14 Statement by the Minister for Education. The Han. 21. Report for 1982-84 Triennium, op. cit., Vol. 2, Part 2. AN AGREEMENT ON DAVID MACK Wal Fife, Statement on Commonwealth Education p 23-4. Policy and Financial Guidelines to the Common­ TRAINING UNIVERSITY wealth Education Commissions, 4 June 1981 22. Report for 1982-84 Triennium. op. cit., Vol. 2, Part 1, P 22. TEACHERS: 15 ibid. 23. Statement on Commonwealth Education Policy and THE UK EXPERIENCE 16. Report for 1982-84 Triennium, op. cit.. Vol. 2, Part 1, Financial Guidelines to the Commonwealth Educa­ p 28 tion Commissions, op. cit.

17 ibid., P 33. 24. In the light of the 1975 budgetary sit~atio~.,the Gover,n­ The Origins of Academic Staff Training in the to review the pattern of full-time higher educa­ ment set aside the reports of the Universities Commis­ United Kingdom tion in Great Britain and in the light of national 18. ibid., P 4. sion, the Commission on Advanced Education. and Universities have for centuries rejected the idea that needs and resources to advise Her Majesty's the Australian Committee on Technical and Further academic staff require any training for their Government on what principles its long term 19. Review of Commonwealth Functions, op. cit., p 24. Education which recommended financial assistance development should be based .. for their respective sectors for (what was to have been) jobs other than that which is SUbject-matter based, 20. Statement on Commonwealth Education Policy and the 1976-78 triennium. Instead, the Government and it has long been the tradition that staff need Financial Guidelines to the Commonwealth Educa­ decided that. for funding purposes, 1976 would be receive no formal training whatsoever in teaching The Committee's report was published in October tion Commissions, op. cit. treated as Ha year outside the triennial progression". administration - or indeed in research. 1963 and contained a total of 178 wide-ranging recommendations. " Only in the last forty years has this tradition been openly challenged in any real measure. Truscott, for example, argued that the only effective remedy for Only one of these related directly to academic staff 'appalling' teaching is for lectures to be made better training - namely, that "af! newly appointed junior teachers should have organized opportunities to by "subjecting af! would~be university lecturers to a acquire the techniques of lecturing and of conduct­ specific course of training," 1 and this theme was ing discussion groups." I n arriving at this recom­ pursued by a growing number of individuals over mendation, the Committee noted 'excessive com­ the next decade. 2 Despite such concern however, plaints' from both university teachers and student the ranks of academe remained largely unmoved. Radcliffe noted that the idea of training new recruits organizations concerning methods of instruction. to university teaching was largely "shrugged off In its consideration of teaching, the Robbins Com­ with a quantity of humorous or supercilious com­ mittee confined itself to general questions con­ ment." J Nevertheless, this period marked the begin­ nected with the use made of teaching resources. nings of a recognition in the United Kingdom of the This was because in March 1961, only one month need for professional training of university teachers after the apPOintment of the Robbins Committee, and a growing questioning of the tenability of the the University Grants Committee (the funding traditional view of university teaching as either a authority for all UK universities) apPOinted a Com­ self-taught art or a craft passed on informally from mittee on University Teaching Methods, under the master to apprentice. Chairmanship of Sir Edward Hale. The terms of This post-war period also marked a beginning inter­ reference of the Hale Committee were est by the AUT (The Association of University to make a comparative study of undergradu­ Teachers) in the improvement of university teach­ ate teaching methods and practices current in Ing, and twice during this time (in 1945 and 1954) the the universities and colleges of Great Britain union approached the Committee of Vice-Chance 1- in the fields of arts and pure and applied lors and Principals (CVCP) on the question of train­ sCience. ing for academic staff. The Committee's report was published in Novem­ National Initiatives ber 1964.' As did the Robbins Report, the Hale The period from 1961-1974 (when the Agreement Report referred to criticism of the universities on the on Probationary Procedures and Criteria came into grounds that university teachers are insufficiently being) was remarkable for a number of national trained for their work. The Committee inquired into initiatives in the university sector which were subse­ the extent to which university teachers should quently to colour the whole area of academic staff receive training or instruction in how to teach. As a training in the U.K.'I Of all these initiatives perhaps result of discussions with university delegations, it that which has had the most far-reaching conse­ became clear to the Committee that any proposal to quences for the UK university system was the make full-time course of training a mandatory pre­ Report of the Robbins Committee on Higher Educa­ requisite for university apPOintment would receive tion in 1963. no support at all. Nevertheless the Committee expressed the view that the haphazard nature of The Committee on Higher Education, under the existing arrangements for training resulted in much Chairmanship of Lord Robbins, was appOinted in university teaching being less effective than it February 1961 by the Prime Minister should be.

