|
BACKGROUND
The Council of Private Higher Education (COPHE) was formally incorporated in mid-2001 after functioning for several years as a loose coalition of private higher education institutions. It is a not for profit association incorporated in the Australian Capital Territory.
Under a Commonwealth-funded Evaluations and Investigations Program (EIP) project in late 2001, a sub-committee of COPHE completed a study on the collection of student and staff data for the private higher education sector. This was an important development enabling effective modeling of policy options, and was the forerunner of more complete data collection and reporting for the private sector.
In 2002 COPHE made several submissions to the Crossroads Review of Higher Education, in support of more equitable treatment of higher education students in the private sector. COPHE engaged with the process of legislation drafting and consultation, resulting in the Higher Education Support Act (2003), with the key introduction of FEE-HELP, an income-contingent loan scheme, and other policies advocated by COPHE for several years.
In 2004 COPHE focused on regulatory issues and approval processes for Higher Education Providers (HEPs) under the Act. One of the key needs identified was for a more robust and sophisticated student record system. COPHE worked with software partners Silverband to develop a web-based student record system, Paradigm.
COPHE has continued to grow and establish itself as the primary voice in private higher education lobbying and advocacy, with a focus on developing sould higher education policy initiatives for all sectors.
OUR PRINCIPLES
COPHE advocates policy which underpins the following:
-
Equitable access to higher education
-
Choice of course and institution
-
Access to student loans
-
Access for disadvantaged groups
-
Universal entitlement via a student-driven funding model
-
Quality assured
-
Diversity and responsiveness to change
-
Encouragement of private investment in higher education
-
Encouraging competition in higher education
-
Equity of access to government funding for research and infrastructure
-
Advocating appropriate regulation and corporate governance
1. Equitable Access to Higher Education
Higher education studies should be readily accessible for appropriately qualified students on an equitable basis. This fundamental principle entails support of students’ choice through equitable access to funding and student support including loan arrangements across both public and private higher education providers.
Choice of course and institution
This principle of equitable access implies that students’ choice of course or institution should not be dependent upon personal or family resources.
Students in higher education should be able to choose freely their preferred course and institution without their options being constrained by inequitable and discriminatory treatment of some courses and institutions in relation to access to student support arrangements. The Australian community’s encouragement and support of higher education should recognise that the social and economic benefits of higher education studies apply irrespective of whether studies are undertaken in a public institution, through a private provider or in some combination.
Access to student loans
All students in higher education should have the opportunity to defer repayment of their tuition costs through an interest-free, income-contingent student loan scheme.
For students, access to income contingent loans is a fundamental feature of Australian higher education, one which makes higher education widely accessible and provides equitable opportunities for all. Income contingent loans, which are an equity measure for students, encourage investment in human capital.
Student loan policy rules should be the same for different sectors of higher education.
Access for disadvantaged groups
Higher education participation for disadvantaged groups, particularly indigenous people, and those from low socio-economic status backgrounds, brings significant social and economic benefits. policy measures to address disadvantage should be available to students irrespective of whether the provider is a public or private institution.
Universal entitlement
COPHE advocates the introduction of a universal student entitlement or scholarship together with a single income contingent loan scheme that encompasses both undergraduate and postgraduate coursework in both public and private higher education institutions.
2. Quality
Students should have a public assurance of the internationally competitive quality of Australian higher education courses and institutions, through rigorous and transparent accreditation, recognition and quality assurance measures embracing both public and private sectors. This must be applied consistently across all jurisdictions with accreditation and registration arrangements that include mutual recognition.
3. Diversity and Responsiveness to Change
Higher education institutions should have the liberty to pursue distinctive missions serving the needs and interests of their students as well as their constituencies and wider communities. A diverse range of options in Australian higher education is to be encouraged. Institutions should be able to respond quickly and flexibly to social, economic and technological change in order to equip students for a rapidly changing world.
4. Encouragement of Private Investment in Higher Education
Excellence in higher education costs money, and students, their families and others should be encouraged to invest in their own education. Students and their families make rational choices in their spending on higher education tuition.
Other policy measures to encourage private support for higher education include expanding philanthropy with innovative tax incentives for gifts assisting non-profit private higher education institutions.
5. Competition
Private institutions welcome competition in higher education. However they seek policy arrangements that facilitate competition and contestability of higher education provision when addressing labour market needs.
The restrictions stemming from the MCEETYA protocols, that limit use of the terms “university” and “university college”, which will not be reviewed until 2013, disadvantage private providers offering courses accredited as equivalent to those taught by public universities.
Private providers delivering research, research higher degrees and postgraduate coursework programs are particularly disadvantaged.
6. Access to Public Funding
The production and transmission of knowledge in higher education institutions, both public and private, contributes to the social, cultural and economic capital of the nation. Institutions which can demonstrate that their programs contribute to the public good, should have access to public funding for infrastructure and resources for research to increase the intellectual capital of Australia.
7. Regulation and Corporate Governance
The effective provision of higher education calls for organisations that embrace best practice in corporate governance.
Currently, different regulatory agencies calls for different forms of reporting. The establishment of a single nationally-agreed standard for annual reporting by the governing bodies of private providers will enable them to demonstrate best practice. Such reporting, when viewed in conjunction with quality audit outcomes should reduce compliance cost, complexity and duplication in dealings with regulatory agencies.
|
Accessible Version
Imprint