Andrew, you are absolutely right and it is high time somebody spoke out against the ridiculous position that Universities should "pay their way" and operate like some kind of business. On the contrary, widespread tertiary education should be regarded as a national "good" from which we all benefit directly & indirectly as a country. The problem, I think lies deep in the national psyche, egged on by populist politicans of both parties and by the ratbag ranters of opinion pages of certain newspapers – that Universities are "elitist"; they are hotbeds of "leftist" academics; they are places where certain graduates like doctors & lawyers learn to get rich. Universities are national assets, not some superior "trade–school where the young learn how to get a job. Apropos this latter, I was invited, some 40 years ago, to a cocktail party in London given by Chase–Manhattan for their new recruits into international banking. All but one of them was an Oxbridge graduate in "Greats" because that very hard–headed bank wanted young people with a generalist education, not some vocational MBA or the like. Oh yes, the exception was my friend, and host, who had a brand new PhD in economics from Manchester.

"although the share of working age adults with a degree has tripled, the university wage premium has remained constant. Just as in the early-1980s, university graduates can expect to earn a cool 50 per cent wage premium over someone with no post-secondary qualifications.
...
Despite copious economic evidence on the benefits of higher school leaving ages,
...
from 2010 the majority of Australian children will face a leaving age of 17. ..."

Where is the economic benefit in paying 50% more for the same labour? No doubt there is a benefit to academic institutions by way of enrolment quotas, but slow-learners with degrees still make the same mistakes as the ones without, and the cycle is perpetuated when Justover Passlevel winds up back on the campus with 50% premium salary to carry on the dumbing-down-dumber tradition.

This particularly affects the customer when we have vice chancellors making stupid errors in enrolment confirmation letters, as I found this year back in semester 1, and simple oversights then confound the graduates at the other end of the tertiary line; Austudy.

Let's hope that Austudy can lift their game in 2010 and get the approvals completed before the financial-penalty deadlines that forced many students to withdraw before April Fools' Day this year.

Not that there's much chance of this rush for on-campus sanctuary doing anything to alleviate the national 'skills-shortage'. On the contrary, it just goes further towards reducing the real value of legitimate degrees.

'No doubt there is a benefit to academic institutions by way of enrolment quotas'

Bingo! Hence the article.

I recently spoke with someone who spent 3 years working in maintenance for a university campus.

I asked them if they ever saw a “Made in Australia” sticker on anything during their 3 years of travels through the rooms and corridors of the university campus. Their answer was (of course) “NO, NOT ONCE”.

Like the high schools and primary schools, the universities purchase almost nothing from Australian companies (and who has ever heard of an Australian textbook being used by an Australian university), and the link between the so called Australian education system and the rest of Australia becomes increasingly tenuous.

Training so many foreign students at universities is simply training the opposition, and telling foreign students that if they enroll in an Australian university they will get permanent residency is a lie being told by our universities to foreign students.

Telling the Australian public that they are an “export industry” (while at the same time asking for more and more taxpayer money) is also a lie being told by our universities.

Telling the Australian public that going to a so called Australian university makes good economic sense when this university system has now amounted a 14 Billion dollar HECS debt is also a lie being told by our so called Australian universities.

There is little connection left between our so called Australian universities and the Australian public, and about all the Australian public is now getting from our universities are lies and an ever increasing HECS debt.

Actually vanna, if you really meant that universities have little to no connection with YOU, then I would have to agree.

You appear to know nothing about universities and even less about education.

"You appear to know nothing about universities and even less about education."
(Posted by Bugsy)

I'd like to nominate that one as the quote of the day. What little connection there maybe between universities and education might depend on one's definition of education. What my 1997 HECS debt bought me was education enough to understand that the university is always right, even if they're wrong. They're still right, and don't question it.

