New Zealand has a long tradition of accessible, affordable public higher education. The 1989 Education Act entitles students to enrol at university by right of prior educational achievement at high school or age. Combined with generous financial aid, this “open entry” has contributed to New Zealand having one of the highest participation rates in the developed world. In the aftermath of the global financial crisis and a change of government to a National-led coalition, the fiscal cost of open entry has come under the spotlight. In a series of policy changes, the government has moved to cap overall enrolments, limit students’ access to financial aid and encourage universities to exclude failing students by introducing financial penalties for low course and qualification pass rates. In principle, these changes could reduce the overall number of students at university without eroding the principle of open entry. Instead, most New Zealand universities have introduced selective admissions policies, ending the era of open entry. This paper explores the arguments for and against open entry, reviews the history of open entry in New Zealand and discusses the likely impact of recent policy developments on the higher education landscape.

1. Is open entry to New Zealand
universities a human right or a
utopian ideal past its use-by date?
Professor Nigel Healey
Pro-Vice-Chancellor, University of Canterbury

2. Recent newspaper headlines
 Open University Entry for Over-20s Ending
 An End to Open Entry at Universities?
 Massey Shuts Door! SIT Shuts Gate!
 We Need an Open Debate about Open Entry
 Another Nail in the Coffin for Open Entry
 “More than half of New Zealand’s university campuses have effectively
closed off second semester entry and are moving towards limited entry
next year. By turning away from open entry, a system that gave all
suitably qualified New Zealanders a fair go, this year marks a sad
turning point away from this cornerstone of our tertiary education
system” (NZUSA Co-President David Do)

3. Overview
 Why publicly subsidise higher education?
 Why allow open entry to university?
 A brief history of university entry in New Zealand
 The performance of New Zealand universities
 The financial challenges post-GFC
 The future of open entry

4. While publicly subsidise higher
education?
 Investment in (higher) education increases productivity
and promotes economic growth – especially in a
knowledge economy
 Higher education transforms the life chances of those
educated – promotes social harmony
 The gains to society of an educated population exceed
those to the educated individuals (through higher
productivity and earnings) – there are positive „spillover
effects‟

5. …and the orthodox policy
prescriptions which follow
 Countries should aim to increase overall participation
rates in higher education
 Policy should focus on raising the participation rates of
socially disadvantaged or under-represented groups –
„social inclusion‟, „widening access‟
 Governments should provide (at below cost) or subsidise
higher education to ensure optimal take-up
 Such support may be targeted at subjects where the
positive spillovers are highest (eg, teacher training)…
 …or at lower income groups who are less able/willing to fund
an investment in higher education

6. Why allow open-entry to university?
(1)
 “Open entry” means the automatic right to enter by virtue
of qualifications (UE) or age
 Competitive selection “rigs” entry in favour of higher socio-
economic groups
 “Rite of passage” for middle-class children; entrenches social
inequalities
 Regressive redistribution of income from poor to rich
 “Open access is a cornerstone of our tertiary education system.
Any moves away from this will threaten participation by most
of the population into tertiary education” (David Do, NZUSA Co-
President)

7. Why allow open-entry to university?
(2)
 High school performance is a poor predictor of university
performance
 Take level 3 NCEA scores and award
 4 for Excellent
 3 for Merit
 2 for Achieved
 Use only best 80 credits (max score 320)
 Compare with Grade Point Average (GPA) at end of first
year
 A+ = 9, C- = 1, D = 0, E = -1

8. NCEA scores vs first year GPA (2009)
(source: Sampson & Broght, 2010)
Type II error
Type I error

9. Age is a better predictor of future
academic performance
UC First Year Students in 2009
Full time Number Pass rate GPA
18-19 (with UE) 1,922 82% 4.2
20-24 344 52% 2.0
25-29 133 70% 3.3
30+ 175 79% 4.1

10. A history of university entry in New
Zealand (1)
 UC accepted “unmatriculated”
students since it began in 1873
 University of New Zealand: “the
Entrance or Matriculation
Examination has been a
'standard' examination given by
the University to make certain
that its entrants are ready, in its
opinion, to pass into the
University“ (NZCER, 1935)
 Government required NZ
universities to admit returning
servicemen after WWI without
entrance examination

