"University offers to students with ATARs below 50 have trebled in just five years despite escalating concern over student quality, particularly in teacher education courses. Offers to low-ATAR school-leavers increased in all disciplines this year, with the greatest growth in allied health, business and ­society and culture degrees. New government data shows that offers to students with ATARs under 50 have risen from 3607 places in 2012 to 9723 this year. Alarmingly, that number ­increased by 2624 on last year."

My experience is that in first year Uni doing I made a very good friend who was doing the same course, who had been granted access with a low ATAR. When I tried to help him with maths, it was clear that he simply could not grasp the concepts, and dropped out after the first semester along with most others who had been given preferential access. While he went on to become a capable electrician, he had lost 6 months and chunk of cash, and only the Uni gained.

From what I see, this is still happening and my question is whether HECs for subjects should be limited to those that meet a required ATAR or who pass an approved bridging course?

Where did you source this quote from?

ATAR requirements are not based on the difficulty of the course - they are based on popularity. For example, the ATAR requirements for a B. Teaching/B. Health and Phys. Ed. is degree are invariably higher than those for the more intellectually demanding B. Teach/B. Mathematics or B. Teach/B. Science degrees, because more people want to be P.E. Teachers than science teachers. Go figure. Engineering degrees have higher ATAR requirements than science degrees, even though a physics major is harder than most engineering courses because engineers are better paid than scientists so the degrees are more popular.

I think there should be some sort of 'you must be at least this educated to attempt this course' requirement but at the moment the ATAR system is not geared that way. And I'm not sure that an ATAR score is the best method to determine if the person has the capacity to do a certain course: if you do no maths or science subjects for your HSC but still get a good enough ATAR from your humanities courses then you can study science, engineering, medicine and other science based courses, but you'll struggle because you lack the prerequisite knowledge. I think that a better system would be to have the universities hold entrance examinations tailored specifically to their particular degrees.

And as for student nurses that can't speak or read English.

ATAR exams ARE effectively run by the universities as it is.

The question is, why should public money be spent on low achieving students simply because they want to have a crack at uni? We need the academic "means" test (the ATAR) to determine where money is to be directed to most effectively serve the nation, not individuals with unrealistic aspirations.

This is not to say a duck can never become a drake. It's that scarce public money should only be spent where it can do more certain good.

Luciferase, it costs Uni students big money to go to Uni, so what 'public' money are you talking about?
Runner, non-English speaking student nurses would be very rare indeed in Australia.
Where did you see all those student nurses who can't speak English?

I'm talking about Govt supported places, Susie.
http://studyassist.gov.au/sites/studyassist/helppayingmyfees/csps/pages/commonwealth-supported-places

Susie

4 corners recently did special on nurses in Australian hospitals who can't read English.

They did indeed, but the majority weren't student nurses Runner, they were foreign trained nurses.
I agree that foreign born nurses should be able to speak good English before being able to work in Australia.

Unfortunately, many of them lie about their English language capacity on their resumes, and have others fill out their paperwork for them. As this country does not really value it's nurses, then the profession is not attracting enough local nurses, so hospitals have to rely on foreign nurses.....they have no choice.

It is an issue for the taxpayer as well as the student, as 2/3rds of undergraduate fees are paid by the state, and 1/3 is subsidised by HECS.

While I understand that some students with ability achieve a low ATAR, and should be given a chance, I believe that a 3 month pre uni bridging course with exam should be able to weed out those that patently have no ability.

Tony: 'if you do no maths or science subjects for your HSC but still get a good enough ATAR from your humanities courses then you can study science, engineering, medicine and other science based courses.'

This doesn't apply to all universities. Last year my grand-daughter got a reasonably high ATAR (90) with maths and science subjects, but wasn't accepted into science at Melbourne Uni because her maths score was not high enough. She did get into U. Tasmania (where she lives).

I think the popularity of certain unis (eg the big ones, Melbourne, Sydney) means you need the right subjects and higher marks to compete for places there. I can't see anyone getting into science at Melbourne with just humanities subjects. I don't think there's anything wrong with UTas, just fewer people apply to go there. Actually it might be better, fewer students, more personal interaction with staff, the challenge to prove you really were good enough for Melbourne!

Hi there SUSEONLINE...

If what you say is true, and I'm sure it is, given your extensive background as a Registered Nurse.

Moreover any 'hospital' who knowingly hires a nurse, foreign or otherwise, or after hiring them, determines them wholly incompetent with the English language, either speaking, comprehension, reading or writing to a satisfactory standard, to safely discharge their duties; would indeed be held criminally culpable ('foresight of consequences'). Should any injury or death occur to a patient under the direct care of this nurse, foreign or otherwise.

The lynchpin SUSEONLINE for criminal capacity is; 'knowledge' and despite that 'knowledge', goes ahead anyway, in permitting that individual to practice as a nurse within the aegis of that particular hospital.

Shadow,

I don't think we should impose any more limitations. Even those who drop out learn stuff, both from the course content and the experience of being a uni student.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Toni Lavis,

I'd be very surprised if there were any engineering degrees that you could enter without HSC level maths. In 2004 I was unable to commence an engineering degree at Adelaide Uni (despite having a very high STAT score) because I'd only done single mathematics in year 12. Although oddly enough they did say I'd be able to get into a mathematics degree!

I studied engineering at UniSA instead. They too had prerequisites, though not as stringent as Adelaide Uni's.

The only people that should get into uni are those who are academic
achievers in the true sense and not 'guess an answer out of four' under qualified social misfits.
They should also be a position to fund their degrees themselves rather than have the state, taxpayer and humble pensioner bankroll them.
When I went to uni I had to not only pass my intermediate certificate to get into 4th and 5th year, but then I had to get a matriculation level pass to apply for uni
My parents had to then cough up with the One hundred thousand pounds plus fee, up front.
No assistance from the government.