30 31 suitability and competence before a decision for confirmation, and review procedure. The sec­ The Committee suggested that training in lecturing NUS Initiatives is taken to confirm them in appointment. The tions of the agreement which dealt specifically with and tutorial teaching should be given as a matter of In a memorandum to the Hale Committee on Uni­ Committee attaches importance to the devel­ training for probationary lectures were as follows: course, The Committee also pOinted to a need for versity Teaching Methods published in June 1961, opment by each university of appropriate operational research in university teaching to be the National Union of Students (NUS) referred to ar~angements (where these do not already 'Selection, Training and Development conducted on an inter-university basis, advancing the necessity of ensuring that the university teacher eXist) for systematic training in the early 4. The Working Party isofthe opinion that Universi­ period of appointment, the view that such research might result in the exist­ is suitably qualified to lecture and to supervise tutor­ ties must maintain high standards of selection ence of advisers in lecturing techniques who could ial work. procedures when they are considering making appomtments to their academic staff. Where visit universities by invitation to advise and assist It was clear that something had to be done - but ~ppointments have a probationary period it is individual members of staff. Reporting in April 1969 the Commission recom­ mended that all lecturers should be trained either what? The need for training had been clearly estab­ Incumbent. on universities to provide training for before taking up their posts or, where that was not lished and the will for itto happen had been demon­ the probationer of a helpful and comprehensive AUT Initiatives strated by the relevant national bodies, but would nature. Advice and guidance by a senior col­ Following yet another approach early in 1961 to possible, during the first three years of their appoint­ the individual university instititions accept the need league nominated for this task, and encourage­ CVCP about academic staff training and the need to ments. In addition, the number and range of short and implement actions? A solution was found (orso ment to attend forma! COurses of instruction examine teaching methods, the AUT established a training courses for lecturers already in service should be included. Attention should be paid to it seemed at the time) in what might loosely be Panel on Teaching Techniques in January 1963. should be expanded and lecturers should be more developments in the training of University Lec­ described as a "pay and productivity" agreement This panel, in an interim report, made a number of actively encouraged by their institutions to make turers at a national level as well as to internal between the employers and the union and suggestions for improving university teaching. 1 use of these courses. courses of instruction. The probationer should govern ment. These included a strong recommendation for the receive a co-ordinated development programme A Groundswell of Opinion which lasts throughout his probationary period establishment of inservice training courses for both The 1974 Agreement on Probation and permits appropriate reports to be made, and new and experienced staff. In short, the movement for an improvement in the standards of university teaching gathered momen­ Following a withdrawal of the standing reference on remedial action to be taken where necessary, at the pay of univerSity teachers from the National regular stages. Universities should also ensure In March 1966, in its quinquennial submission tothe tum over the thirty year period from 1940-1970 such that the day-to-day duties and workload allo­ UGC, the AUT proposed the establishment of a that the traditional view outlined in the opening Board for Prices and Incomes, academic salaries .beca":le subject to a new negotiating machinery cated to a probationer are appropriate for a per­ national staff college to act as a focus for future paragraphs of this paper - namely that university son of his age, standing and experience. developments, and a conference on university coor­ teachers required no training outside their subject­ InvolVing two separate committees: Committee 'A', dination (held at the in matter - came under increasing attack from a wid­ made up of union and employer representatives Criteria (the AUT and the University Authorities Panel - 1967) considered the question of whether coordi­ ening variety of sources. The few individuals who in 5. The primary consideration for the employing UAP - respectively, and Committee 'B', made up of nated action on the part of universities, either the 1940s (and previously) had pleaded for training university in deciding whether or not to retain a AUT and UAP on the one hand and Government on person at the conclusion of his probation must nationally or regionally, would produce more effi­ were now joined by a growing awareness on the the other. (The University Grants Committee was be the long-term interests of the university itself cient, economic and soundly-based systems of parts of the UGC, the CVCP, the AUT, the NUS and repres.ented at meetings of