History
The 30th Birthday Blog
“History is a daring enterprise whose practitioners work perpetually in areas of terrible uncertainty” (overheard on ABC Radio National).
In 2006 ATEM celebrated its 30th Anniversary. Part of that was to make a start on gathering its history. On this page there are three set pieces in the download box, the first and the third by Maree Conway who is the Association historian. The second document is a more philosophical piece on the nature of ATEM and its mission.
In the second download box there are some source documents from long ago.
After that there are spaces where people associated with ATEM have recorded their memories. Please feel free to add to these spaces over time. In this way the History Page will continue to grow and be useful to other historians in the future.
The ATEM Archives are beautifully cared for by the Noel Butlin Archive of the Australian National University http://www.archives.anu.edu.au/nbac/html/index.php
| Download | Format |
| The establishment of AITEA: a short history by Maree Conway (1994) |
 |
| The Birth of an Organisation: ATEM and the Principle of Subsidiarity,
Love and Other Ideals by Giles Pickford (2003) |
|
| The 30th Anniversary History of ATEM: “Inherent Uncertainty” by Maree Conway (2006) |
|
Origins
Colin Plowman's Memories of AITEA
From my earliest days at the University of Western Australia in the 1950s I was bothered by the lack of any formal development of the theory and practice of university administration amongst my colleagues. This discontent with the status quo came to a head in the early 1960s during my time at the ANU. Two steps were taken in those days which were precursors of what was to become AITEA.
Firstly, I used to gather my staff for a meeting every Friday at which we discussed the theory and practice of our work. I encouraged them to read books about administration and about good writing. Examples were the works of Quiller-Couch, Fowler, Gower and Robert Graves. I remember the first sentence in Graves’s Reader over your Shoulder which was “What are the principles of a clear statement?”
Secondly, I visited Maurie Blank, Registrar at the Caulfield Institute of Technology, as I had heard of his ideas for formalising the training of College administrators. He was an extraordinarily modest and unassuming man. I asked him why his ideas for an Institute were confined to the Colleges of Advanced Education. He replied that University Registrars appeared dismissive of his ideas and that the Vice-Chancellors were reluctant to take a different view. The opposition came mainly from Hugh McCredie (Sydney) and Jim Butchardt (Monash) and to some extent Howard Buchan (Flinders).
After a time, however, my colleagues at other institutions sensed that they needed to do something about formal training and initiated a School for University Administrators which was run at the University of Melbourne. This venture had the support of the Vice-Chancellor, Sir George Paton; the Registrar, ‘Ding’ Bell and his Associate Registrar Paul Morgan, together with Ray Marginson. A similar school was run in Canberra by me and Don Patterson at the Canberra College of Advanced Education. It was at this School that I met my wife Anne. The next step was that Warwick Williams of the ANU and Paul Morgan of the University of Melbourne ran a School at the University of Papua New Guinea.
The Registrars remained generally opposed to the idea that the CAEs should be included but the idea for the Australian Institute of Tertiary Education Administrators (AITEA) nonetheless began to emerge. Graham Jackson of the ANU visited the University of Western Australia and convinced the Deputy Registrar, Dan Dunn, that the CAEs and Institutes of Technology in Western Australia (now Edith Cowan and Curtin) should be included in the new organisation. People began to give the idea more consideration, but not necessarily active consideration.
In the mid-1970s Graham Jackson and I ran a Pan Pacific Conference of University Administrators at which Gareth Thomas from the Institute of Education in London was a guest. Don Watts of WAIT and Tony Kearney, Registrar of the University of Tasmania, as well as Alec Lazenby, Vice-Chancellor of the University of New England gave support.
From this point, the concept of AITEA was taken seriously. There were still some pockets of resistance, represented by Sam Rayner (Queensland) and Keith Chester (James Cook), but they were now in the minority.