"Even those who drop out learn stuff, both from the course content and the experience of being a uni student."

...and I'm supposed to go to work and pay taxes for that outcome? If it takes an economic depression to get some kind of sense back into gov't expenditure, bring it on.

Single, unemployed 40 odd year-old women getting IVF at huge expense to taxpayers as if success is likely, is like the ATAR debate. If they are a part of the successful 3% (like the success rate of low ATAR uni entrants), the taxpayer then gets to pay for the upkeep of the offspring!

Where does it all stop?. I'm tired of paying thru the gills for such inane stupidities.

Chrisgaff. If you passed the intermediate certificate in NSW, then did 4th and 5th year before matriculating to get into university, you must have done this before 1962-7, when the system changed. The leaving and intermediate certificates went, to be replaced by a six year high school, with the School Certificate at the end of Year 10 and the Higher School Certificate at the end of Year 12. (It may be different if you were in another state, but the fact that you give the cost in pounds means that you're talking pre-1966, so my argument below holds.)

I was at high school in NSW in the late 1950s, under the old scheme. My family was really poor and the only way I got to university - the first in my extended family - was by winning a Commonwealth Scholarship, courtesy of Sir Robert Menzies. (I still had to work part-time for the entire course to cover my living costs, 18 shillings or roughly $2 for Saturday morning as a check-out chick at Woolworths). My younger siblings followed suit, and with education we dragged ourselves out of poverty.

Because I had a scholarship I don't know what the cost of the degree was at the time, but I very much doubt that it was 100,000 pounds. And what does 'plus fee' mean? I haven't been able to find the 1960s cost of university degrees on line, but the median house price in Sydney in 1965 was only about 5,000 pounds, the equivalent in 1966 to $10,000 (an aunt bought a house in Randwick for that in 1960, it was sold in 2010 for $1.5 mill.).

So a university degree at 100,000 pounds in the 1960s would be equivalent to $200,000 in decimal at that time. The current annual cost of an Undergraduate Bachelor Degree is between $15,000 to $33,000 (https://www.studyinaustralia.gov.au/global/australian-education/education-costs). So a three year degree would be about $100,000, half the cost you have quoted for the 1960s and not allowing for inflation.

So, either you have the figure wrong, or you've just proved that degrees today are really cheap.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/not-in-our-national-interest-universities-slammed-over-atar-leniency-20160530-gp71qi.html

An ATAR or tertiary admissions rank below 50 indicates the student performed worse than half of the nation's school students.
According to research from the Grattan Institute, the same students are up to twice as likely to drop out of university, partly contributing to more than $1.6 billion in unpaid HECS debt last year and forcing the federal government to consider radical measures such as collecting debt from the dead in order to bring spiralling student loans under control

Hi there COSSOMBY...

I did my Intermediate Certificate in 1956, and like you we were dirt poor. So any hope I had of going to Uni. was out of the question. Nor did I possess the brains to gain any sort of scholarship, so the spectra of gaining a degree of any description was now seemingly impossible at that time.

My parents saw no point of insisting I do my Leaving Certificate (another two years), so I left school went bush and became a jackaroo which I thoroughly enjoyed until I found the sheep didn't particularly like me, so I left and joined the Australian Army. Which in my opinion was the making of me. After completing my engagement I reluctantly took discharge (mainly because of my parents continued anguish of me being sent back for a second tour of Vietnam) and joined the police, and there I stayed until I was medically retired after over 32 years of service.

So COSSOMBY, I would contend education or the lack of it, isn't everything. With lots of luck, a fair bit of dedication and buckets of personal discipline, you can still carve out a decent sort of vocational outcome in your life, without necessarily possessing solid tertiary antecedents, to give one, that desired 'leg up' in life.

It could be reliably asserted though I did enjoy exemplary job stability, none of it in my opinion could ever be precisely described, other than unremarkable.

Hi O Sung Wu. I had my first run in with sheep in 1965, when I helped drench a mob, quite an experience for a then city girl. I now live in sheep country in western NSW, so I've seen a few more.

I agree tertiary education isn't everything, but it can give you a boost up.

One of the most interesting people I've ever met (Menindee ca 1976) was a guy, then about 60, who ran a transport business. He was illiterate, and totally matter-of-fact about it. He was also articulate and a born story-teller. He had a prodigious memory, especially for figures, claimed he could remember the details of every job and payment. His contracts were based on a gentlemen's handshake. It was fascinating to hear about his experiences in the bush and in business. (I remember thinking - this is how people worked 1000 years ago.)

Another of the most interesting people I've even met was my boss in the 1970s, a university professor. You'd go to see him to get a form signed, and you'd leave an hour later after a personal master-class, which would start off 'I've just been reading this interesting article ...' I didn't really need to go to university classes for an education, just have lots of forms to get signed! (He didn't much like the form-signing bit).

So I'm even-handed, people are people regardless of education.

Hi (again) COMMOSBY...

Very very true. Many of these old blokes in the bush though hardly educated, can barely read and write, but possessing prodigious intellects in matters of life, living and fully embracing the school of hard knocks.

Moreover, I've always found them most pragmatic with any difficult problems they must address. Preferring the occkam's razor approach when confronting the task of teasing out the broad elements of a problem.

Though there are some vocations in life without a thorougher access to tertiary education, you'd never have the skills to complete your tasks effectively.

Suseonline,
Apart from foreign students they are all running on public subsidies. HECs or post paid loans which never get repaid.
The unpaid and outstanding loans are in the high billions of dollars.