]

[dropcap2]T[/dropcap2]he businesses that have no money will fund the Tertiary sector that has no funding to sort out the students that have no hope with our current policies – but don’t tell anyone !!

[hr]

[dropcap2]D[/dropcap2]ecrease in the number of universities would be a good bet

[hr]

[dropcap2]C[/dropcap2]onsider selling certain Universities to national and international private enterprise.  Lincoln University, for example, could be sold to a Chinese consortium to use as a training establishment for future Chinese dairy industry workers, and other primary industry workers,  working on Chinese-owned farms in New Zealand.  This would remove the costs of Lincoln University from the Government books, as well as gaining the revenue from the sale.  Likewise, several of the Polytechnics and ITPs could be sold to private enterprise.  Nelson-Marlborough Institute of Technology, for example, could be sold to a consortium from the wine industry, which already has a presence on that campus.

Such a move would necessitate a change to the Education Act and as these organisations became industry-owned training staff for their own organisations, they would not need to be accountable to NZQA or funded through TEC, allowing the Government to reduce the size of these organisations, creating further budget savings.  Such a move would also reduce the number of New Zealand students actually studying in New Zealand, reducing the costs of student loans and allowances, as well as reducing the SAC funding budget line in the Vote Education.

[hr]

[dropcap2]C[/dropcap2]utting the number of Vice-chancellors and having one ministry-appointed CEO for all universities to be housed in the Ministry of Education so that all conversations with DCEOs can be recorded for punitive action.

[hr]

[dropcap2]W[/dropcap2]e have no ideas and John’s spent the budget on new carpet for his office, bugger, let’s just blame the Tertiary sector, say it their fault and make up some bull shit that no one understands – so it’s business as usual but don’t tell anyone.

[hr]

[dropcap2]M[/dropcap2]aking all the IP and IP Development  people at all universities redundant as the commercial partnerships will own all of that.

[hr]

[dropcap2]D[/dropcap2]isestablishment of all political studies departments.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email