Our motivation was the conviction that we should be taking an interest in the quality of our work and the way that it advanced our institutions. The motive was not related to what we could derive from it, but rather how our colleagues and the institutions where they worked could benefit. We wanted to understand the structure of the machinery and how it could best be oiled and maintained.
Eventually people came to realise that what we were doing was important and my legacy remains the satisfaction that we achieved something worthwhile. I noticed in a recent publication of the Association of University Administrators (UK and Ireland) that the aims of their programs are to promote “reflective practice”. This, in a nutshell, was our aim in the 1970s.
The Future
There is a degree of schizophrenia in ATEM at the moment. Are we an organisation devoted to promotion of reflective practice, or merely an organisation that allows a person to acquire further letters after her or his name? Are we lighting a fire in the minds of our members in which they strive to understand the nature of what they are involved in, or are we merely teachers of clever techniques for solving problems?
If we are lighting the fire, then we are giving staff the ability to derive the deep satisfaction that comes with mastering a craft. If we are only providing management techniques, then in my view we still have a long way to go.
I should add that we were a happy bunch in the old days of AITEA. I have noticed lately that there is much more rivalry in the organisation and much less cohesion. This might simply reflect the world in which we now live. Things do change, and the older Ghosts watch with some concern from the sidelines at the same time as we cheer you. However, we wish you all well. ATEM has passed to your hands.
Colin Plowman
Convenor of the ATEM Ghosts
August 2006
The Conference
Warwick Nicoll reports on early events with the AITEA Conference in New Zealand
The most interesting story that relates to the AITEA Conference in Auckland is that we tried to vary the usual type of social activities in two ways; firstly by spending an evening at Alexandra Park the home of harness racing in Auckland, where we had use of a large lounge overlooking the racetrack, great food, company, music, together with betting facilities. The major race of the evening was the AITEA Handicap or Cup, I can't quite recall the exact detail, but Ross Christie, as President duly presented the trophy in the birdcage to the winner's owner and after some effort draped the winning horse with a suitably crafted cover resplendent with the AITEA name on it.
To this day I am sure the owner had no idea what AITEA was or even if he cared. The concept of going to the harness racing took some selling to the delegates at the conference, it didn't matter whether you wanted to bet or not, everyone seemed to thoroughly enjoy the evening and I have been reminded of it by many of whom were present at various ATEM Conferences and functions over the years.
The second activity which we introduced was at the dinner where we tried to encourage all present to represent their home or city area by presenting an item, totally unrehearsed and without warning. The talent, or in some cases the lack of talent, amongst our members was rather overwhelming. I don't think I have ever been game to attempt to repeat the activity.
The main thing that came from both activities is that the fellowship developed through common membership and interest, stimulated by ATEM activities, greatly strengthens the value of membership. Members do however need to participate in the activities.
Regards
Warwick Nicoll
The Journal
The Web Site
10/02/2006
The ATEM Web Site began in 2000, after the upheaval caused by Jim McLauchlan's ATEM 2000 Group. It was certainly a huge step forward, adding one more jewel to the ATEM Crown: the other jewels being the Annual Conference and the Journal. Halvorsen the second Executive Officer of ATEM: the first EO being John Chapman AM.
The site is currently in the creative hands of a group of geniuses in Melbourne called Evolution7, aided and abetted by the equal-third EOs Giles Pickford and Peter Scardoni.
We applaud the 3rd child in ATEM's cradle. The Annual Conference is now a huge baby and the Journal has produced over a million pages of well-reasoned print, but the first happens only once a year and the second quarterly. Whereas the Web Site happens by the minute.
The Branches
ACT
NSW
23/07/2006
Although AITEA was created by Victorians, with some help from the ACT and Western Australia, it was in New South Wales that the transformation to ATEM was conceived. Below are the memories of Jim McLauchlan (President of ATEM 1996-1999) about that time of turmoil and a new Spring.
