The future of property education in Australia
| Date | 17 August 2020 |
| Published date | 17 August 2020 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JPIF-06-2020-0062 |
| Pages | 9-14 |
| Subject Matter | Property management & built environment,Real estate & property,Property valuation & finance |
| Author | David Parker |
The future of property education
in Australia
David Parker
Independent Author, Adelaide, Australia
Abstract
Purpose –The study aims to comment upon the state of property education in Australia.
Design/methodology/approach –Statement of opinion
Findings –Property education in Australia is heading down a one-way dead-end road
Research limitations/implications –This article is a statement of opinion
Practical implications –Highlights alternative forms of delivery for property education in Australia
Social implications –Considers property education delivery in context of current social environment
Originality/value –Statement of opinion based in experience in academia and practice
Keywords Australia, Education, Research, Teaching
Paper type Viewpoint
Almost ten years ago, a symposium on the future of property education in Australia was held
to explore the hypothesis that property education may be at a crossroads, with current
university undergraduate programs having evolved to supply educated employees for the
property profession, including property valuers, managers and agents, following a
curriculum for accreditation codified by professional bodies, which may meet neither the
requirements of the broader property industry nor the senior management of universities
seeking to implement federal government education policy (Parker, 2011a).
Ten years on, it may be further hypothesised that the crossroads has been traversed and
that property education in Australia is now heading down a one-way, dead-end road without
the property profession, property industry, professional bodies or university administrations
having turned the traffic lights to red.
A recent example illustrates the extent to which university priorities have overtaken the
importance of educating employees forthe property profession and property industry. In one
Australian university last year,78% of students failed the examination in statutory valuation
(being an introduction to valuation forrating, taxation and compulsoryacquisition) as it was
evidentthat they were unable to correctlyanswer the examinationquestions. One student resat
and failed again, appealed, had both their original and resitpapers re-marked and the marks
were only changedby plus and minus one mark. The universityadministration made neither
suggestion of sub-optimal teachingnor of examination questions being toohard.
In response, the university administration simply gave all students an extra 10 marks.
This had the effect of reducing the failure rate to 59% and passing ten students who will enter
the property profession and property industry without an adequate knowledge of statutory
valuation with which to practice (which employers assume they will have), further eroding
the standing of the property degree and the integrity of the university. At the time of writing,
neither senior management within the university, the state government as regulator, the
professional bodies as accreditors nor the property profession nor industry as employers had
sought to intervene.
As the future of property education is multi-dimensional, it is proposed to view the issue
through a series of stakeholder lenses:
(1) The role of education;
(2) The role of research;
Property
education in
Australia
9
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/1463-578X.htm
Received 2 June 2020
Revised 3 June 2020
Accepted 3 June 2020
Journal of Property Investment &
Finance
Vol. 39 No. 1, 2021
pp. 9-14
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1463-578X
DOI 10.1108/JPIF-06-2020-0062
To continue reading
Request your trial