GAMSAT ®COURSES
GAMSAT ®InterviewReady
Guides
Important Dates
STUDENT TESTIMONIALS
SCHOLARSHIP
FINANCIAL AID
GAMSAT ®Tips
GAMSAT ®Resources
Questions?
About
by
Elliot Dolan-Evans,
29 April, 2016
Read 2511 times
Higher Education is a target of some of the most controversial reformations in the recent Federal Budget, with proposals seeking to fundamentally change the funding structure of this sector, [1] which could have a profound influence on future medical students. As you study for the GAMSAT exam, learning more about this information should be useful to you.
In 1989, the Higher Education Contribution Scheme [HECS] scheme was introduced, which abolished the commitment of the previous government in the early 1970s to assume full funding of higher education and abolish student fees. [2,3] The government reduced funding to higher education in the late 1990s amidst the release of the Learning for Life report in 1998. [3] A panel chaired by former head private school teacher, Roderick West, released the Learning for Life report, which advocated the opening of universities entirely to market forces through deregulation and a much higher contribution from students to paying tuition fees. [4] Interestingly, at the time, both major Australian political parties criticised this report, which tabled no financial analysis or economic justification for its implementation, as being regressive and irresponsible. [4]
Education is a unique commodity, and there are greater considerations that must be made compared to standard products and services, including the influence on the job market and the national interest. [6] Attitudes towards higher education have moved from regarding the education of young people as a genuine ‘public good’ in the 1970s, to a ‘private benefit’ that students should pay for themselves. [2] However, is it arguable that there are public benefits of having an adequate supply of high quality nurses, doctors, and teachers. Indeed, some sectors of the community have called on the government to recognise this, demonstrated by the Lomax-Smith Review, which called on government to increase funding to higher education in order to realise the future value for the public in such an investment. [7] Markets can produce less than an optimal supply of goods and services – and in an environment where there are increased student fees, the demographics of the students will most likely change, and students may select courses based purely on private benefits. [7]
The major changes in the Federal Budget this year will mean that the cost of a university degree will evidently be greater. [9] There is concern that this may result in people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds being dissuaded from entering university [6], which could instigate a general decline in demand for higher education. However, some international data suggests that while demand for courses may drop initially with rising tuition fees, this recovers to the previous level fairly quickly. [7] University enrolments in Canada demonstrated this pattern following university tuition fee increases in the 1990s. [10]
However, analysing enrolments in relation to parental income bracket has clearly shown a decreased university enrolment for students from a lower socioeconomic background, with slight increases in enrolment of youth from higher-income families. [10] Results from overseas, such as these, affirm inequities in access. [3]. The difference in perceived utility gain for the same education choice between those of lower and higher socioeconomic backgrounds is substantial, as those from disadvantaged social classes typically place a greater emphasis on avoiding further social downward mobility in entering debt, compared to the desire to achieve upward social mobility in the future. [11]
Low-income students are more likely to see university costs as a debt compared to wealthier students, rather than a positive investment in their future. [12] Evidently, students from lower-socioeconomic backgrounds are cognisant of the large debt accumulated from university, and would be unwilling to put themselves at a further economic disadvantage. [13] This leaves results in the situation of the disadvantaged social classes self-excluding themselves from higher education. [12]
Accessibility to medical school must be one of the major concerns following the announcement of the 2014 Federal Budget. Due to the extremely high demand for places, it would be very likely that medical schools would charge the highest fees [14], especially considering the current under-funding that already places pressure on medical schools. [15] First year medicine tuition costs in Canada have risen to $18,146 in 2007 from being $3,222 in 1994 due to deregulation of fees. [16] These enormous costs have increased indebtedness, increased financial stress, and have changed self-reported career choices for Canadian medical student. [17]
A large proportion of rural/regional students come from lower-socioeconomic backgrounds and a majority already have educational debt at entry. [18] As most Australian medical schools use post-graduate entry into medicine, most students will have three to four years of educational debt prior to commencing medical studies. Rising tuition fees and soaring debt will surely act as a deterrent to many candidates, and permanently limit the diversity of medical students. [18] This will be to the severe detriment of the profession, limiting the ability of the field to recruit the best candidates, affecting the capacity of the medical fraternity to solve major health issues [18], and if rural and lower-income students are lost to the profession, there will be less doctors inclined to practice in rural and poverty-stricken communities where doctor shortages are the most severe. [16]
A number of models produced to track the debt levels of graduates have consistently demonstrated a much greater burden of debt on female graduates, who already face pay discrimination in the workplace. Female graduates may take a longer time to pay off their HECS debt due to pregnancy and child birth, as well as an arguably lower earning potential in many professions still. [19] A greater amount of time to pay off the educational debt will see the net amount of repayments increase, as a greater rate of interest functions on the outstanding sum. [19] As fees increase in medical school, a point will surely be reached where the financial realities of studying medicine will permanently be overwhelming and entry into the profession a dream for numerous groups of potential students. [18]
Similar proposals that focused on a ‘student-centred’ funding system in the 1980s and 1990s for higher education were categorically rejected and labelled as ‘right wing, ideologically driven’ proposals. [3] If the proposed changes are implemented in their current form, will we see the disappearance of the ‘fair go’ from the foundations of Australian education?
Check out our GAMSAT To Med School Podcast for more interesting news, tips & tricks about the GAMSAT, applying to medical school, and life at med school.
Reference List