Everything was nice and pretty for first-year psycho school until we got to try our first group experiment. We all 200 odd students got to be subjects for a fairly simple theorum of John Stroop (1935) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroop_effect but our methods were adapted from the original to the computer age. Only problem was, they still wanted us to work on 10ms precision, and computers with Intel clock chips don't count to 10ms precision, but around 55ms precision. No more, even if the digits are there to the millisecond, the clock ticks at 55ms or around 18 times per second.

So I handed in my report with the two sets of data calculated at both timings, and by chance, the data at the wrongly counted 10ms proved Stroop wrong, while the correctly timed data came in as Stroop would have expected. For that, I was quietly failed without explanation and wasted the entire otherwise good year's study, all for that one report.

So that's what my university education taught me: they're always right, even when they're wrong. Don't question a thing and maybe they'll let you graduate and make 50% premium whether you're right or wrong.

Yep, I 'd have to agree seano, that year was wasted.

You did a first year subject that had report component worth the entire subjects assessment? I find that highly doubtful. More likely you were failing the subject anyway and that report didn't save you.

Never mind, at least you will never go back eh?

Also, just as a bit of information, enrolment confirmation letters aren't written by Vice-Chancellors, they are sign stamped by registrars and prepared by Justover Passlevel if you're lucky. If you aren't lucky, then they were prepared by first year psych dropouts from the temp agency that thought they didn't need an education after all. There's lots of them out there, most science and arts courses lose about a third of the class in the first year.

Universities are about more than educating fresh out of high school brats that whine about HECS debts, they are research institutions that contribute to industry and society in ways that nescient opinionists like vanna couldn't even imagine.

Yes, Bugsy. Research Methods 114 was the one unit that must been passed to enter second year BSc Psycho; that report was 60% of grade. My 20% score for the additional information aka reality (how they erronerously proved Stroop wrong) got me 12.5% of the unit, so an impossible 100% exam score would have totalled 52.5% for the unit. They weren't taking chances, were they? Imagine the number of fake theses founded on that same IT ignorant mistake and you might see what they had to lose by admitting to the false data.

More likely you're failing to comprehend the truth and so resorting to unfounded insults as you did yesterday. Truth is I was doing well with exam scores as high as 95%, but the truth couldn't save me then - they didn't want to know it. Maybe it can save me now? Try wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_8254 and it might be too hi-tech, so scroll to the very bottom of the page, it's in the section under 'Programming Considerations', just above 'See Also'.
"The slowest possible frequency, which is also the one normally used by computers running MS-DOS or compatible operating systems, is about 18.2 Hz."

This is why using a computer for time-dependant psycho experiments will return random results, such as Stroop is wrong, world is flat, because precision is false if 10ms is used for ANOVA.

---o0o---

On the 2009 confirmation errors, are you suggesting that they sanction fraud by signing letters under false names on uni letterheads? Here is the letter that cost me another year's $40,000 + 50% premium. I guess I'm out-of-pocket around $120,000 now on top of the 1997 HECS debt I narrowly avoided for 2009.

http://antarctica.netau.net/ecu/fcukerry.jpg

As mentioned before, always remember the first rule of university education is that they're always right, even when they're wrong, they're still right, and don't ask questions if you want your degree!

Actually Bugsy, the last university course I did was through correspondence.

Not one textbook or piece of software we had to purchase came from Australia (of course), and I was also informed by other students undertaking the same course to never contact the lecturers unless absolutely necessary, because this might annoy them. So I never contacted a lecturer unless absolutely necessary, and not one other student doing the same correspondence course did so either to my knowledge.

I learnt nothing from the lectures, as I learnt everything from the textbooks.

Their course cost me considerable amounts of money to learn from a textbook, and the HECS fees went to marking my exam papers and assignments I suppose. The same course could have been done through 100’s of other universities throughout the world (with nothing special about so called Australian universities), and the same course can now be undertaken in various TAFE colledges for a fraction of the cost.

The days of universities are numbered.

One university in QLD has seen the light, and it is now intergrating with a TAFE colledge, with a new TAFE college being built on the campus with no dividing fence.