11. A history of university entry in New
Zealand (2)
 Progressive education movement 1930s-1950s
 C E Beeby
 “the architect of our modern education system”
 Director of NZ Council for Education Research 1935-39
 Director of Education , 1940-60
 Peter Fraser
 Minister of Education 1935-40
 Prime Minister 1940-49
 “every person, whatever his level of academic ability, whether he be
rich or poor, whether he live in town or country, has a right, as a
citizen, to a free education of the kind for which he is best fitted and to
the fullest extent of his powers” (speech in 1939)

12. A history of university entry in New
Zealand (3)
 Unmatriculated students could be admitted at the University‟s
discretion (“provisional admission” ) first at 30+, then
21+, finally 20+
 1989 Education Act
 Paved the way for introduction of domestic tuition fees ($1,250 in
1991), previously nominal $300
 Domestic tuition fees set at 25% of total cost of tuition
 Increased by average 13% pa throughout 1990s
 Made entry at 20+ a right (no univ. discretion)
 New “driver‟s test” principle:
“come and have a go, if you think you‟re smart enough”

13. 1989 Education Act
 Para. 224
 2. a) a person is eligible to be enrolled as a student at any
institution…if the person is a domestic student [and]
 2. b) the person holds the minimum entry qualifications for the course
determined by the council (as defined by the NZ Qualifications
Authority (under para. 257)
 3. Sub-para. 2. b) does not apply to a person…[who] has attained the
age of 20 years
 5. Where the council of an institution is satisfied that it is necessary to
do so [it…] may determine the maximum number of students who may
be enrolled in a particular course
 9. No foreign student…shall be enrolled at an institution if the student's
enrolment at the institution would have the effect that a domestic
student…would not be able to be enrolled

14. The story so far
 The case for publicly subsidised higher education turns
on the positive spillovers for society of having
educated, productive and engaged citizens
 The case for open entry is that it gives
everyone, regardless of social background, a chance to
succeed?
 So:
 How is New Zealand‟s university system performing?
 And what is the problem with maintaining open entry?

15. Proportion of 25-64 year olds who
have studied at tertiary level
45
40
35
30
25
New Zealand
20 OECD
15
10
5
-
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Source: OECD Education at a Glance 2010

16. New Zealand university participation
rates by age group and
ethnicity, 2009
45.0%
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
Pakeha 18-19 Pakeha 20-24 Maori 18-19 Maori 20-24 Pasifika 18-19 Pasifika 20-24 Asian 18-19 Asian 20-24
Source: Ministry of Education

17. New Zealand university participation
rates by ethnicity (% population 15
years+ enrolled)
9.0%
8.0%
7.0%
6.0%
5.0% Pakeha
Maori
4.0% Pasifika
Asian
3.0%
2.0%
1.0%
0.0%
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Source: Ministry of Education

18. So how is the university sector
performing and what is the problem?
 New Zealand has 4th highest tertiary participation rate
in OECD (after Canada, Japan and US)
 Although there are differences in participation rates
between ethnic groups, rates are trending up
 But growing participation and social inclusion increases
the cost to the taxpayer of higher education
 Giving everyone a “fair go” wastes resources
 Post-GFC, the government‟s ability to fund higher
education is significantly constrained

19. The cost of the NZ tertiary system
($m)
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
Student loans
2,000
Tuition subsidies
1,500 Student allowances
1,000
500
0
Source: Ministry of Education

20. Direct government funding to
universities
$1,400,000
$1,200,000
$1,000,000
$800,000
Total Government Funding
$600,000 EFTS Vote
$400,000
$200,000
$0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Source: Ministry of Education

21. Increased funding has price and
quantity dimensions
Funded EFTS Government
114,000 Funding/EFTS
112,000 $12,000
110,000 $10,000
108,000 $8,000
106,000 $6,000
104,000 $4,000
102,000 $2,000
100,000 $0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Source: Ministry of Education

22. Giving everyone a “fair go”
necessarily wastes resources
 Although it is hard to predict in advance how an individual
student will perform, with open entry a significant proportion
will fail
 Open entry is a “fair go” to succeed or fail
 Resources are genuinely wasted if:
 Failing students do not learn anything
 They could otherwise have been working or learning a
vocational trade
 Their self-esteem and confidence is damaged by failing
 “Ghost students” – unintended product of open entry, liberal
progression standards and student loans