AITEA and ATEM a Reminiscence
1. The Pleasures of Youth and University Expansion
In late 1969, I arrived in Australia to take up appointment as a 'Graduate Assistant' in the Registrar's Office of The University of Sydney (the capital T was a requirement for all correspondence and publications). One of a group of young administrators brought in to underpin the rapid and generously funded development of Australian Universities in the late sixties and early seventies, I revelled in an exciting, demanding and productive environment which appeared to offer unlimited expansion.
As unfortunately still seems to be the case, most of us had wandered into our jobs by accident or referral. There was no sense of administrators being 'professional' at any level within the University (including us): the prevailing view, heavily reinforced by the hierarchy, was that we were solely there to serve the academic staff. For many academics and senior officers, this categorised us as 'downstairs' menials in the Victorian sense of being 'in service'. There was one species of administrator below us in the pecking order - the 'Graduate Clerk' - a grade whose appointment process was arcane, and for whom transmogrification to our level was well nigh impossible.
This view of our role was expressed in some strange ways. The GA's quickly became a cohesive and social group, and most of us would head off for lunch once a week to talk shop, exchange views, pass on information and of course, gossip. Out of this came radical ideas such as seeking a regular monthly meeting with senior staff, access to Academic Board and Senate papers, internal secondments to gain wider experience and (most radical of all), promotion based on merit rather than longevity or gender. Bear in mind that this was well before Equal Employment Opportunity and the Merit Principle became a legislative requirement. We even dared to debate whether we served the University first, encompassing and supporting the groves of academe and all the other forms of university flora and fauna. After some six months of hints and frowns from several senior administrative 'heavies', I was summoned to the Registrar's office to be told I had excellent career prospects, but solemnly warned against appearing to lead or create dissension. Two of my colleagues were also carpeted. We ignored the pointed suggestion that the lunches should cease, gave assurances of both loyalty and innocence, and were naively surprised that by the end of the year, our 'radical' agenda was quietly implemented - without acknowledgement.
We learnt on the job, from each other, and from our mistakes. The fortunate ones among us worked with skilled and experienced senior colleagues, the best of whom knew how to 'bring us on', which was the closest we came usually came to a mentoring or training program. There was only one middle level training program available nationally - the forerunner to the AVCC program - owing its existence to supportive and farsighted Registrars like Colin Plowman (ANU) and 'Ding' Bell (Melbourne). Held once a year over five days (I think) for twenty odd participants, selection was a rare prize, and I felt absolutely privileged when I was nominated in 1974. As a newcomer to Australian Higher Education, I discovered the genuine and long lasting benefits of what is now simply 'networking', and in addition to making some friends for life, began to get a fuller understanding of the breadth, depth, diversity and complexity of the university system. It also sparked my enduring passion for training and professionalism in higher education management. Over the next two or three years, I also learnt how fragile these programs can be: there were several attempts by a conservative clique of Registrars to discontinue the annual event, only narrowly averted by the 'progressives'.
A final example of those years was the usually dismissive attitude to obtaining further qualifications, formal or otherwise. This was generally seen as a purely personal activity with no relevance other than as a useful addition to student numbers. A colleague who subsequently became my wife decided to enrol externally in the only postgraduate diploma/master's degree for staff in tertiary education management. The University decreed that all fifteen days of the annual residential component should be deducted from her recreational leave, on the grounds that it was not a requirement for her employment - she already had an honours bachelor's degree - and that was sufficient for any Graduate Assistant.
2. Downhill to the Advanced Education Sector
In 1976 I moved to the New South Wales Institute of Technology (now the University of Technology, Sydney and a few blocks down from Sydney University), which was part of the burgeoning Advanced Education sector. Allegedly 'equal but different', there was intense rivalry with the University sector, and many of my new colleagues, especially academics, were determined to make the Institute an Australian version of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. I suspect only Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, a sister college of advanced education, got anywhere near that status.