Committee A and repre­ of the other members of its staff, and of its stu~ training for academic staff. Following this confer­ academics themselves. The expansion of the uni­ dents. But it is recognised at thesametimethata ence, the CVCP invited the AUTto set up a Working versity system in the late sixties and early seventies sentatives of the UGC acted as confidential advisers to the Government in Committee B.) university has a responsibility to assist the devel­ Party on the Training of University Teachers with a lent urgency to a problem which at long last was op~ent of a member of staff in his probationary remit to consider the extent of training currently becoming formally recognized and seriously consi­ A comprehensive review of the salaries of non­ period; and also some concern for the future of a provided, to estimate the value of such training, to dered by all parties involved. clinical academic staff took place in 1971 under the probationer whom it does not wish to retain. suggest topics for training and to recommend ways Government had already accepted the need for auspices of th.is new machinery and Jed to agree­ 11. An employing university which declines to retain in which effective and acceptable training might be ment on a revised structure and salary scales with a person on grounds of inadequate performance made available to universities. training - indeed in its report on university salaries in 1968, the National Board for Prices and Income effect from October 1971.ln February 1972the UGC or insuffiCient promise or personal unsuitability s~ould be able to show (a) that training in univer­ The AUT Working Party on the Training of Univer­ had recommended a probationary period of four to spelt out the terms of this salary settlement which included the following provision in respect of sity teaching was made available and (b) that sity Teachers reported in February 1969 recom­ five years for all academic staff entering the univer­ continuing advice and help towards improve­ 6 probation: mending: sity at assistant lecturer or lecturer leveL In addition, ~ent wer~ offered and due warning given of the Board had seen a need for passage beyond Lecturers Inadequacies by the Head of Department or • that a number of preliminary courses of training probation to be rigorously controlled, instead of Probationary period to be 3 years with possi­ other responsible person." for newcomers to university teaching should be being automatic as it then was in many universities. ble extension to 4 years in doubtful cases. mounted immediately; Training procedures to be improved with tho­ The University Grants Committee, perhaps mindful rough review prior to confirmation on the It is clear from these extracts from the Agreement • that certain university departments of higher edu­ of the zealously guarded institutional autonomy basis of revised and improved procedures that universities were (and are) called upon to fulfil cation should be given additional resources to en­ characterising the universities, recommended that and criteria. three requirements in respect of probationary train­ able them to provide 'field officers' who could visit ing. These requirements are: universities by invitation to advise on training and the method of implementation of the Board's recommendations should be left to each institu­ As Matheson notes, it was to take a further three help with evaluation of new methods; and • Development Programme tion's own discretion. In its letter of May 1969, the years before detailed agreement was reached by a Working Party of Committee A on the procedures The provision of a co-ordinated development pro­ • that CVCP should appoint a body to evaluate the UGC wrote: gramme throughout the probationary period. experience of mounting the first preliminary and criteria to be used in connection with the proba­ The normal period of probation should be tionary period, and a formal UAP/AUT 'Agreement • Training courses, and to assess the resources available to three years from initial appointmenC with a increase the provision of courses so that all newly on Probation' was not circulated to universities until The provision of training of a helpful and compre­ possible extension (at a university's discre­ October 1974.' appointed staff and also older members of staff tion) to four years. It would be {or each univer~ hensive nature including: could have the opportunity of receiving the same sity to decide its own method of iudging The agr~ement, formally known as the Agreement (i) advice and guidance by a senior colleague nomi­ formal training. whether or not a teacher has successfully concernmg the procedure and criteria to be used in completed probation. If probation is to serve nated for this task; connection with the Probationary Period, 10 covered Finally, the Working Party recognized the need for its true purpose, entrants to university teach* regular planning by CVCP or by some agency act­ ing must be given full opportunities to develop the. following. areas: .the nature of the probationary (il) encouragement to attend formal courses of ing for the universities as a whole. appropriate skills and to demonstrate their reView, selection, training and development, criteria instruction at both local and national levels.

