The public opposition to university deregulation

Burke, PF; Wei, X

The public opposition to university deregulation

Burke, PF

Wei, X

Permalink

Publisher:: Australia and New Zealand Marketing Academy
Publication Type:: Conference Proceeding
Citation:: Innovation and Growth Strategies in Marketing, 2015, pp. 830 - 837
Issue Date:: 2015-11-30

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Published versionAdobe PDF (197.68 kB)

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Burke, PF https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0978-0237	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Wei, X	en_US
dc.date	2015-11-30	en_US
dc.date.available	2015-08-28	en_US
dc.date.issued	2015-11-30	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Innovation and Growth Strategies in Marketing, 2015, pp. 830 - 837	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	1441-3582	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/40500
dc.description.abstract	This study examines findings from recent surveys conducted to understand public opinion towards the Federal government’s proposed changes to higher education. Frequently labelled ‘deregulation’, these changes include modifications to the HECS-HELP system, government funding reductions, and provision for universities to determine tuition fees for domestic students. Our research shows that public opinion amongst those familiar with universities strongly oppose deregulation and will impact voting behaviour. The overwhelming feedback is to maintain the existing HECS-HELP system, with possible modifications in the form of flexible repayment parameters and refined tuition bands. With such negative market responses, this study indicates a potential higher education policy failure. However, our findings also indicate alternative policy changes to appease public expectations	en_US
dc.publisher	Australia and New Zealand Marketing Academy	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Innovation and Growth Strategies in Marketing	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference	en_US
dc.title	The public opposition to university deregulation	en_US
dc.type	Conference Proceeding
utslib.location	Sydney, Australia	en_US
utslib.location.activity	Sydney, Australia	en_US
utslib.for	1505 Marketing	en_US
utslib.for	15 Commerce, Management, Tourism and Services	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences/FASS Faculty Administration
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business/Marketing Discipline
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - ACRI - Australia China Relations Institute
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - BIDA - Business Intelligence and Data Analytics
utslib.copyright.status	open_access
pubs.consider-herdc	true	en_US
pubs.finish-date	2015-12-02	en_US
pubs.place-of-publication	Sydney, Australia	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.start-date	2015-11-30	en_US

Abstract:

This study examines findings from recent surveys conducted to understand public opinion towards the Federal government’s proposed changes to higher education. Frequently labelled ‘deregulation’, these changes include modifications to the HECS-HELP system, government funding reductions, and provision for universities to determine tuition fees for domestic students. Our research shows that public opinion amongst those familiar with universities strongly oppose deregulation and will impact voting behaviour. The overwhelming feedback is to maintain the existing HECS-HELP system, with possible modifications in the form of flexible repayment parameters and refined tuition bands. With such negative market responses, this study indicates a potential higher education policy failure. However, our findings also indicate alternative policy changes to appease public expectations

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/40500