Current and former staff at the University of Canberra have hit out at the secrecy of management after journalism students, including myself, were warned off making freedom of information requests.
As Crikey reported on Tuesday, four students were pressured into withdrawing FOI applications targeting controversial stories involving UC administration.
As the university finally responded to the claims following widespread local media coverage, former staff have raised concerns the university is prioritising their management and finances over students and teaching.
John Passant, a former UC academic, says UC leadership has a “profit before people approach” and he believes “education has become a product, a commodity to be bought and sold on the market”.
Another former UC academic (and a lecturer of my mine in previous years), Josh Rosner, agrees: “I resigned my academic teaching position at the University of Canberra because I felt I could no longer look students in the eye and faithful suggest they were studying at a university that cared about their education.
“UC, as an employer, is the most dysfunctional, political, unsupportive environment I have ever worked in.”
UC refused to comment or answer questions on my article and instead released a statement claiming that they have “a policy of open and free access to information” and that “the University’s FOI Officer responded to all of the [FOI] requests”.
Professor Greg Battye responded yesterday, stating “several concerns were raised by different parties” about the FOI requests put to the university.
Professor Battye says he passed on these concerns to lecturer Crispin Hull, after which Hull made “a very reasonably phrased request to all the students involved in FOI requests to UC to withdraw those requests”.
Hull also commented on the issue, claiming he defended his students, including myself, from UC management.
“As I tell students, every Australian has a legally enforceable right to ask for and obtain access to documents under FOI, so there cannot possibly be any ethics-committee requirements for such ‘research’,” he wrote in an email to professor Battye.
He also informed the university he would not be a part of any “bullying conduct”.
Several students have also come out since the article was published informing me they are no longer formally withdrawing their FOI requests. One student, Ashley Hamilton, is pursuing an FOI on UC buying the naming rights to the ACT Brumbies.
The National Tertiary Education Union also expressed concern over the issue. Stephen Darwin, the NTEU’s ACT secretary, is worried about the level of secrecy: “The way Ms Ingram’s FOI request and those of her colleagues was handled raises serious questions about the state of accountability within the university.”
Darwin also says two of the subjects of the FOI requests — the changes to the journalism degree and the ACT Brumbies sponsorship — are issues the NTEU had already tried, and failed, to obtain information on.
Is File Shredding Tax Deductible …… ? I mean, does it get Contracted Out, is it Externalized now ? Niche Market, any one ? Managers. Self Protecting, CYA tossers. Meritocracy, anyone? COME ON !!!
What is the world coming to when journalism students can’t work out when to use ” me” or “I” and use “myself” !
“Current and former staff at the University of Canberra have hit out at the secrecy of management after journalism students, including myself, were warned off making freedom of information requests.”
Give me a clue Kay.Pearse. What are the options available for ‘what is the world coming to? A fork in the road? A grisly end? The start of the rest of its life? At least the writer revealed they were a “student”. They don’t know everything yet. They certainly haven’t passed Pedantry 101.
It was my understanding, from your own articles, that you had obtained the documents in question before you were ‘warned’ or rather as Crispin Hull said, asked if any students were willing to withdraw the request on grounds of processing capabilities. It would seem counter-productive to threaten students to withdraw request that have already been completed. There are many UC journalism students, who while respect your right to have an opinion, do not agree with you assertions about our supposed anger about changes to the degree. It would be good practice to identify what is only opinion and to whom that opinion belongs.
As for Crispin’s support for students, it has been unwavering since this debacle began. In the lecture the week before your first Crikey article, Crispin promised to support all students and that he only asked students to withdraw their request if they wanted to as the FOI officer was going to have issue with fulfilling all requests to the fullest in the time restraints. It is unfortunate that by missing the lecture you printed information to the contrary. While I acknowledge you have rectified that initial statement in this article, I would say the damage is done wouldn’t you?
As a journalism student I am excited about the changes and in an environment where journalism jobs are fast decreasing and changing, I think the new degree will make students more employable in the wider communications field, which is the current industry reality. By finding students of that opinion, you may have produced a more balanced account of what is really happening at the uni.
I completely agree with STUDENT UC’s comment.
Your articles do not reflect the views of many of your fellow journalism students (like myself) and contain incorrect and misleading information.
Perhaps in the future you should do your research before making such broad generalizations and misquoting your tutors and fellow students.
As for our tutor Crispin Hull, your articles cast a negative spin on his negotiations with us, his students. Crispin has been nothing but supportive and helpful in his mentor role, giving us thorough advice throughout the FOI process.
Your outburst has had negative outcomes for your fellow students, with some students recently losing interviews and potential sources, who now refuse to speak to UC students as a result of your crikey crusade.
I had hoped that your second article would set the record straight but it appears to be as poorly researched and biased as the first, it is not at all a reflection of UC journalism students’ views.
If only you had done your homework before badmouthing your uni and running to the press…
This is certainly not an example of Journalism #101: fair, accurate and balanced reporting of events…