This had to be done otherwise the so called Australian university would have to close due to financial bankruptcy, as foreign student numbers have fallen so so much. Even with the TAFE college being built on the campus I foresee the university will gradually die a natural death, as few people in today’s world want to attend an elitist, socialist and feminist riddled institution that teaches minimal skills and costs a fortune to attend.

Also, if so called Australian universities are so good at research, then how come the last thing you are likely to find in a so called Australian university is a “MADE IN AUSTRALIA” sticker.

The story that so called Australian universities are good at research and development is yet another lie being told by the so called Australian universities.

I am one of those who's had no education & started work at 14. I've learned two trades & have been working as a mechanical plant service officer for a decade now.
I have a lot of contact with education people, health people & general public servants. I used to feel disadvantaged because of my lack of education until I realised that a great number of educated people are not actually intelligent & even less useful in society. The larger %age of my daily work's problem solving stems from designs & policies dreamed up by supposedly educated people. To cut a long story short, we have ample education but what we don't have enough of are people whose education wasn't wasted. Witnessing the at times absolutely idiotic mentality of educated people actually makes me glad I stayed academically unenlightened. There are very good scholars who are an absolute asset to the country but they're quite contend to remain the silent achievers unlike those useless academic experts who forever parade in front of the stage but have no idea what's holding up the props.
Boosting education ? no need for that just up the quality of what's already available

Well you sure showed me Seano, it looks like Edith Cowan Uni does not have an Office of the Registrar, maybe they are so small the VC prepares all the paperwork for all the students himself. Is that a printed digital signature (ie sign-stamp – in the old days they used a rubber stamp that looked like the signature) I see at the bottom of that letter? That’s a dead giveaway that they employ office staff if it is. These aren't frauds Seano, they are prepared and sent by office zombies in the enrolments section and posted under the authority of the VC under a mail merge. Is this difficult to understand? I'd be willing to bet that big Cox never saw that letter, or ever heard or read your name before, but you can blame him personally for making mistakes on your enrolment. At least, you can in the blogosphere, anything’s possible here.

So when you asked the Research Methods course coordinator what did they tell you about why you failed the report? Did you see the marked report (you had a right to)? What did the Dean's office say to you when you showed them your outstanding examination results in all your subjects and asked them to review your case? What did the Student Union advisor tell you? There are many ways of resolving issues like that, but I find that most people will just call the administration and get Justover Passlevel (if they're lucky) and be told that they cannot help, and that will be that. They don't have the authority, nor any inclination, to do anything. It's like trying to resolve a warranty issue by calling the customer sales team's secretary.

Wow vanna, one TAFE-level postal course and you’re an expert on universities. That must have been some well-prepared course. What was it,VC101: how to become a university administrator, earn $$$ from home?

It makes me wonder why either you bothered even enrolling in the first place, especially since you’re whinging about the HECS you had to fork out, and that all that matters right?

"These aren't frauds Seano, ... Is this difficult to understand? I'd be willing to bet that big Cox never saw that letter, or ever heard or read your name before, but you can blame him personally for making mistakes on your enrolment."

So if it isn't fraud to write something under the name of another, would you prefer to call it institutionalised plagiarism, Bugsy?
I never mentioned anyone's name. You were the one who questioned it. Whoever made that mistake that cost me a full-time 4 year double degree was too scared to even put their own name to it. If it wasn't Kerry, then YOU TELL ME who stuffed up my 'formal' education in 2009?

'Did you see the marked report (you had a right to)?'

I still have it packed in my relics from days gone bye.

'What did the Dean's office say to you'
Same sort of claptrap that you're spouting, but less 'assertive', more 'authorative' excuses because we don't want to know and we're the important ones in this place so STFU and get lost Seano.

'It makes me wonder why either you bothered even enrolling in the first place, especially since you’re whinging about the HECS you had to fork out, and that all that matters right?

