University of Newcastle Aviation Program
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Newcastle Uni cclosing Aviation program
Lancer, you need to look at the background. The review board for aviation was appointed as a result of the decision to review the programs offered by the University. Aviation was and is not the only discipline under review. Several programs are supposed to be axed. The review board simply established that it is uneconomically to continue the aviation program considering the resources and investment required to elevate the program to an Asia-Pacific centre of excellence. Admittedly it was not helpful that the then program director severely resisted to accept more international students in fear they could be terrorists and "bomb us" and his absolute refusal to consider offering the courses to airline cadets with the reasoning that "nobody tells me what to teach".
During the past two years the University exams were similar to CASA ATP exams and even more difficult. The CASA pass rate is very good now in Courses like Flight Planning, Air Navigation, Air Legislation as well as Performance and quite satisfactory in the other subjects. The problem is somewhere else. Firstly, the passmark of any University exam is 50% by law. There are students who just don't attend lectures and tutorials or make no efford hence fail the exams or just pass the University exams with 50%. These students still demand to sit the CASA examinations and, unless the law is changed, the University would have no right to refuse any such student to sit a CASA exam.
There were talks with CASA but to no avail. The people pushing through the proposed legislation do not support tertiary University degrees. I have more than good reasons to suspect that CASA aims for a pilot training system into which Universities and even TAFE would not fit. However, let me not go into this in this thread, it is a separate issue.
There are some who, correctly, say that the number of students from the University of Newcastle who failed CASA ATP exams was quite high up to mid 2003. May be some find it interesting to learn that the University had trouble recruiting suitable teaching staff and contracted Sydney TAFE to provide the instruction at great expense.
This is over since the beginning of 2003 since the University managed to engage someone with an airline background and who is experienced in ATP training. Now TAFE is not any longer used and the pass rate has significantly improved.
During the past two years the University exams were similar to CASA ATP exams and even more difficult. The CASA pass rate is very good now in Courses like Flight Planning, Air Navigation, Air Legislation as well as Performance and quite satisfactory in the other subjects. The problem is somewhere else. Firstly, the passmark of any University exam is 50% by law. There are students who just don't attend lectures and tutorials or make no efford hence fail the exams or just pass the University exams with 50%. These students still demand to sit the CASA examinations and, unless the law is changed, the University would have no right to refuse any such student to sit a CASA exam.
There were talks with CASA but to no avail. The people pushing through the proposed legislation do not support tertiary University degrees. I have more than good reasons to suspect that CASA aims for a pilot training system into which Universities and even TAFE would not fit. However, let me not go into this in this thread, it is a separate issue.
There are some who, correctly, say that the number of students from the University of Newcastle who failed CASA ATP exams was quite high up to mid 2003. May be some find it interesting to learn that the University had trouble recruiting suitable teaching staff and contracted Sydney TAFE to provide the instruction at great expense.
This is over since the beginning of 2003 since the University managed to engage someone with an airline background and who is experienced in ATP training. Now TAFE is not any longer used and the pass rate has significantly improved.
Drshmoo, these young people take the bait quite easily, don't they. Your arms must be getting tired from all that winding-up. Anyone reading your posts must realise by now that anything useful you have to say is is generally obscured by bulls**t.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 811
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Condorflyer,
I'm looking forward to seeing what will replace the course, but its disappointing to see the old one wind-up in the manner it did.
I won't quote the first two sentences of the review's "Terms of Reference: Background" on this public forum, but it certainly doesn't imply the review was a standard undertaking by any means. It clearly shows that there were serious underlying problems within the staffing of the department itself.
The whole review process stank of a set-up. The Chairman of the Review Board was the head of another institution's Aviation programme, and remained on the panel despite the obvious conflict of interest. Another on the panel was also from a 'competing' institution. While three industry representatives were invited to take part, only one did - a graduate now employed by QantasLink as an F/O. The course was railroaded by the HofS who seemed to pay lip-service to the concerns of staff and students while furthering her own agenda behind the scenes. The School simply wanted more funding and places for itself at the expense of the aviation degree that should never have been part of that School.
