Extramural Presidents Blog » Exclusion

Why have Student Representatives?

ralph — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 02:29:03 +0000

What good do student reps do? A cutting question for a student representative. I expect that students would continue learning regardless of whether or not student representatives exist. But there is a case to be made to support student representation. In a committee today some papers were tabled that changed the learning Outcomes and number and weighting of the paper’s assessment. This is not normally a problem except that the paper was for 2012. Students may have already enrolled. Imagine their surprise when the find out the first assessment is not 10 but 20 per cent of the final grade, and that all the assessments had changes. Imagine their surprise when they learn – perhaps a few weeks into the paper – that the learning outcomes had also changed.

Student Reps support University communication to students

I made the point that students who have enrolled should be notified of the change. This was noted and agreed – the paper cordinator was instructed to ‘make it so’. This point would not have been raised if the student rep had not been at the meeting. This is a small point – but possibly significant to a few students.

At Academic Board the issues are University wide. With the roll-out of the eight year rule communication is again an issue for students. As your representative I have been vocal in my opposition to this regulation and now that it comes to implementation I continue to advocate for students’ interests.

The communication to students, regarding the eight year rule, will be released soon. If it had not been for your student reps this rule may have been more restrictive and the communication a minor detail. Following student rep involvement, I expect a clear explanation of the regulation changes and for the opportunities to negotiate a personal pathway to be included.

Failure to Engage

ralph — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 04:42:56 +0000

A trial of new regulations is underway. It is called the Failure to Engage Pilot.

Each year a number of students do not engage with their study. They may have believed that they have unenrolled or they may be enrolled as a full time student in order to receive an allowance and decide that one of the papers can wait until next semester. Whatever the reason may be, failure to engage is a problem for the University and students; they are prevented from offering or gaining that place at Massey.

It is likely that following the trial a University-wide policy will be implemented allowing for termination of enrolment in that paper of students who do not hand in compulsory assessments and fail explain themselves. What has not been determined it the downstream effect of being unenrolled from a paper. How the paper outcome is recorded on a student transcript and how this will affect future access has yet to be finalised.

I have no issue with the policy so long as there is a well understood process backed by excellent communication and record keeping. I will be suggesting that the impact on students should not be disproportionate with the often innocent offence of not coping with the workload. If you have a view on this, please reply to this strand and I will ensure your opinion is heard by Massey.

Dire Times for Extramural Students

ralph — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 01:27:20 +0000

LET ME STUDY!

Distance Education has fallen out of favour with our Government. For Massey students this may translate to missing out on a place if you are not enrolled with a qualification pre-specified. It may also mean that you cannot get a place if you are new student and it will mean strict enforcement of regulations; if you fail you are out.

In a sensible reaction to New Zealand’s Tertiary Education Strategy, places for distance students at Massey will be reducing. By the time this column goes to press the Massey University Investment Plan for 2011-13 will have been released. This investment plan will likely outline how Massey’s distance student numbers will reduce over the next few years by around 15%, equating to approximately 2,500 students. I expect that Massey’s plan will also address the Government’s focus on youth and Maori students by signaling an intention to increase the number of Maori students and the number of young students (those under 25). And with a $1.8 million boost in student services levies for 2011, Massey will also focus on further developing the academic and pastoral support for students with the aim of improving completion rates.

At the same time, Massey, internally and through its 2020 Strategy, has said it is committed to distance education and the student profile that accompanies that mode. This is not necessarily at odds with Massey’s current Academic Reform Project: rationalizing offerings, which can only be described as prolific and unsustainable, in order to better reflect the current needs of students. But it is at odds with the message that the Investment Plan carries. Clearly there will be a focus of cuts in distance offerings if academic reform is to fit the investment plan vision. So how can Massey’s internal rhetoric be reconciled with Government direction?

Can Massey create an oportunity from the Govt direction?