AITEA was born in this ferment of rivalry, when Maurie Blank wrote a weighty and somewhat overdone Constitution which nonetheless engaged the aspirations of many us who believed in the need to identify and create professional standards and behaviour. My Registrar gathered me up with half a dozen other senior administrators without notice one afternoon, and hauled us off to a meeting which had been called by another CAE to establish a New South Wales region of AITEA. It was in fact a takeover move, to put NSWIT in control, and ensure that none of the universities could influence the directions that the fledgling AITEA might take. For several years, there was no certainty that it would become a cross-sectoral organisation. We set about organising seminars, training programs and lunches which attracted large numbers of participants, and our membership grew exponentially across both sectors. There were attempts by university registrars to discourage their staff from joining, and at least two serious moves to set up an 'exclusive' Conference of University Administrators to parallel the U.K organisation. Fortunately, common sense - and a fair bit of effective politicking by those in both sectors, myself included, who believed that separate associations would weaken all parties - prevailed.
3. Further Downhill to TAFE
In 1987 I moved to the New South Wales Department of Technical and Further Education, a few more blocks down from NSWIT. During the previous decade, I had served on the AITEA NSW region Executive in various capacities, and seen the skills and efforts of my colleagues build it into a thriving and effective professional association.
In the mid eighties, in an echo of the long dead CAE/University status issue, we had debated whether we should admit TAFE members. The Constitution's emphasis on Degree/Diploma level entry qualifications, and the need to define what was 'Tertiary' experience, gave the 'hairsplitters' lots of opportunity to press the case for exclusion, but again common sense prevailed. Those of us on the inclusive side who imagined that we would see if not a flood, at least a steady flow of TAFE members, were to be sorely disappointed. Little did I realise that as result, a few years later I would join TAFE, and still be able to retain my membership of AITEA. Pressure of work meant that I was unable to continue to serve on the Executive, but kept in touch by regularly attending the state and national conferences.
Late in that decade occurred one of the saddest and most perplexing events that any voluntary organization an experience - a President committing serious misconduct, and subsequently being stripped of his membership. Seen by some as an inevitable 'rite of passage', it nonetheless sent a shockwave through the membership, especially the State and National Executives. As one cynical woman member remarked to me, 'even the boys in the club can't trust each other any more'.
4. A Reluctant Branch President
In 1992, the outgoing President of the New South Wales branch approached me about standing for the position. I had several reservations, not the least of which was whether I could commit sufficient time to the role to make a worthwhile contribution. The branch was in good shape, financially and in terms of programs and membership numbers, but seemed to have hit a plateau.
We faced a set of problems just as knotty - and some still as unresolved - as today. Only a small fraction of the members was able or willing to give their personal time, AITEA was perceived by universities and government instrumentalities as a 'worthy' training group but not a key player, there was resistance to creating a comprehensive professional body, and many of those who stayed out of AITEA were 'utilitarians' who had correctly concluded that membership would not add much value to their career options.
Another reservation was that it was hoped that my TAFE role would increase membership from that sector, which had so far been a trickle. Given that my responsibilities included TAFE training, this seemed reasonable to those with little knowledge of the Department. As I pointed out, NSW TAFE had well established statewide training programs, conferences and degree/diploma courses for administrative staff, all offered through a division of twenty full time staff with an annual budget of over $4m. The branch couldn't compete with that, and I doubt that much has changed since then. We decided to focus on cross-sectoral issues, and 'getting to know you' functions, which were well attended but did not attract many new members.
This was also an era of restructuring, downsizing and major political interventions in tertiary education; we were avowedly and appropriately not an industrial body and therefore we always tended to be on the periphery of the actions and events directly affecting our members. Nevertheless, in NSW we continued to focus on what we did best, and maintained our program coverage and membership for the next few years.
From the beginning, AITEA was a state-based organisation: the regions had the members, the money, and a majority on the 'National' Council (national is in quotes because we were an Australasian Institute, and our friends across the Ditch can be sensitive). I had attended an occasional meeting, but by and large our branch, like the others, pretty well ignored their deliberations, except when it came to increasing the membership subscription or asking us to pay more to the national coffers. As Branch President, I now had to attend every meeting, and was not impressed. There was much chat and some bluster about issues which seemed to me to be second order, and even when resolutions on key matters were solemnly passed, they were rarely acted on. Many of these issues were of long standing, and we would chew these old bones quite contentedly, comfortable in the knowledge that they would be served up again.