The course was close to being considered an 'Asia-Pacific centre of excellence' until it slid into decline. Had the 'Head of Aviation' been more proactive during the wider restructure, many of the organisational issues that resulted may have been mitigated. Newcastle was widely considered the best aviation degree in the country (and it was the first) until the 'course management' issues appeared following the collapse of talks with Impulse, and were subsequently exacerbated following the re-aligning with the parent School.
The day of ab-inito programmes may indeed be over, but I wouldn't hesitate too much in saying that it's largely a result of hidden agendas conflicting with the steps necessarily to align the course with the regulatory and industrial needs of the time. The regulatory environment was the same 10 years ago as it was when the programme was suspended. The issues of pass-mark discrepancies and the like have been sucessfully tackled for over a decade.
Lancer
I'm looking forward to seeing what will replace the course, but its disappointing to see the old one wind-up in the manner it did.
I won't quote the first two sentences of the review's "Terms of Reference: Background" on this public forum, but it certainly doesn't imply the review was a standard undertaking by any means. It clearly shows that there were serious underlying problems within the staffing of the department itself.
The whole review process stank of a set-up. The Chairman of the Review Board was the head of another institution's Aviation programme, and remained on the panel despite the obvious conflict of interest. Another on the panel was also from a 'competing' institution. While three industry representatives were invited to take part, only one did - a graduate now employed by QantasLink as an F/O. The course was railroaded by the HofS who seemed to pay lip-service to the concerns of staff and students while furthering her own agenda behind the scenes. The School simply wanted more funding and places for itself at the expense of the aviation degree that should never have been part of that School.
The course was close to being considered an 'Asia-Pacific centre of excellence' until it slid into decline. Had the 'Head of Aviation' been more proactive during the wider restructure, many of the organisational issues that resulted may have been mitigated. Newcastle was widely considered the best aviation degree in the country (and it was the first) until the 'course management' issues appeared following the collapse of talks with Impulse, and were subsequently exacerbated following the re-aligning with the parent School.
The day of ab-inito programmes may indeed be over, but I wouldn't hesitate too much in saying that it's largely a result of hidden agendas conflicting with the steps necessarily to align the course with the regulatory and industrial needs of the time. The regulatory environment was the same 10 years ago as it was when the programme was suspended. The issues of pass-mark discrepancies and the like have been sucessfully tackled for over a decade.
Lancer
Last edited by *Lancer*; 28th Jan 2004 at 11:41.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
University of Newcastle Aviation Degree
Lancer, you must have a good insight in proceedings and I am not saying you are totally wrong. What I am saying is that the number of programs were to be slashed in an effort to make the University more effective and efficient. Yes, there was the potential of conflict of interest considering that the review board was chaired by a competitor and still had at least one competitor who wanted to market an Aviation "Mickey Mouse" program which left all the aviation instruction and training to flying schools (mainly BAE) and, after additional not aviation related studies, handed out an Aviation degree. It suited BAE and the University in question since BAE could market their services claiming their training leads to a degree and BAE fed the University with additional international (full fee paying) students. I am not denying there was a staffing problem.
I am sure the new venture will possibly be even better as it will be more appropriate for modern times. The aviation program itself will be an industry program and not a degree program but at the end students will be qualified to straight away enrol into a higher degree course. The school employed a new staff member a few years ago who is an ex European military and airline pilot and is an experienced aviation teacher with even formal teaching qualifications and, as far as I know, he is now in charge.
Let's see what happend.
I am sure the new venture will possibly be even better as it will be more appropriate for modern times. The aviation program itself will be an industry program and not a degree program but at the end students will be qualified to straight away enrol into a higher degree course. The school employed a new staff member a few years ago who is an ex European military and airline pilot and is an experienced aviation teacher with even formal teaching qualifications and, as far as I know, he is now in charge.
Let's see what happend.