32 33 9 Duties and Workload Jones, to examine the future provision for the train­ gements. By 1974 committees had been established sions meet the needs, both real and per­ The allocation of day-to-day duties and workload ing of university teachers. In its report in January !n t~irty-two universities, and by 1976 all but eight ceived, of academiC staff. Unfortunately, little appropriate for a person of the probationer's age, 1972 the Working Group stated that the time had Institutions had Senate Committees whose sole or effort has been devoted to finding ways of standing and experience. come when present arrangements should be sup­ major remit was the training of academic staff. assessing these aspects of training provi­ plemented by a more formal scheme of training sions. (organized at local, regional and national levels) Like growth was also to be found in the number of Under the terms of the agreement, an employing including induction, initial training and departmen­ central training agencies or units. Whereas only two university which declines to retain a person should tal support, advanced courses for established staff such units existed in 1969, by 1977 the number had Nevertheless, it must be conceded that the level of be able to show that these requirements have been and for those involved in providing training. risen to fifteen. financial provision for training remains abysmally met. How individual institutions were to meet these low - and there are signs that in the current eco­ requirements was not spelt out in the Agreement In March 1972 the CVCP circulated the Report to Likewise, in 1971, training for new staff was compul­ nomic situation it may fall lower still. document and the ensuing debate on what consti­ universities, inviting comments on the scheme and sory at only three institutions; by 1973 attendance tuted training of a helpful and comprehensive indicating that it (the CVCP) had no desire to lay was mandatory at thirteen universities, 'encour­ A second cause for some pessimism must be the nature has continued unabated ever since despite down a uniform pattern of training. ag~d' by senior staff at seven more, and entirely cessation for funding for CCTUT and the subse­ the many attempts at clarification. optional at the remaining twenty-five. ~~~n~ reliance of training on local and/or regional To assist in the development of its proposed arran­ initiatives. CCTUT welcomed the Agreement and felt that gements, the Working Group recommended that While growth in the provision of training might In December 1978, CVCP established a Review some form of best practice would evolve over the CVCP, as a matter of immediate action, should to reflect a situation, such optim­ ~eem now-he~lthy Gr,?up, under the Chairmanship of Sir Harry Pitt, to next twelve months and that the Committee would establish a Co-ordinating Committee for the Train­ Ism must be regarded With extreme caution and it have a role·to play in assisting universities to recog­ ing of University Teachers. CCTUT should be repre­ reView arrangements for the training of university might be wiser to view the reported increases in teachers. The Review Group's report was circulated nize such practice in the area of probationary sentative of CVCP, AUT and UGC and arrange­ training provision as intentions rather than as real­ to universities in February 1980. The main outcome training. ments should be made for it to be adequately ity, There is no doubt that some growth in training of the review, which recommended a strengthened serviced. In February 1972 CVCP accepted this activity has taken place over the past decade, but However, the experience of the Co-ordinating Co-ordinating Committee with an increased budget Officer was that there was considerable confusion recommendation and the AUT and the UGC were the generally low level of funding must be inter­ and staff, was the t~rmination of CCTUT in July about the status of the Agreement. And indeed the invited to nominate members to the newly formed preted as indicative of limited progress. national committee. 1981, and the establishment of a new committee predominant theme that emerged at a series of (without any budget or staff) in August 1981 with a regional meetings convened by the Committee over The Co-ordinating Committee for the Training of The low level offunding reported in 1974-75 was still remit "to meet from time to time to review the Cur­ the winter of 1975-76 was the training offered to University Teachers very much in evidence in 1976-77 and the position rent provision for the training of university teachers probationary lecturers and the implications of the The Co-ordinating Committee (CCTUT), estab­ had not changed radically by 1979-80. CCTUT's and to ensure that universities are made aware of Agreement for such training. lished by CVCP in February 1972, appointed a Co­ final survey of training provision carried out in 1980 this provision. ", As. indicated above, from August As a result of these regional meetings it became ordinating