Questions such as our professional status (if any), the rise of managerialism in education, the emergence of commercialisation in all aspects of our work, the need to review our outdated Constitution, whether members were 'owned' by the branches or the Institute, clarifying the relationship between the two, and even determining the financial worth of the Institute, were all grist for our grinding but somewhat unproductive mill.
In 1995, a major issue emerged: there had been an uncontested election for National President, and some members of the Victorian branch decided that the result was unacceptable, and the election process flawed. There were threats of legal action to overturn the outcome, and even more extreme declarations that the branch would secede from the Institute. The outgoing President was unable to deal with the problem for personal reasons, and the other Branch Presidents gave me the hospital pass. When I talked it over with the spokesperson for the Victorian branch, I was left in no doubt that they were deadly serious about both litigation (legal advice had been taken) and secession (they were sure that the Constitution would enable them to keep their members and their resources).
After an intensive re-reading of the Constitution, I doubted whether their claims were well founded, but it was obvious that a victory for either protagonist would be pyrrhic, and the Institute, if it survived, would be a long time recovering. An acceptable compromise had to be found. I decided that the only workable solution would be for our members to reconfirm their electoral decision. If other persons decided to stand in a new election, so be it. However, the Victorian region would have to give an undertaking that it would abide by the result, whoever was elected. I also advised that the first election did not appear to have been handled according to the prescribed electoral process, which at least allowed the Institute Council to elevate the issue above personalities. All parties agreed to the compromise. I then had the difficult and frankly unpleasant task of telling the President Elect that the Council would be considering a motion to set aside the election.
There was real tension and concern among those aware of the contretemps as we approached the next Council meeting, which was to be held before the start of the Annual Conference in Hobart. In the event, the decision to hold a new election was taken after an extended debate, and as I recall, without a dissenting vote.
5. An Even More Reluctant Institute President
Mightily relieved to have got through this minefield apparently unscathed, I left the meeting to enjoy the Conference and forget the interplay of politics and personality created by an issue which had illuminated a darker side of our organisation.
That same evening, there was the first of half a dozen approaches over the next two days urging me to contest the election. After politely and lightheartedly declining the first two, I began to wonder if this was an orchestrated process with some agenda that I couldn't fathom, and decided to take it seriously. A discussion with two close friends helped to ease my paranoia, so I began to think the possibility through. There was still a year of my branch Presidency to run, and hence the need to consult the State Executive. I worried that in an already divided election environment, it would appear that I was taking advantage of a situation in which I had played a significant part, or even worse that I had engineered the whole mess. Equally important was that I would be running against a woman, and my many women colleagues and friends had often ragged me about the 'boys in suits' who thought they ran AITEA. In an overwhelmingly university group, could someone 'branded' as TAFE, no matter how senior, engender the respect and support that would be necessary to keep building the Institute? And in any case, why take on what was clearly going to be a difficult and thankless task which could well prove impossible?
In retrospect, I was worrying too much. The answer was straightforward, and given to me by a friend who was also a seasoned and blunt branch President: 'Don't kid yourself, Jim, nobody else wants to do it'. She was right.
6. From AITEA to ATEM
And so I inherited the Presidential mantle, worn with distinction by most of my predecessors, the majority of whom I had respected and liked. I was determined not to let them or our members down.
While awaiting the election result, I had done some serious thinking about how to go about the task if it came my way. Identifying the problems was, as always, the easy part, and I divided them into three: patching up the divisions that were now evident between the branches and the Institute Executive; dealing with the backlog of issues that had occupied the Council for far too long; and selecting some achievable initiatives that would improve AITEA's standing as a professional organization.