I believe that within this period of change there exists an opportunity to strengthen Massey’s position as New Zealand’s preeminent distance education provider. If existing resources are focused on developing the best quality delivery for the distance offerings that remain, and we can be reassured that other providers are being discouraged from expanding their distance programmes, then when the wind changes Massey will be in possession of the most advanced (both technologically and pedagogically) distance education delivery in the country.

Massey’s New Disciplinary Regulations

ralph — Mon, 22 Nov 2010 03:13:00 +0000

EXMSS represents you in Massey meetings

I have been giving feedback on the proposed Disciplinary Regulations since 2008. Good on Massey for getting students involved right from the start. There have been times when I have had to be clear and strong in my assertion that the system must serve student first and foremost.

At the November Academic Board meeting the revised disciplinary regulations for student misconduct were tabled. The regulations themselves follow the procedures of past years however the scope has widened to now include academic misconduct such as plagiarism. Two issues have emerged from the final draft which was passed through the board for inclusion into the Massey regulations: the role of the Registrar in deciding on the level of misconduct and the placing of offences on student’s transcripts, the latter of which was brought up at the meeting.

In the past cheating through exams or by copying assignments or other students work has been controlled by the teaching staff and often dealt with in differing ways across the University. Under these new regulations academic misconduct will now be described as level one, level two or level three, with L3 being the worst offence. Instances of level two and three misconduct will be recorded on a database that is available to Academic Integrity Officers (not lecturers) so that repeat offences can be noted. Level one offending is seen as an opportunity to teach the student more about the issue.

In the meeting it was suggested that L2 and L3 offences should be placed on the student’s transcript. I was vocal in opposition to this, as this could easily generate a range of negative consequences that would have repercussions far in excess of the ‘crime’ committed. After further discussion the idea was dropped.

Students discussing the issues at the 2010 EXMSS AGM

The second point is about the role that Registrars take in deciding the level of the offence. In supporting documents the level is described but there is no one to assist the Registrar in getting it right. The Registrar makes that call alone. When pointed out to the Academic Board it was agreed that further discussion should take place around the support the Registrar gets in making this call. It was also noted that the key stakeholder (students) will need to be clearly informed about the changes and possible consequences now that the stakes are much higher for students if anything goes wrong.

The student voice had an impact. Students will benefit from having a representative on Academic Board. Let’s just hope we can continue to keep students in the loop if we no longer have universal membership of the representational bodies that work this system.

Summer School Enrolment Close

ralph — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 01:18:18 +0000

It came as a shock even though the signs were there. I feel more could have been done to prevent this from happening and more could have been done to advise students in a more timely way. That said it is clearly the Government’s Tertiary Education Strategy (TES) that has closed Massey’s doors this summer. (There is a fantastic Off Campus article School of Hard Knocks discussing the end of open entry.) So what do we do about it? I am continuing to lobby the Government about the issue, basing my discussion around the submission to the TES I wrote last year and using the voice of the students to support my statements. I need you to reply to this blog so I can include your voice (anonymously).

Why don't they get it?

Massey is a big organisation and had begun the process of moving to a capped number. This was being done in a manner that was designed to reduce the impact on students. Good on you Massey. The Government then decided that that was not fast enough change and forced the capping of student numbers. The Tertiary Education Strategy is a Dog - especially for mature and part time learners. So let us now focus on the source of this misery and present a united voice in opposition. Tell us your story, your grief and we will get some public debate around this issue.

EXMSS feels it is unacceptable for New Zealand to have a Tertiary Education System that is unable to deliver the courses offered at the beginning of the year. What does that say about our Government’s vision and planning? Massey is not the only institution that has had to suddenly close its doors. For students this poorly organised, frantic dash to capped numbers, driven by a flawed strategy is completely unacceptable.

Over 25s become ‘Special Admissions’

ralph — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 02:46:03 +0000

University study? Think again.

Massey and other universities around New Zealand are being forced to introduce regulations that deliver on the Governments Tertiary Education Strategy. Forced because some institutions would prefer to maintain a student body that reflects New Zealand’s education needs, not some reactive strategy that fails to understand educations role in society and economic recovery.

