Legislation before the parliament sets out the first five recommendations of the O’Kane Accord, including requiring HE providers to have a “support for student” policy.
What policies will cover and how they will work are set out in a euphemistically named consultation paper from the Department of Education, (more telling than consulting).
It’s a switch from the coalition’s now abolished policy that required students to pass half their subjects or lose their Commonwealth funded place. The onus will now be on institutions to demonstrate they have worked to help students – or else.
And the “else” is an intrusion into university and other provider administration, with the Department of Education reminding them of existing compliance powers, plus warnings, fines and accreditation at risk. This is separate to regulation by the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Authority.
The way to avoid such punishments is to have a policy that sets-out a whole range of aspects of students support, including:
- how institutions will assess suitability for study, especially among students who have “triggered alerts”
- support for students struggling with housing, finance and mental health
- help from academics and peers
- appropriate crisis and “critical harm response arrangements”
- resources, quality assurance and training to make policies happen.
Institutions will report to the minister on compliance and performance, “periodically” (census dates, twice a year or annually are suggested).
If anybody decided that it is all too much like hard work and the fine of up to $18,780 per student fine is worth the risk, DoE has thoughts on further incentives for acting through a name and shame campaign.
“Where a higher education provider fails to be compliant, the Department will consider publishing outcomes against the support for students policy. For example, that the higher education provider has been non-compliant against the policy and the reasons for the non-compliance. The Department could also consider publishing student outcome data for all higher education providers.”
As to anyone want to argue the toss, DoE remarks, “a quality higher education provider fulfilling existing requirements under law and meeting community and student expectations will likely already have policies in place to support students to succeed.”
This is a project the government needed to get going – the legislation covering the policy is through the Reps but the Senate sent it committee, which will take submissions, have two hearings and is expected to report mid-September. Engaging with providers in advance quiets provider complaints before they start.