It was a pretty inauspicious beginning. A special general meeting was necessary to declare the election result within a specific time frame, and the Honorary Secretary was from Western Australia, so I had to organise the meeting myself. Turning up at Sancta Sophia College, the usual venue for the NSW branch, I found only a handful of members. A call to W.A. elicited information about the required quorum, and the indifferent suggestion that the meeting be rescheduled. In an eerie replay of my former Registrar's 'branch stacking' twenty years before, I rounded up a group of colleagues from Sydney University and NSWIT and made the quorum by the slimmest of margins. The quips and barbs from those friends about crossing their palms with silver (or at least buying them drinks) and the imperial placing of the crown on my own head were accepted as a reasonable 'quid pro quo'.
And then it got worse. I had been aware that the outgoing President had experienced some difficulty with the Treasurer, and had even gone to Canberra in an unsuccessful attempt to get the financial records. To this day, I don't know what the real problem was, but it was only solved by my meekly travelling to Canberra, buying the Treasurer a cup of coffee, and receiving with some formality a few slim manila folders. It was patently clear that the Executive 'team' was close to dysfunctional. I added a fourth problem to my list - finding colleagues who would form a working Executive.
Those first six months were spent meeting and talking with branches, separating the desirable tasks from the difficult but feasible, and convincing the Council to set up the 'Institute Reference Group'. This awkwardly titled brainchild was my attempt to identify and progress issues for the Institute and head off region fears of 'Centralism' by including representatives of every region. All I asked was that the members be prepared to work. By June 1996, the Council had agreed (with some hesitation), and for the next four years the group became a powerhouse of ideas, activity and productivity. By 1998, it was redubbed most appropriately as the ATEM 2000 Group.
One always savours those relatively rare career experiences when a diverse assemblage of individuals becomes a driving, exciting and fun-to-be-with team. We debated, argued, disagreed violently on occasion, but always got on with business. Everyone contributed, but I must single out Maree Conway, whose encyclopaedic knowledge of the organisation and commitment to making it truly professional is unsurpassed; Tom Gregg, who was already building the New Zealand branch in many of the directions that I hoped to develop for the Institute; Margie Cole, whose boundless enthusiasm in general and communication skills in particular led her to take on the Newsletter; and Richard Easther, who was to guide us through the financial minefields and produce the first comprehensive consolidated accounts, earning accolades as 'the World's greatest Treasurer, Keating included'.
There was a double benefit, in that several of these key players also participated in the Executive and Council, and could clarify the issues and present the proposals. This may seem trivial, but in fact assumed real importance, particularly at Council, where I strived to demonstrate the Chair's neutrality. Yes, I failed at times, the most memorable occasion being a rather stormy meeting in Perth when we were adopting a new name and a new Constitution. One fellow member of Council later told me that he was poised to interpose himself between me and another member to prevent fisticuffs. (I'm sure he was exaggerating?).
Out of all this came a raft of initiatives, virtually all of which were adopted and implemented. Others can judge their value and relative significance, but the one closest to my professional heart was the change of name. As with so much of our agenda, this issue had been around since 1988, when Russell Huntington of the Victorian branch had put up a paper to Council pointing out the clear and probably permanent shift to 'managerialism' in Universities, and proposing the name 'Institute of Tertiary Education Management'. Although taken with superficial seriousness, it died amidst a little levity and a few snide remarks such as 'who wants to be an ITEM'. We got there in the end, by dint of the efforts of many, and perhaps, a small shift up the alphabet, despite the odd comment about whom we might 'hate' or have 'gobbled up'.