Officer in September 1973 and in June reported th.en. in r.espect of the following year (1980~ 1981 the organization of training activities has of obvious that universities were at different stages of 1974 convened its first national conference on aca­ 81), only SIX Institutions planned to increase their necessity been carried out solely by universities implementation of the Agreement and that many demic staff training at the Manchester Business level of expenditure on training, thirty-three expec­ themselves on a local or regional basis. To date, little would welcome further information and advice. The SchooL Thereafter CCTUT became the focus for ted to maintain the 1979-80 level and seven planned has been done on a regional basis. Only two Committee therefore convened, in June 1976, a national initiatives in staff training and a series of to reduce thei r level of financial support for training. regions - the Midlands and Scotland - have deve­ National Working Conference which was held at regional, national and international conferences, The continuing programme of 'cuts' has meant loped any formalized training activities. In the Mid­ the . The basic aim of this meetings and workshops followed until the Com­ fu~h.er budg~t~ry reductions in many institution$ lands, th~ Working Party establiShed in February conference was to consider the training implica­ mittee's demise in July 1981. The Committee's work training provIsions and 1982/83 is even Jess well 1~77. contrnue.s to p~omote inter-university activities funded. tions of the Agreement for universities. is perhaps best exampled in a Report on one of its within the r~glon. Smce 1981, the Working Party has national conferences. 11 (Mack, 1979). Its demise is representatives from all Midlands universities and I~ is tru~, as Matheson'" indicates, that the informa­ An edited account of the findings of the conference reported fully in Matheson " and in brief by Mack. 1] continues to sponsor regional workshops. More in the form of a preliminary draft document for tion which has been collected on financial provision recently, three of the Midlands universities (Leices­ The Impact of the 1974 UAP/AUT Agreement on for staff training discussion and consideration by universities was t~r, Loughborough and Nottingham) have estab­ Provision of Training produced in the Spring 1977 following comments is not intended to infer a detailed picture of the lished a consortial training programme at sub­ made on an earlier draft at a second series of There can be little doubt that a general groundswell regional level. of opinion in the decades before the 1970s led to the training provision of particular universities. regional meetings. It was not intended to be a rigid Any picture so derived will be incomplete. Nor prescription of how to implement the Agreement. establishment of the Bryman Jones Working can the data necessarily be taken to imply that In Scotland, the Scottish PrinCipals gave their Although a number of the Committee's contacts in Group, the Co-ordinating Commitee for the Train­ s,taff at one institution have greater opportuni­ approval tothe establishment of a Steering Commit­ universities felt that the publication of the document ing of University Teachers and ultimately to the ties for personal development in teaching (or tee for Staff Development in Scottish Universities to would add a much needed impetus to the consider­ UAPIAUT agreement itself. Likewise, there can be any other area) than staff at another institu­ promote "liaison between the Scottish Universities little doubt that this agreement led to radical tion Nonethless, it is evident that the number in m.atters of staff development in general, but, more ation of training issues by universities, opposition to of train!ng opportunities and the range of cen­ the document led the Co-ordinating Committee to changes in the provision of training opportunities particularly, in the provision of advanced subject­ within individual universities. Both prior and subse­ tra/ traming faci/itles varied enormously bet­ based '!Ieetings on teaching practice, "The Steering abandon its plans for publication and The Training ween mstitutlons. Such comparative data for Implications of the UAP/ A UT Agreement on Proba­ quent to the agreement, there was substantial md,v,dual mstitutions, particularly when com­ Committee met for the first time in March 1978 with tion remains an unpublished document. growth in training provision within individual institu­ bined witt: comparative levels of expenditure a membership drawn from the eight Scottish Uni­ tions. Whereas by 1968 only eight universities had can be mlsleadmg m the sense that in the final versities, and has since sponsored a number of The Brynmor Jones Working Group on the institution-wide training courses, by 1971 no less analysis it is the quality of formal training, the training workshops and courses. Training of University Teachers than forty universities had made such provision. In standard of central training facilities