The govenment, not satisfied with the impact of the TES are now looking to restrict access further for mature students. Imagine enquiring about a course and being told that your University Entrance qualification is not good enough. Sorry UE is not what is says. UE means you only have the right to enter university as a Special Admission.

That means you will have to meet a set of criteria that could be cuturally based, academically based or luck based. You will not know if you are successfull until the last minute and your place will gone if you fail or take a break for more than two years.

There is a window of opportunity to have your say. NZQA, who are reviewing entrance criteria, are calling for submissions. I will be submitting on your behalf. Please send me your views and I will make sure thay are included in the EXMSS submission.

It’s an Anti-social Plan, Joyce.

ralph — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 02:59:09 +0000

Access is no longer guaranteed

Tertiary Education Funding. Steven Joyce has described how it will work. Completions must come within the targeted range as described by the institutions investment plan. Otherwise the TEC will use their funding-stick; give the institution a beating for not being good enough.

The reaction will be sensible. Institutions will increase support for marginal students, using compulsory service levies to fund new initiatives. That’s good, lets all muck in and help those that need it most – a bit like how Student Associations work. Institutions will also be more careful about who they choose to study with them. They will choose those with good school grades who want to study full-time. They will be supported in this by the TES push to enroll school leavers. Students who fail will be shunted out the door to make way for the bright new things.

But there is a problem. If you are an adult the doors will be closed. If you fail because the course was crap or your mother died; you are out. If you are māori and are looking for a second chance at education you will have to count on… on what?

Unlike Labour I think National needs to let institutions control who has access. In the same way that the Government is looking for courses that match the institutions capabilities and New Zealand’s needs National needs to allow institutions to define their ideal student body and accept enrolments based on their own criteria. This may see Auckland University full of young bourgeoisie but will also allow Massey to continue to offer places for second chance learners who need to study extramurally.

National has not discounted changes to New Zealand’s open entry policy. National legislation removing open entry would be antisocial and bordering on racist. Antisocial because it is ignoring those with disabilities, students who study part-time for professional or personal development and the elderly who through education wish to continue to contribute to society. Racist because the group they are targeting effectively excludes māori. Māori learners in degree level tertiary education are predominantly adults who have entered the system through the over 20 open entry route. If National closes this door then how does their policy satisfy the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi?

National need to think again about the social impact of their Tertiary Education policies.

Unsatisfactory Acadmic Progress

ralph — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 03:33:49 +0000

What are the key issues for extramural students this year? Two key questions come to mind: will you have a place at university if you do not pass the majority of your semester one papers, and what new services do I get for the increase in student services levy?

Question One – a matter of access: Massey has stated in the Manawatu Standard that there will be normal access to programmes of study in 2010. There has been no change in the Unsatisfactory Academic Progress Regulations and there appears to have been no change in the numbers who are excluded for this reason. Massey has been using the term ‘managed enrolment system’ to describe their ability to control student numbers to the TEC but at this stage it appears that the change is in how the existing rules are applied. “With more rigour” as Steve Maharey put it. It would be worth reading the regulations.

The sun is setting on open entry to tertiary education

The key to ensuring your place at Massey is to pass more than half your courses and pay your fees on time. Keep in mind that this is a consequence of National’s Tertiary Education Strategy and high student demand. Massey is doing what it can between a rock and a hard place.

Question Two – rising fees: EXMSS has been working hard to both find out what services students value and to encourage Massey to deliver appropriately. A fair whak of the increased student levy will be focused on additional support for students who are struggling: this to ensure the Governments focus on completion is satisfied. To get the best from your Student Levy students need to find out what the Student Learning and Development Team offer. Pre-reading and Post-reading of assignments to offer structural and referencing advice, regional study seminars, open days and personal support are all useful. Don’t be shy, you have paid for it, make contact and be supported.

Postgraduate tuition fees are another issue as Massey is seeking to raise them by $1,000 per FTE. I will be discussing this with the University and will post on this topic soon.