Robert McMahon Friends of Adult Education
PREMIER’S Assurance of Adult Ed Worthless
Big price rises, closed facilities, staff losses and up-front payments make a mockery of David Bartlett’s assurances that Adult Education is ‘safe’.
Sources have revealed that Adult Education staff have been told to re-cost many of their classes under new ‘policy’ directions. It is predicted price rises of between $10 and $20 dollars will be common, with some classes, such as adult learn swim with high venue costs, likely to entail huge price rises.
It is feared that concession card holders, making up 50 % of Adult Ed enrolments, will be particularly hard hit.
Further, it has been revealed that the new ‘web based enrolment system’ mentioned by Premier Bartlett in the Mercury yesterday will result in forced up-front payments meaning only people with credit cards and internet access will be able to enrol and confirm class places immediately. Those without access to these will have to make their way to selected payment centres meaning many people will miss out on courses because they cannot ‘beat’ those favoured by the new system.
Once again it is the most disadvantaged sections of the community (the elderly, people with disabilities, those without internet access or those in regional areas) will be the ones hardest hit.
In addition, Hobart centres at South Hobart and the Eastern Shore are scheduled for closure under rationalisation plans, leaving uncertainty about the future of many Adult Ed programs.
“This is a classic example of chopping the legs off an organisation and then saying, look it’s not walking very well, we’ll have to put it down,” said Bob McMahon, Spokesperson for Friends of Adult Ed. “It sounds like Bartlett and his bureaucrats are setting up Adult Education for an inevitable fall in enrolments which is telling given his continual qualifying statement that Adult Ed classes will continue to be offered ‘as long as people continue to enrol’”.
“Members of Friends of Adult Ed are being dismissed as a few disgruntled people resistant to change, however, it is not change we are resistant to, but lies and having our resources and services dismantled in this way without even the courtesy of consultation.”
Friends of Adult Ed have written an open letter to Mr Bartlett asking him to clarify these and a range of other issues and concerns.
Open letter to David Bartlett on the future of Adult Education
Dear Mr Bartlett
As you are aware, Friends of Adult Ed is organising a public meeting in Launceston, 16 April 2009 because of concerns about the long-term future of the organisation. These concerns have arisen out of ambiguous statements and commitments made over the past 18 months, from information contained in an Examiner article in January this year and from informal reports from within Adult Education about what is really happening to that organisation.
I am writing to you in the hope that you can clarify these issues now.
Given recent events, particularly in relation to the sale of TOTE Tasmania, you can understand that we are hesitant to accept broad, blanket statements and will instead only be satisfied when specific questions and issues are addressed and answered in a clear, straight-forward and un-ambiguous way.
1. Can you tell us what the continual statements that Adult Education will be retained “as long as classes are viable” or “as long as people continue to enrol in courses” actually mean?
That is:
i. How exactly will ‘viability’ be determined?
ii. Under the previous organisation model of Adult Education the state was looked at as a single entity and certain courses and areas could be subsidised to ensure more equitable provision. Will this model continue?
iii. If prices rises are imposed on courses and enrolments decline, will this mean they are deemed ‘not viable’ and therefore reason to discontinue provision?
iv. If other bureaucratic decisions (see point 4 & 7 below) result in falling enrolments, will that then be cause to discontinue provision?
2. The renaming of Adult Education teams under the banner of ‘Community Learning’. Do your comments of yesterday mean this is off the agenda entirely? Or does it mean Adult Education will exist as a brand, but with no discreet structure or funding, under some Community Learning umbrella?
3. Andy Norris, Adult & Community Learning Services manager was quoted in the 23 Jan Examiner article saying, “….the name Adult Education was still being used on the front cover of both the autumn and winter program guides. But he said that it would be one of the issues looked at in a review of brands in the next 12 months.” Do your comments of yesterday override this?
4. Retention of facilities (particularly in urban centres) – Mr Norris said whilst there were “no immediate plans to sell off facilities…eventually he would like to see all parts of the northern Community Knowledge Network housed at the Launceston Library”. This, along with already implemented plans in Hobart to ‘rationalise’ facilities, suggests that the selling off of buildings is highly likely in the future therefore,
i. What commitment do you give that environments suitable for adult learning will be maintained and that adults will not become second-class learners having to ‘make do’ wherever they can?
ii. Can you confirm the South Hobart and Eastern Shore Adult Education facilities are being closes and/or sold?
iii. If facilities are sold, will that money go to provide for facilities hire for classes now without venues?
iv. Or will the cost of hiring alternative facilities then have to be absorbed by individual course fees? If so and enrolments decline as a result (simple principles of supply and demand dictate they are likely to fall at a given point) will this mean that this provision is ‘no longer viable’ and therefore may not be supported into the future?
6. You state that course guides are still coming out, however, we believe this is no longer the case in the North West. Can you inform us whether or not this is correct, and if so, why this has happened?
7. Despite your statement that staff at Adult Ed still have their jobs, please comment on the fact that half of the staff have left either resigning, being reassigned or due to ill health, since coming in to the CKN structure. What do you believe this says about how effectively this process has been managed by high-paid senior bureaucrats?
5. You describe the current $1.8 million allocation to Adult Education as a luxury and far more generous than other states. This along with comments from CKN management about ‘hobby’ and ‘lifestyle’ courses indicates from our perspective a serious lack of understanding of and appreciation for the myriad of benefits the provision of a wide range of adult learning opportunities brings to both individuals and the community in general. I would be interested to hear what your experience of adult learning is (outside formal institutions), and how many people and/or groups you have consulted to gain an understanding of this sector? Also what research and/or community consultation process was undertaken as a basis for these new policy directions?
7. Your letter to the editor boasts of a new web-based enrolment system for Adult Education. We have had advice that a key feature of this system is the forced ‘up-front’ payment for classes. This heavily favours those people who are both computer literate (many of whom have no doubt learnt their skills through Adult Ed as it was and remains at the forefront of IT education for the general population for the past 20 years) and those people with credit cards. There are many issues of social equity that are brought up by the use of such a payment method – one that has bureaucratic benefits but little benefit for the student enrolling and seems contradictory to the CKN’s aims of creating a more inclusive adult learning environment. Issues of particular concern are:
i. Many groups will now be disadvantaged, particularly when accessing popular classes – eg people outside urban areas who are unable to get to payment outlets to enrol and pay, people with mobility or transport problems, working people without credit cards. How can you guarantee all Tasmanians will have fair and equal access under this system? What policy or strategy covers this?
ii. If under this system there is a marked decline in enrolments, will you be making this information public?
iii. Will such a decline in enrolments then lead to this provision being deemed ‘unviable’ and therefore no longer supported by your government?
The reality is that it is decisions such as the one above that make us uneasy about the real ‘education and social equity’ credentials of those managing current policy changes in CKN and makes it difficult for us to trust that provision will truly be maintained and supported.
We look forward to your clarification of these points.
Friends of Adult Ed