I'm not whinging about the HECS. I'll never make that $40,000 let alone the 50% premium, so what do I care? By the way, I was 30 in 1997 and not a frigging school-leaver. You make so many foolish assumptions that it's worth logging back in late at night just to add to the comedy that you come up with when you put your little mind to it. I don't suppose you were ever a performing arts student by any chance, were you Bugsy?

It's called "proxy" Seano, and now I'm not surprised they told you to go away, I'm getting the same feeling and I've never met you.

What you don't seem to realise is that it's in the university's interests to have you graduate. They get paid for it. There are ways of getting mistakes resolved, however you don't seem to know any of them.

Never mind, at least you know better than any of 'em eh? And I know how old you claim to be.

A performing arts student would have graduated by now.

It's staggering how so many people who have either never gone to university (and often so proud of it) or have dropped out have so many opinions on how they should be run and what should be done with them.

So Bugsy, you believe it quite acceptible for unis to teach science students incorrect use of computer equipment? If you had at least acknowledged this rather obvious error, it might have added to your cred', but I suppose by your avoidance that you don't want to know because you have no answer.

Back to this year's stuff up, I knew the vc wouldn't waste time between golf games to bother writing all those letters, but call it what you like, someone wrote it under a false name, no reference to 'FOR: Kerry O. Cox'. The style was personal letter, addressed to 'Dear Sean' signed 'Yours sincerely,'. I call it fraud, but if not been wrong, no problem. Unfortunately, as you might open your eyes and see, it WAS wrong.

First I did on receiving the letter was call Joondalup admin. Excuse: "It's because you haven't selected your units yet." even though I had enrolled full-time. So I got online and chose units. I called back and asked if they could send out the correct letter. Centrelink would never grant Austudy for a part-time course.

"We can't. Go to admin in person for that." So I did, three times over two weeks, took a number and waited almost an hour each time. Then had to go to classes. No service. Too many international students in the queues.

Eventually, March 3rd, I wrote the timetable off the online system by hand on ECU notepad and submitted that with my Austudy application. I also took the original incorrect letter into centrelink to verify the authenticity. That was when centrelink got confused, and put my Austudy application for a full-time four-year double degree on hold until March 30. As you know, the fin' penalty deadline was March 31st. When centrelink still hadn't made a decision on March 30 I had to withdraw from the semester. What stopped ECU from simply mailing me the correct enrolment details to make up for THEIR first mistake?

Answer that one, Bugsy.

Teach science students incorrect use of computer equipment? Don’t be so dramatic Seano, you were in a first-year psychology class. I’m pretty sure your problems were psychological and not electronic.

On your timing problem, I was going to give you the benefit of the doubt, but since you have made such a big deal of it, I will try and explain something to you. You haven’t really provided many details though. From my reading, Stroop’s original study was timed to one fifth of a second, i.e. 200ms using a stopwatch. This limit of precision is merely the minimum error rate, i.e. the result +/- 200ms. In your case the minimum individual error would have been +/- 55ms, the smallest timing speed of the clock. This does not invalidate any of the results however and should not return any sort of “random numbers”. The “original” 10ms precision that you mentioned they demanded must have been from one of the 700+ later studies that reproduced and confirmed it. It seems more likely to me that they asked you to average the results down to two decimal places and that you think this cannot be done. But it can if you average the results and put in your estimated standard error (ie +/- SE).

I am curious how you can calculate two sets of data using two different timings from the same set of results, when you claim that the results were random numbers. I am even more curious as to how this 10ms timing data “proved Stroops wrong”, because it would not have mattered what the limit of precision was; it should return the same result on an ANOVA, since the average of replications would return a far greater error than the limit of precision.

It all sounds like an externalising BS story to me.

As for your other problem, it sounds like you have more problems than a mistake on a letter. One would be prioritising: surely getting official confirmation of full-time enrolment to gain subsequent funding would have taken priority over one or two of your classes?

Thanks for addressing the problem as well as the usual mistaken derogatory assumptions. At least now we can overcome this minor issue, very costly for me in 1997. You're one step beyond psycho school that year - you questioned something.

