Like many sectors hit hard by coronavirus, the country's universities are entering a period of soul-searching and potential transformation.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
And like many other fundamental institutions of civilised society, it's a time to revisit the very reason for their existence.
What are universities for, how do they benefit society as a whole, and what do they bring to the economy?
These are serious questions worth asking, as the sector starts to pick itself out of the coronavirus-imposed doldrums.
The Morrison government's answer thus far has been that universities should be all about jobs. Specifically, steering young Australians into degrees that lead to jobs, and in the process making humanities studies either unaffordable or seemingly a bad choice.
As universities anticipate record numbers of applications for study in 2021 as the COVID recession sinks in, federal education minister Dan Tehan announced on Friday a rejigging of university funding.
"One of the sad things when you have a recession is that youth unemployment does grow and we've got to make sure that we skill young Australians so when the jobs are there, they can take them," Education Minister Dan Tehan told ABC television on Friday.
READ MORE:
This initiative will include major increases to the number of university places over the next three years.
It also means fees will double for some arts courses, and fall for Stem subjects.
It's a long-running joke that arts degrees will get you nowhere. They don't always, on their own, lead directly to jobs, in the same way that a degree in law, IT engineering or medicine will.
But making the humanities out of reach for low-income students makes a mockery of the fundamental tenet of higher education.
Education and learning, of all kinds, are key to a well-functioning society. While this period of economic hardship and recovery is a good time to revisit the purpose of Australia's universities - several of which are among the best in the world - this should not be to the exclusion of any one avenue of study.
It's clear that Australian universities have become too reliant on overseas students, and that the model needs to change in the post-COVID era.
But why cancel out a whole raft of professions - anthropology, languages, history, fine arts - in the name of jobs alone?
And why make university education contingent on the prospect of jobs alone? The US university system, flawed as it is when it comes to its fee structure and student loans system, generally insists on a general undergraduate degree that covers a broad range of subjects, including history, literature and communications, before the student advances into graduate courses such as law or medicine.
This is to give students a competitive edge in a future workplace. In other words, humanities subjects are considered essential, rather than frivolous.
Not to mention the fact that when it comes to higher education, there's no benefit to cancelling out individual passions or strengths. a student with a flair for history and literature may not take to maths or economics, no matter how lucrative the potential job on the horizon.
It's worth remembering too that tertiary education is essentially long game. Qualifications take years - at least three - to obtain. And yet the economy is now crying out for skills. There are queues of young people desperate to acquire them.
But like all things related to the sector, neither will happen overnight. Whether the country will still need thousands of newly qualified engineers in six years time is impossible to say.
But this measure by the government, while not the worst idea in its intention, seems to be unnecessarily cancelling out one of most important purposes of education.
Degrees in Stem subjects should by all means be encouraged, and all paths towards them cleared. But this shouldn't mean cancelling out humanities.