and the While the 1971 salaries negotiations were in train, 1969 only eleven institutions had established Senate competence of training personnel that ulti­ While such regional developments are welcome the CVCP in March of that year and in collaboration committees or working parties specifically charged mately determine the worth to academic staff they too suffer from a lack of any financial provision with the UGC and AUT had set up a Working with determining training policies, but by 1971 of an mstitution's provisions in this area. - and of course have little impact on the remainder Group, under the Chairmanship of Sir Brynmor twenty-five institutions had established such arran- Another factor contributing to warth is the of the c~untry which has yet to develop any signifi­ extent to which an institution's training provi- cant regionally-based activity 34 35 In summary, the current situation looks bleak to senior colleagues and heads of departments. In staff, can /ustify, On past performance, COn­ to provide suitable courses which may be expenditure on those central training indeed. There is now little opportunity for national overall, national terms, however, this little evidence tmu.e~ more effective at regional rather than faCilities, whatever their titles, which are seen national level; co-ordination, little regional activity and signs of a pales into insignificance. The vast majority of lectur­ as relating solely to improving the basic skfl/s decreasing commitment at local level. On this posi­ ers remain unaware of the Agreement, its provisions of univerSity teaching. and its potential. There remains, in a majority of to

36 37 3. S. Radcliffe, The Training of University Teachers', Uni­ author's contention that a reversal of that decision STEPHEN JOHNSTON (however unlikely su~h a develC?pment ~ight see~) versities Review, 28, 1955, pp. 12-15. THE NEED FOR UNIVERSITY and the implementation of a revised national body IS 4. For detail of these initiatives see C.C. Matheson, Staff PUBLIC RELATIONS the key to the future success of staff deve.lop~~nt Development Matters, CCTUT, London, 1981. and ultimately to the success of the universities themselves. 5. Higher Education: Report of the Committee app.oin­ ted by the Prime Minister under the Chairmanship of Amid the flood of conflicting opinions about what Liberal Senator and Chairman of the Government The Australian Context Lord Robbins, 1961-63, Cmnd 2154, H.M.S.O. 1963 has happened to tertiary education over the past Members' Committee on Education, Science and Are there lessons from the UK experience that may (Robbins Report). eighteen months*, only the most limited consensus the Environment, in the April 1982 edition of Vestes. be learned and applied in the Australian context? has emerged. The base line was probably drawn by Mr. Puplick said of universities: Indeed there are. The Australian Vice-Chancellors 6. Report of the Committee on University Teaching Methods, H,M.S.O., 1964. (Hale Report). the Vice-Chancellor of the Australian National Uni­ Committee's Working Party on staff development is versity and former Chairman ofthe Commonwealth In seeking to set themselves apart, or perhaps to be applauded for the recommendations it has put 7. AUT, Interim Report of the Panel on Teaching Tech­ Tertiary Education Commission, Professor Peter it would be more accurate to say, in allowing to the AVCC. They are cogent. well argued, and niques, J 220, March 1964. themselves to remain apart, the universities Karmel. at the July 1982 conference of tertiary edu­ have found that they have been threatened by timely - but they are also reminiscent C?f the UK cation administrators and academics at the Darling recommendations of a decade ago. In their present 8. AUT. Report to Council, Working Party of University the cutting edge of governments, they have Teachers, 0 276, February 1969. Downs Institute of Advanced Education. Disagree­ virtually no protection and their cries for form they represent the best of intentions - but ing with the conference title, "The Reorganisation of mercy have struck few responsive chords in they do not guarantee the best of actions. Australia 9. C.G. Matheson, op. cit. Tertiary Education in Australia", Professor Karmel the wider community. 3 would do well to learn the lessons of the UK expe­ suggested that instead we had witnessed rience in order that the initiative now gained should 10. AUT. Non-Clinical Academic Staff: Agreeme,:t con­ Professor Caro remarked: be built on rather than lost. In progressing the Work­ cerning the Procedure and Criteria to be used m con­ a major readjustment of the resources in ing Party's recommendations through to implemen­ nection with the Probationary Period, LA/538, Octo­ higher education devoted to teacher educa­ "I have little doubt he is right. What should we be dOing about it? The image of the universi­ tation academics would do well to conSider the ber 1974. tion to meet the changed circumstances of ties in the public is important. "·1 benefits of a