After careening around a snowy Vienna for half an hour or so, my bus driver contrived to wind up right in the midst of a swirling mass of student demonstrators, part of the thousands of students that converged on Vienna to protest against the Bologna Process (and much else). There were banners, drums, lights, music and lots of general mayhem. Our poor little bus was unable to move forward or reverse.

Despite the freezing weather, protesters stayed out all night. Although they were united in their opposition to the Bologna Process, the source of their complaints depended on which country they came from. Some feared tuition fees, others were displeased with a perceived (and possibly a real) loss of academic independence and still others were there to reject what they saw as the instrumentalism of universities run mainly for the benefits of the economy.

The Bologna Process, of course, is mainly about harmonising degrees - making qualifications recognisable across national boundaries, credit transfer and other aspects of student mobility. Nevertheless, it is obvious that many students, and also academic staff, are deeply uneasy about the pace and direction of change and the Bologna Process provided a convenient opportunity to express their disapproval.

From the viewpoint of Australia, it is easy to forget that our higher education sector is not the only possible model. For example, not all countries have emulated our heavy dependence on private financial contributions from students. Not surprisingly, the protesters were against paying high tuition fees.

In many countries, academics are not employed by their universities but by state education departments (similar to school teachers here in Australia). Here I was surprised. Many academics seem to prefer this arrangement.

Most important of all, not everyone in the world is enamoured with the idea that universities exist to "drive the knowledge-based economy" as claimed in our Commonwealth Budget Papers. For many protesters, an education that is reduced to teaching job skills is tantamount to no education at all.

In the end, our intrepid little Australian contingent was not held hostage for long. Displaying a combination of grit and foolhardiness, we three insisted on leaving the bus and joining the throng. As it turned out, we were right. After a brief walk in the cold with the friendly protesters, we ducked into a bistro and had dinner. Those remaining on the bus, meanwhile, were marooned for some time. Alas, we never made it to the "festive event" but, as someone once said, life was not meant to be easy.

- Steven Schwartz

The draft curriculum covers a lot of ground but everyone who reads it finds something omitted - some favourite bit of history, or literature or science.

Children spend only a finite number of years in school, so a curriculum cannot include absolutely everything. Some sifting and choosing will always be necessary.

Still, it makes you wonder, are there some things that absolutely everyone needs to know?

Are some skills so vital that everyone needs to master them?

These questions will be addressed in a debate organised by the Royal Society of Arts in London on March 22.

What do you think is essential for all citizens to know?

- Steven Schwartz

Altinay acknowledges there will be resistance to such a program, but nevertheless he insists the modern world needs some kind of “reference framework” ...

a moral compass – a set of guiding principles – to enable the people of the world to navigate the treacherous waters of our epic interdependence.

The ideal venue for a conversation about global civics, says Altinay, is the university campus:

Universities offer a unique context where young people can grapple with new and thorny issues and pursue interconnections ... [furthermore] university populations are becoming more representative of the myriad points of view on our planet.

If modern universities don't help students figure out what their responsibilities are to their fellow human beings then "they would be failing in their mission".

I am broadly supportive of Altinay’s case, which you can read in full here. Indeed, over the years I’ve argued that universities need to embed ethical and moral principles in their operations and curricula; and that is exactly what we are attempting to do with Macquarie University’s new undergraduate curriculum.

However, it will be difficult to achieve Altinay's goals unless we can decide fundamentally what a university education is actually for.

For example, I was in Vienna last week for the Ministerial Conference to celebrate the 10th anniversary of Bologna process.

Student protesters were out in force, making their feelings known about what they want from university education.

As a report in University World News makes clear, students' "motivations for action vary depending on the country they are studying in".

In the UK, the main problem is tuition fees; in France it is reduced university autonomy; and in Spain the lack of student participation in Bologna reforms.

It seemed to me, though, that among these varying aims the students had a consistent underlying message – that universities should be much more than utilitarian institutions whose primary objective is to train people for the workforce and to make their countries richer.

I think they have a point.

- Steven Schwartz

Perhaps of more concern than the public relations battering is news this week that the state of maths and science at Australian schools and universities is said to have "deteriorated to a dangerous level".

According to a report from the Group of Eight Universities the number of students enrolled in a maths major at Australian universities declined by 15 per cent between 2001 and 2007, while the number of students taking advanced maths at secondary school fell by 27 per cent between 1995 and 2007.

As “mathematical skills are essential for the study of science” there will be a knock-on effect of fewer young people wanting a career in science.

Much needs to be done to restore public trust in science and scientists in the face of widespread cynicism. One writer in a prominent newspaper asserted

“After a period of priest-like authority, the pointy-heads in lab coats have reassumed the role of mad cranks they enjoyed from the days of Frankenstein to boys’ comics in the 1950s.”

Meanwhile, the credibility of climate science is said to have deteriorated so much in the UK that a leading journalist says it will take a "prophet" to reverse the trend, a "passionate, persuasive scientist who can connect and convince".

Another columnist says that "the attack on climate scientists is now widening to an all-out war on science" adding:

"Until there is a global code of practice or a Hippocratic oath binding scientists to do no harm, the reputation of science will be dragged through the dirt by researchers who devise new means of hurting us."

Perhaps also undermining the discipline is what the academic Frank Furedi calls "a trend to treat science as a belief that provides an unquestionable account of the Truth".

"A belief in the power of science to discover how the world works should not be taken to mean that science itself is a belief. On the contrary, science depends on an open-ended orientation towards experimentation and the testing of ideas."