Almost equally satisfying was laying to rest the dread spectre - at least to the branches - of a 'permanent secretariat'. Another very old potato, it was regularly put aside for reasons of funding, the fear of increasing 'central' control, and the assertion that the workload did not justify it. Within a few months of taking on the job, it was clear to me that no effective President could single handedly deal with AITEA's range of demands, from administrivia to management and policy development. Although in my own position I had four personal staff, it was impossible to divert them from their primary tasks, as I had been able to do as a region President. Thanks to the dedication of Lyn McGrath, a TAFE member, and John Chapman, AM, (whom I believe is now the longest and the most continuously serving officer in AITEA/ATEM), who in turn accepted the role of Institute Secretary, I survived the first two years. By that time, the case for a full time position was self evident, and Lisa Halvorsen was seconded from the University of Newcastle. I owe each of them a considerable debt for putting up with me during some regularly difficult times, and am comforted by the fact that they are still friends. Giles Pickford and Peter Scardoni have continued to demonstrate and reinforce the value of an ongoing secretariat, which operates for the benefit of all members.
I began this reminiscence to jot down a few highlights for our thirtieth Anniversary, and clearly got carried away. If any of my remarks are inaccurate, or worse still, derogatory to any of the groups or individuals who shared my perambulation through AITEA/ATEM, please accept my apologies. My sole intention has been to give the reader a historical whiff of people and events, and the satisfaction that comes from helping to build a professional association. AITEA/ATEM has been a vital part of my professional life. I still retain sufficient passion to hope that it will engender the same response in its present and future members - or at least in a small percentage. The dedication and commitment of the latter is a prerequisite for a bright future.
Jim McLauchlan
NZ
QLD
SA
TAS
VIC
WA
The Re-Thinking of 1997-2000
The Future
14/09/2006
Thirty Years of ATEM History: A Snapshot
By Maree Conway
[Caveat: as someone involved with ATEM for around 20 years, this history is filtered by my experience of the Association. I've received input from members and presidents, I've searched our archives and previous research on the Association. This snapshot is based on a presentation to the 2006 Members Forum - the presentation is available from the ATEM website. The interpretation is mine, and open to the interpretation of others. If you disagree with something here, write an entry on the ATEM history blog). All members are now creating ATEM's history, so take the opportunity to have your say.]
ATEM was established as the Australian Institute of College Administrators in 1975. At its first AGM in 1976, the Australian Institute of Tertiary Education Administrators was established, with a name change 20 years later in 1996 to ATEM. Originating in Victorian colleges of advanced education, ATEM has a sometimes painful birth in terms of its acceptance by universities:
"People connected with AITEA seem to have considerably more time to pursue their interests than any university administrator . I am of
the opinion that much of the material AITEA is putting out is to say the least not only not useful to University administrators but harmful to
the profession of university administration. There is a fundamental difference between the 'two' administrations [universities and colleges] and
this must be clearly pointed out constantly and continuously. That the interests of a university administration may be best served by a separate
and restricted organisation . Any university administrator who wishes to join (AITEA) may naturally do so but no encouragement should be given."
(Hugh McCredie, Deputy Registrar, University of Sydney, 1978).
ATEM was also established as a federation of branches, and a form of states' rights has dogged ATEM's history, creating a them and us divide which, at times, has become hostile. There has been much game playing during ATEM's history, which is not unusual for an association of this size. The current Council is moving ATEM beyond this them and us divide, but it is still present in conversations between members. The result of this divide is that ATEM has spent much of its history talking about the same things, and moving forward in very small steps.
Always a volunteer association, ATEM has relied on the goodwill of its members and their institutions to keep the association running. There have been a number of big personalities in ATEM, but progress has often been mired by ego and game-playing. Professional development has always been ATEM's core business, but it is notable that professional development was not directly mentioned in the original constitution. Our focus on professional development may no longer be sufficient for the future. The Association has attempted a broader role on a couple of occasions in the past, but we have not built those roles, and have quickly retreated when seen to be criticised by external groups such as the AVCC. Membership has been static for a number of years, and we have yet to decide whether this is our optimum membership level, or whether we need to make some adjustments to attract new members, both from administrative and academic ranks.
ATEM's history has been marked by 'inherent uncertainty' - in our role, our position in the sector, how loudly we can speak up in the sector, and what it is we offer the sector. We still do not have a codified knowledge base (standards to underpin our professional education and training program), and we have not decided whether we want to stake a claim in the division of labour in universities, or whether we are content to remain invisible in that context.