properly constituted national body. the 1980s.' The provision of such a body in Swed,en u.n.der the 11. D. Mack, The Workshop Way, Report on the Nati~nal Professor Caro was understating the case; the auspices of the Swedish Board of UnIVersities and Working Conference held at the , Few would argue with that statement, but opinions image of the universities in the public is vital. As Colleges (UHA) has helped ensure the real success 9-12 June 1978, CCTUT Occasional Publication No.1, as to why the readjustment happened and indeed both Professor Karmel and Professor Caro have of institutional staff training and development pro­ 1979. whether it should have happened, are likely to observed, a pre-requisite for the universities' sel1- grammes. The lack of provision of such a body in diverge considerably. promotion is the certainty that thei r own houses are the UK has ensured the relegation of staff develop­ 12. C.C. Matheson, op. cit. in order. Justified complaints by the community of ment programmes to that of a minority interest. There is one point on which there appears to be inadequacies in mqnagement, staff performance 13, D. Mack, CCTUT Dies, ASTD Newsletter, No. 10, total consensus: the public by and large are at best and academic standards, must be faced and recti­ If the recommendations to AVCC are to succeed in Loughborough University of Technology, 1980. indifferent and at worst antipathetiC to the needs fied. The universities must then go on to correct a establishing staff development activities on a firm and purposes of tertiary education in Australia. At situation that can be simply illustrated by two paral­ basis, then acceptance of an agreement and imple­ 14. C.C Matheson, op. cit. the 1982 Conference of University Governing lel lines. On the top line are people involved in mentation of that agreement are not of themselves Bodies sponsored by the Australian Vice-Chancel­ tertiary education, convinced of its importance, of sufficient. There must also be an acceptance of the 15. ibid. lors' Committee, the Director of the British Techni­ the need to maintain the system in a healthy state need to monitor and evaluate all aspects of imple­ cal Change Centre and former Vice-Chancellor of and decrying those on the bottom line, the politi­ mentation on an ongoing basis. Without such cen­ 16. ibid. the University 6f Sydney, Professor Sir Bruce cians, businessmen, journalists and members of the tralized and authoritative leadership it is unlikely, in Williams, listed the unfavourable climate of opinion public who allegedly make misguided criticisms the light of the UK experience, th.atthe ~ew i.n.itiati~e towards the universities as his first concern about based on ignorance. The lines are parallel, they do for staff development in Australian universities Will 17. C.F. Carter, Higher Education for the Future, Black~ well, Oxford, 1980. Australian tertiary education, Professor Karmel told not intersect, there are few cross lines of communi­ survive to the year 2000. the conference delegates that universities were cation, so the alleged falsehoods remain uncor­ 18. E. Hewton, 'The Twilight World of Staff Development', seen as comprising: rected to the continuing detriment of the system. References Studies in Higher Education, 5, 2, 1980, pp. 205-215. a very high proportion of layabout bludgers The proper relationship should be circuitous. The 1. B. Truscott, Red Brick University, Faber and Faber, who don't work very hard and when they do universities should promote a strong image in the London, 1943. 19. CCTUT, The Future Role and Work of the C?­ work don't do it very well. Undoubtedly there public mind, backed by substance, that their work is ordinating Committee for the Training of University are a few of such people around universities, Teachers A submission to the Review Group pre­ vital to the well~being of society and is worth defend­ 2. TH Matthews, 'The Training of University Teachers', there are in every walk of life, the only reason ing when its integrity is threatened. If the image Universities Quarterly, 5, 3, 1951, pp. 269-274: and A. pared, o~ behalf of CCTUT, by the Committee's Co­ they are picked out in universities is because Lloyd, 'Should Assistant Lecturers be Trained?', Uni­ ordinating and Research Officer, September 1979. there is a general hostility and antipathy cannot easily be impressed on the minds of the versities Quarterly, 6, 4, 1952 (unpublished). towards higher education. 2 majority, then at least it must be first impressed on the minds of the influential. Universities will find only a tenuous basis for survival to fulfil their tradi­ In a paper delivered the previous day, the AVCC tional and developing roles, unless they make the Chairman and Vice-Chancellor of the University of effort to explain themselves to the public. The pur­ Melbourne, Professor David Caro, noted a state­ suit of excellence must be explained if it is to be ment by Mr. Christopher Puplick, a former NSW maintained.

* Article submitted in September 1982

38 39