Canberra¡¯s plan to deny government benefits to failing students is regulatory overreach that will particularly disadvantage education minister Dan Tehan¡¯s constituents in the bush, Australian university groups say.

The government blindsided the sector with a plan to?rule students ineligible?for teaching grants or loans if they failed to successfully complete half of their subjects. The proposal was among a raft of surprise inclusions in draft legislation underpinning Mr Tehan¡¯s?overhaul of undergraduate fees and subsidies.

Mr Tehan said the measure would protect students from pointlessly incurring large tuition fee debts. ¡°Research has shown that nearly 6 per cent of university students fail every subject in their first year,¡± he told the?ABC.

¡°Universities and students [must] understand that they need to work together to make sure that the student is suitable for the course they¡¯re undertaking.¡±

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

But critics said universities already monitor their students¡¯ progress, and regional students ¨C many of whom are the first in their families to attend university, and can struggle in the unfamiliar environment ¨C are most at risk from the new rule.

The Regional Universities Network??why the government had taken ¡°so prescriptive¡± an approach. ¡°While the objective of the proposed measure is reasonable, we would not support reducing the autonomy of universities to determine their own student progression requirements,¡± said chair Helen Bartlett.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

Other groups have raised similar objections in submissions on the draft legislation. The Innovative Research Universities (IRU) said Mr Tehan had produced a ¡°heavy handed¡± solution to unsubstantiated problems.

It said the legislation included 18 new measures to stop universities from adopting ¡°negative marketing behaviours¡± or signing up non-genuine students ¨C activities that had flourished temporarily in vocational training funding schemes before the government tightened the rules.

Most of these measures are ¡°not necessary for universities¡±, the IRU??says. ¡°This is a major extension of regulation over universities, with a limited evidence base for the need.¡± ?

It says the accountability section of the ³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ Support Act has more than doubled in size since the act¡¯s introduction in 2003. The new measures would make it longer still ¨C ¡°contrary to the government¡¯s commitment to reduce red tape¡±.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

Australian National University policy expert Andrew Norton said most universities already intervened when students failed more than half their subjects. The government¡¯s measures would limit the grounds under which students could plead special circumstances ¨C particularly if those circumstances had emerged before the ¡°census date¡± when students became liable for fees.

¡°A university¡¯s judgement on the student¡¯s specific circumstances is likely to be fairer than an inflexible bureaucratic rule,¡± Professor Norton?. ¡°The current situation¡­is preferable to the government¡¯s proposal.¡±

The IRU also wants the draft legislation to include tighter rules around the ¡°maximum base grant amount¡± set by the education minister, to ensure that overall funding for each university¡¯s courses cannot decline from one year to the next.

The submission also calls for a change to ¡°grandfathering¡± rules covering some arts, humanities, business and law courses. While fees for such subjects will rise under Mr Tehan¡¯s proposals, students?starting their courses before 2021 will continue paying the current amounts.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

The government originally indicated that this safeguard would apply even if students subsequently changed their courses, but the legislation does not allow for that ¨C a situation the IRU wants reversed.

john.ross@timeshighereducation.com