PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES PICK UP STEAM IN AUSTRALIA

Private universities are a recent phenomenon in Australia. And it is pleasing to see that overall univerity enrolment is dropping -- as Australians wake up to useless credentialism

Demand for private universities has surged even as student interest in public institutions has fallen, and is expected to jump higher this year as private fee-paying students become eligible for government loans. Enrolment in NSW universities dropped by more than 5 per cent from 2003 to 2004 and was static nationwide, but Australia's two main private universities have recorded strong growth.

Student numbers at the University of Notre Dame, which is Fremantle-based but opens next year in Sydney, increased by almost a quarter from 2003 to 2004, adding about 670 students to its books. Bond University on the Gold Coast experienced an 18 per cent rise, with about 620 more students on campus.

There was a 15 per cent drop in student numbers at the University of Western Sydney, and a 2.5 per cent increase at Macquarie University and the University of Technology, Sydney. The University of Sydney recorded a 1.6 per cent drop, and enrolment at the University of NSW fell by almost 4 per cent. Many public universities have been reducing their intake to eliminate the widespread practice of enrolling above their funding quotas, but figures released by the Universities Admissions Centre last month show that fewer people are applying for undergraduate study. Marginally fewer year 12 students applied to enter university in 2005 than did the year before. Mature age applications fell by almost 6 per cent.

However, the executive director of Notre Dame's Sydney campus, Peter Glasson, said the Catholic university's "big growth area" was Australian mature age students. Notre Dame began in 1992 by offering only diplomas in education, adding programs gradually until 2001 when it began rapidly expanding its course offerings. Medicine will be offered in Fremantle this year, and at the university's planned Sydney campus in 2007. Next year in Sydney it will offer law, business, teaching, nursing, and arts. Nevertheless, Notre Dame was committed to a maximum of about 5000 students in Fremantle (up from about 3000 now), with the Sydney campus planned to rise to the same limit over the next 10 to 12 years, Mr Glasson said. Notre Dame's pay-as-you-go fees are only marginally above the deferrable charges of public universities, but Mr Glasson said the Federal Government's new FEE-HELP scheme this year, which lends private students up to $50,000 towards their fees, is likely to boost demand even more.

The Vice-Chancellor of Bond University, Robert Stable, attributed the private boom to small class sizes, close relations with industry, an emphasis on the quality of undergraduate teaching, and a more flexible approach. Bond offers a third semester over the summer when the public universities are on holidays, allowing "people who are particularly enthusiastic about getting out into the workforce" to cut a year from what would normally be a three-year degree, Professor Stable said.

A higher education policy analyst at Griffith University, Gavin Moodie, said private universities' strengths were that they were "smaller, they're more nimble, [and] they're more entrepreneurial". Mr Moodie said their growth was part of "a general change in social views" that matched the increasing demand for private high schools.

Source






ANTISEMITISM AT DUKE UNIVERSITY

The Palestinian Solidarity Movement is a far-Left and pro-terrorist organization that recently had its annual conference at Duke University. The university was forewarned of the nature of the organization but refused to cancel their hosting of the event. The meeting went off as expected with the usual outpouring of "anti-Zionist" hatred and advocacy of terrorism. But the end of the official meeting was not the end of the hatred at Duke. It soon became crystal clear that the so-called "anti-Zionism" was in fact just plain old antisemitism:

"And indeed the close of the conference did not mark the end of Duke's experiment in "discussion and learning." To appreciate what happened next, it helps to know that, unlike the Duke Conservative Union, the university's two Jewish organizations, the campus Hillel (known as the Freeman Center) and a student group called Duke Friends of Israel, had opted from the beginning to refrain from criticizing the university for agreeing to host the conference. In fact, in a demonstration of their own commitment to free expression, the groups publicly praised the decision. At the same time, and in the same spirit, they formulated a "Joint Israel Initiative." This was a resolution pledging that both they and the PSM would conduct a civil dialogue, would together condemn the murder of innocent civilians, and would work toward a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. On the eve of the conference, the Jewish groups also staged a "rally against terror."

But whatever hopes the Jewish campus organizations held out for civil dialogue were rapidly dashed. Representatives of the PSM refused to sign the Joint Israel Initiative, objecting in particular to its condemnation of violence. Not only that, but in the aftermath of the conference, even as the open anti-Semitism on display there was going entirely without censure, Duke's Jewish organizations themselves--and Jews in general--became the object of furious attack.

The first salvo was an article in the Chronicle by one of its columnists, a Duke senior named Philip Kurian. Headlined "The Jews," it denounced Jews as "the most privileged 'minority' group" in the United States and in particular bemoaned the "shocking overrepresentation" of Jews in academia. Replete with references to the "powerful Jewish establishment" and "exorbitant Jewish privilege in the United States," the article went on to characterize Jews as a phony minority that can "renounce their difference by taking off the yarmulke."

Mr. Kurian's column was followed by an even more intense anti-Semitic outpouring on the Chronicle's electronic discussion boards. "I am glad you have the courage to stand up to the Jews," wrote one correspondent. Another said he "was thrilled to read Mr. Kurian's belligerent critique of that long-nosed creature sitting squarely in the middle of the room that nobody is allowed to talk about. Yes--that elephant Mr. Sharon . . . and his treasonous cousins in America."

One posting, beside providing a link to an online article blaming the Jews for the outbreak of World War II, called for "an investigation into the Jewish community's practices and leadership during the past 150 years." "Whenever anyone says anything negative about the Jews," expostulated still another writer, "they go after them with Mafia-style ruthlessness. . . . This is the reason Jews are the most hated people on earth and why they have always been kicked out of every country."

Having welcomed known anti-Semitic agitators onto its campus, how did the Duke administration react when the aftereffects of the agitation began to play themselves out before its eyes? Responding to Mr. Kurian's article in a letter to the Chronicle, President Brodhead first condemned the "virulence" of some of the PSM's critics. He then pronounced himself "deeply troubled" by Kurian's sentiments, while offering assurances that Mr. Kurian "probably did not mean to . . . [revive] stereotypical images that have played a long-running role in the history of anti-Semitism." Reverting to his by now standard mantra, Mr. Brodhead stressed again that the central issue was the importance of "education through dialogue." "I am grateful," he wrote, "to the many individuals and groups who helped turn last week's Palestine Solidarity Movement conference into a peaceful and constructive event" and "proud to be at a school where difficult matters are dealt with in such a mature and constructive way."

It is all but impossible to imagine the president of Duke offering a similar encomium to, say, a conference of neo-Nazi rabble-rousers on his campus, or defending a parade of speakers dilating on the "diseased" history of, say, black Americans. It is in fact impossible to imagine Duke agreeing to host such debased goings-on in the first place. In that sense, the administration's appeals to free expression and dialogue were the purest disingenuousness".

More here

***************************

For greatest efficiency, lowest cost and maximum choice, ALL schools should be privately owned and run -- with government-paid vouchers for the poor and minimal regulation.

Comments? Email me here. For times when blogger.com is playing up, there is a mirror of this site (viewable even in China!) here

***************************