Talk:History of Monash University

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Science and technology focus - neutrality[edit]

The article currently reads that Monash: 'was originally intended to have an emphasis on science and technology, to compensate for the perceived weakness in this area at University of Melbourne'

I have noticed that the neutrality of this has been questioned. This should be discussed. My own view is that this is a neutral comment. It has been referenced. It has much more to do with the broader context of universities and Australia at the time than with criticism of Melbourne University. The policy rationale behind establishing a second university in Melbourne was that, as new technology became more and more important in the economy, the State and Federal Governments formed the view that a specialist science and technology university should be built in Victoria. These areas had not been a focus of Melbourne University's research and it could not put through the number of students which the State required. Thus it is described in the article as a 'perceived weakness'. It is a 'perceived' weakness, not necessarily an actual weakness, but a perception of the governments and the Murray Committee nonetheless. To quote the reference in greater detail: 'The existing Australian universities, such as the University of Melbourne...defined themselves as one remove from government and 'a place apart' from the more plebian society around them. These universities now began to feel the pressures created by the emphasis on science and technology, and government-driven modernisation strategies. It was no longer possible to take all comers in every course.' It then describes the Federal Government's response and the Murray Committee's report.

If it is thought that the word 'weakness' carries too negative a connotation, then perhaps it could be changed to a less direct and meaningful, though perhaps more tolerable, phrase such as 'limited capacity' or 'limitations'.Profb21 (talk) 07:56, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I have an issue because although it's referenced, it's citing a POV rather than an established fact. For example, would Melbourne uni agree with this statement? Michellecrisp (talk) 07:59, 12 June 2008 (UTC)