Regarding timing, a simple example is amateur running events: 100m, 400m. What if your digital stopwatch has no seconds. Just minutes and hours. Understand how the expected results for 100m events maybe ALL zero minutes, the 400m, a few front-runners return zero minutes, most amateurs returning race-times of one minute? Those race-times to the second might be range from 55s to 65s or only 10 seconds between fastest and slowest. Welcome to the digital era, where we can't guesstimate that nearest halfway mark on the precision like we might have with analogue sorts of timing devices or yardsticks etc.

In the Stroop trials, reaction times of subjects were critical, so working to a precision that the standard hardware was unable to provide, caused (by random chance) five-fold amplification of some times, where a calculated difference of only 10ms during an Intel clock tick resulted in a timed difference of 55ms.

I hope that helps you understand how incorrect use of computers can provide some fantastic data, even proving something so well known as the Stroop Effect wrong. That was why I thought it worth making the effort to recalculate the data by the right precision, because otherwise, we'd have looked like a sorry bunch of illiterate first year students who could see this word 'red' and still want to paint it black.

---o0o---

As for the other matter, my answer is NO, and can you please answer the question I asked you yesterday? Why were they too lazy to send out the correct confirmation of enrolment letter? Waiting on the tech-guy to come and put more paper in the printer? Run out of stamps or envelopes?

Seano, your argument and example would only hold true if the reaction times for both the control and the “interference” groups of data were less than 55ms. But they aren’t. Human reaction times are greater than the level of precision that the clock could measure, about at least three times longer for the average person, in fact. And that’s absolute reaction times, even if they were faster than that, Stroop’s interference effect is so clear it is easily measured with the precision of a 1930s stopwatch. That is, the differences between the average times of the interference experiment and the control are so large that an 18Hz computer chip would not be able to screw with them. The variability between replicates is likely to be much larger than the error introduced by the limit of precision.

You still haven’t explained how you “corrected” your data to return contradictory results, but even without looking your report, I can tell that it is very likely you did something majorly wrong, but just won’t accept that. It’s clear you have been nursing this sob story for quite a while now, but I think it’s time to let it go.

As to your other question about getting the correct enrolment letter, they already told you to visit them in person, which it seems you failed to do. You can blame it on foreign students, lack of service or thinking that attending class was more important or whatever you like. But in the end there is only one person to blame. Man up.

Well, now this thread is way off topic and I don't have anything else to say on-topic, so maybe we should leave it there.

Bugsy, if you'd accept the two examples I provided, based on reality, without 'likely' or 'doubt' but just plain truth, we could get back on-topic.

My response to the article's suggestion to lower university standards even further by increasing student intakes during economic recessions, was that it adds to the problem, only resulting in 50% premiums in labour costs for the same intellectual quality of personnel. Quite clear in that incorrect letter someone wrote as pretend VC, then refused to correct, leading to this entire year wasted for myself.

Three hours waiting for resolution that should never have been necessary to start, and could've been resolved for the price of a postage stamp, again no fault of international students, but incompetence of admin staff at the scene, like those in Joondalup who made the original mistake. Economic recessions aren't overcome by more incompetence. There's plenty of that already.

It happened, to me, in real life, this year. Whether it was formally-qualified fools, or the hubris that goes with it, we don't need more. I hope they can get their act together for 2010.

Lastly, on the Stroop experiment mistake, I believe I mentioned that results returned at 10ms were random because the precision used was less than 20% of the digital timing device. As it happened, that's how our group experiment happened by chance to prove Stroop wrong. Evaluating the same data at the correct precision, that random sample of 200 students DID respond to written word meaning before the ink colour, but you must think in hexadecimal to understand this, not decimal.

Again, unqualified staff on campus will perpetuate those wrongs as I found in 1997 and again in 2009. First with scientific error, and then with poor, stubborn, thoughtless administration. I'm not surprised that you consider it best to skip classes to wait in queues, but that's just another example of the poor standards of education in this country today. Why bother attending lectures if you're not going to learn anything?