For the future, it is time to move beyond the focus on the detail that ATEM has been bogged down in for most of its history, and embrace the big picture and the ideals of ATEM's founders. It is time to be bold and articulate our value to the sector - as a group, not just as strong and passionate individuals. The core of our future has been with ATEM since its establishment in 1976: the professional interests of members; fellowship; and recognition of individuals and the profession.
As was written in 1991 during the future directions review:
"The expectations of membership revolve around professional development and fellowship, but there is a view that the Institute should do more for the recognition of administrators as professionals by promoting the importance of their role with higher education" (Future Directions paper, 29 July 1991).
How we will be viewed in our 50th anniversary is up to each of us as members, but it is time to move beyond inherent uncertainty, beyond the detail so that we can work out where it is that we fit in the sector now and into the future.
Maree Conway
Councillor at Large
Postscript from the ATEM Secretariat: Maree has pointed out that TAFE is very thin in ATEM. However, the New Zealand Polytechnics are well represented. We cannot work out what is going on there. If anyone has an explanation please let us know at atem1@bigpond.com
| Download | Format |
| 30 Years of ATEM |  |
02/08/2006
Maree Conway has given these snippets from her 30th Anniversary History of AITEA/ATEM. They give one a sense of how ATEM is changing and what its future is.
Of the 58 responses 29% joined because someone recommended they join, 21% for networking, 19% to keep up to date with what is going on in the tertiary sector, 16% because of professional development, and 14% to join a professional association. One person joined by mistake!
When I did my survey for my Masters in 1995, most people joined to keep up to date with the sector and for professional development, with networking was cited as a reason by about 12% and to join a professional association about 6%). But I didn't offer the "recommendation" option in my survey.
Some reasons for joining ATEM:
- because of my concern for the management, treatment and isolation of general staff (Michael Whitley, University of Sydney)
- strong networking opportunities, the great conferences and workshops (Lydia Tarnowsky, University of Adelaide)
- to learn what was happening across other parts of the tertiary sector (Bessy Rasmussen, Massey University)
- I actually joined by mistake...must admit, I have not regretted that (Prasad Gita, University of Auckland)
Stories/impressions of ATEM:
- for me ATEM is about self-discovery. It offers...reflective practice. ATEM gives people the opportunity to take time to think about what they do, rather than just blindly do it (Giles Pickford, ATEM Ghost)
- I stay in ATEM...in order to try and help make it as productive, relevant and useful ... (Sam Jacob, University of South Australia)
- ATEM is all about groups of people coming together to learn, share ideas and provide support to others (Maureen Gillett, University of Western Sydney
- ATEM is about 'encouragement' (Manor Cooper, Charles Sturt University)
- I remember the rivalry, played out at National Council, between the States...(Robert Thomason, Melbourne Business School)
- the support I have received through ATEM membership and participation in ATEM events is a significant contribution to my working life in the HE sector (Kaye Hempsall, University of New England)
- it goes to the heart of how to make ATEM great, for me, which is that it will always be as great as its members, as great as the people who stand up (sit down) and get involved, and that ATEM is 'us', not 'other' (Sam Jacob, University of South Australia)
- I worked at Caulfield Institute of Technology whilst Maurie Blank was the Registrar. This was an era when the general office consisted of about 15 people - including student admin and payroll - when calculators had handles and students queued to pay their fees in cash which we took on a single cash register! (Joy Chirnside, Deakin University)
- ATEM provides a professional 'home' for administrators, it provides us with a vehicle for our voice and a say in matters which affect us and the issues that are important to us (Darlene Sebalj, University of Newcastle).
Now, before anyone says that most of the quotes come from Australian members, that's because only 17 of the 58 responses were from NZ.
Enquiries: Giles Pickford - 0411 186 199|Peter Scardoni - 0411 498 462|Fax: +61 2 6125 5262