23. Illustrative academic progression
policies
The University of Auckland
 Satisfactory progress: a student is required to attain a Grade
Point Average of at least 0.8 in the last two semesters in
which they were enrolled.
 http://www.calendar.auckland.ac.nz/regulations/academic/enrolment-and-programme.html
Victoria University of Wellington
 Satisfactory progress: passing at least half the number of
points attempted in the last two consecutive trimesters of
study, or passing at least 36 points in the most recent
trimester.
 http://policy.vuw.ac.nz/Amphora!~~policy.vuw.ac.nz~POLICY~000000000900.pdf

24. Eight year qualification completion
rates for domestic students
80%
70%
60%
50%
40% 2000-2007
2001-2008
30% 2002-2009
20%
10%
0%
Bachelors Graduate Honours/PG Masters Doctorates Total
cert./ dip. cert./dip.
Source: Ministry of Education

25. Eight year qualification completion
rates for all students (bachelors and
above)
70%
60%
50%
40% Male Domestic
Female Domestic
30% Total Domestic
International
20%
10%
0%
2000-2007 2001-2008 2002-2009
Source: Ministry of Education

26. Comparative bachelor’s degree
completion rates (five years)
100
90
80
70
60
50
Completion Rates (at least 5A/5B
40 Programme)
30 Left Without Tertiary Qualification
20
10
0
Source: OECD Education at a Glance 2009

27. Proportion of students who leave without at
least a first tertiary degree
%
60
50
40 OECD average
30
20
10
0
Source: OECD Education at a Glance 2009

28. Constrained capacity to fund higher
education: government debt
projections post-GFC
Source: The Treasury's Long-term Fiscal Statement

29. How can the Government spend less
on higher education?
 Plan A: Investment Plans 2008
 Set EFTS funding cap per institution
 Drawbacks:
 With open entry, universities can‟t prevent becoming over-
enrolled
 Public expenditure on student allowances and loans
demand-driven and goes over-budget
 Worst of all worlds – public spending still uncontrolled and
universities underfunded

30. How else can the Government spend
less on higher education?
 Plan B: have you cake and eat it (2010)
 Retain open entry to give everyone a fair go, but drive
underperforming students out of the system more quickly by:
 Penalising institutions for exceeding their enrolment caps
 Penalising institutions for low course / qualification / progression
rates
 Denying underperforming students loans
 Keep open entry, have fewer all-years EFTS in universities
and (in principle) graduate the same number of students

31. The UC response (1)
 Retain open access
 Tighter progression standards to:
 Weed out weak students
 Encourage underperforming students to work harder, seek
support
 New rules (approved November 2009):
 Can take a course only twice (three times with Dean‟s
approval)
 Risk of exclusion after two successive semesters of a GPA
below 1.5

32. The UC response (2)
 Retain open access but…
 Remember relatively poor performance of 20-24 year
olds (52% vs 82% for school leavers and 70% for 25-29
year olds)?
 Case for reintroducing some form of entrance
examination to ensure that 20-24 year olds are ready for
university study

33. Challenges for universities
 If open entry is to be retained, universities need to
fundamentally reshape infrastructure and organisational
culture to ensure:
 Students understand the consequences of failing
 Weak students are identified and monitored
 Pro-active support is in place for those willing and able to
succeed
 Such changes are a challenge to the business model
 Large, unsupported entry-level classes cross-subsidise small
advanced classes and research
 Staff may resist reallocation of resources towards level 100
and retention services

34. A final complication…
 Although it appears to violate the 1989 Education Act, a
simpler response by universities is to limit open entry
by selecting on basis of NCEA results
 Action by several universities to adopt selective entry
creates strong prisoner‟s dilemma issues…
 ...open entry universities may find standard of entrants
falling, forcing them into a vicious circle (lower
entrants, higher retention costs) or (more likely) to
adopt selection

35. Conclusions
 Open entry has been a feature of New Zealand universities
since the 1920s
 It has contributed to amongst the highest participation rates
in the world…
 …coupled with relatively low completion rates
 Faced with funding pressures, the Government is seeking to
reduce “waste” in higher education, by excluding poor
performing students while maintaining open entry
 While UC remains committed to open entry, there is a risk
that the Government's strategy may be derailed by growing
use of selectivity at entry level