In Australia politicians and educators have realised science has an image problem. (Incidentally, the image problem is not a new phenomenon: many years ago Mark Twain said the fascinating thing about science is that "one gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact".)

Australia’s Chief Scientist Professor Penny Sackett is attempting to promote science as an attractive career for young people while the Government is developing a plan that “affirms the critical importance of a vigorous, high-quality national strategy for public engagement with the sciences”.

Innovation Minister Kim Carr says it is "time for all true friends of science to step up and defend its values and achievements" adding that "when you denigrate science, you destroy hope".

One of the projects here at Macquarie University is a series of lectures and tutorials in science communication by Professor Tim Flannery.

I hope more academics and researchers will reach out to future students and the public to communicate the importance of science.

As the University of Queensland’s Graeme Orr says, if academic experts do not engage with the media "others less expert will" ...

"Backgrounding journalists can be thankless; but the alternative is unleashing an uninformed journalist or beat-up on the public".

What do you think needs to be done to make science an attractive option for young Australians?

- Steven Schwartz

The author of close on 40 books and numerous scholarly papers, Blainey's work has ranged from local mining history to global scale "big history". His books – "distinguished by spectacularly good titles and his masterful command of prose" - include Tyranny of Distance, Triumph of the Nomads, A Land Half Won, The Rush That Never Ended, The Causes of War and A Short History of the World.

As his historian colleagues Deborah Gare, Geoffrey Bolton, Stuart Macintyre and Tom Stannage have pointed out, Blainey steered Australian history into the nation’s conversation as a "courageous public intellectual, a writer of rare grace and a master storyteller".

His work has often met with controversy, none more so than his coining of the phrase "black armband view of history":

“To some extent my generation was reared on the Three Cheers view of history. This patriotic view of our past had a long run. It saw Australian history as largely a success ... There is a rival view, which I call the Black Armband view of history. In recent years it has assailed the optimistic view of history. ...[and it] might well represent the swing of the pendulum from a position that had been too favourable, too self congratulatory, to an opposite extreme that is even more unreal and decidedly jaundiced.”

Blainey is ranked at No 8 in The Australian Public Intellectual Network’s Top 40 of local intellectuals.

And if you put yourself in the public sphere, which Blainey has not been shy about, you can expect your views to be criticised.

But as Richard Allsop commented recently, the attacks on Blainey by fellow academics and others

"presaged a new era in the national discourse, one in which someone with a view with which one disagreed was not just wrong on that issue but was a bad person".

Such ad hominen attacks have indeed become a part of public life, and it may be one reason why many scholars and researchers are reluctant to engage in public discussions.

This would be a shame. Australia needs more intellectuals – whatever their views – to contribute to the important debates of our time.

Agree or disagree with him, I think we can salute Geoffrey Blainey for his courage, scholarship and commitment to the history discipline.

- Steven Schwartz

Today I'm in Canberra for Universities Australia's annual conference, at which Ms Gillard told the country's vice-chancellors of her plans. It is expected the site will go live in 2012.

Of course, we don’t know the full details yet but, on the face of it, this is a great stride in the right direction. I have been in favour of such a project for some time.

According to the Minister:

"We want students to make their decisions about where they want to study on the basis of robust information about the quality of education provided at each institution rather than on hearsay, inference from entry requirements or prestige."

One of the upsides of such a website is that it would make universities more accountable and stop them publishing inflated entry scores.

Hopefully, students should also be able to compare courses and institutions for their recruitment practices, retention rates and the employability of their graduates.

- Steven Schwartz

Possibly not, according to Sydney Morning Herald columnist Lisa Pryor. She notes that in a recent Guardian article in which dozens of writers provided hundreds of tips for good fiction writing, "not a single one recommended taking a creative writing class".

"Perhaps this is because they know that if you can't work out what good writing is by reading widely, if you need it spelled out slowly with the benefit of a circle of plastic chairs and a whiteboard, you lack the mettle to be a great novelist."

Macquarie University is one of many universities where students can study creative writing. We offer highly successful MA and Postgraduate Certificate programs in Creative Writing - and the programs boast an impressive list of published graduate writers.

There are other achievements too, some of which you can read about here. But for just one example, Jeremy Ohlback, a Macquarie MA in Creative Writing graduate, was shortlisted for the 2009 Australian/Vogel Literary Award for an unpublished manuscript by a writer under 35 years of age.

And it's probably wrong to assume that everyone attending a creative writing program actually desires to become a published writer. Not every history graduate wants to be a professional historian; or every science graduate a scientist.

People study for a range of reasons, perhaps to satisfy a personal ambition or desire, or even plain old fun.

But over to you – have you taken a creative writing course, and what did you get out of it?

- Steven Schwartz

A new report from Universities UK looks at how Britain's universities might respond to growing demand for higher education courses from older learners.

It says UK universities are well-placed to play a leading role in harnessing the contribution that older people can make to society.

Nicola Dandridge, Chief Executive of Universities UK, says ageing populations will raise major challenges, but also create significant opportunities.

"The idea that people stop making a useful contribution to society when they reach the age of 60 or 65 is outdated. We are facing a situation where older people are living longer and healthier lives and have, as a consequence, a huge amount to contribute. Universities have a significant part to play in harnessing that contribution."

Meanwhile, Harvard University academics hope to change the concept of “retirement” with a program called The Advanced Leadership Initiative.

The Initiative was formed by faculty from Harvard's professional schools of law, business, government, education, medicine and public health to "build knowledge about societal challenges" by helping to "deploy accomplished leaders at later life stages in public service".

"Harvard is seeking to tap the experience of a socially conscious generation of leaders ... in solving major social issues ... A select group of Fellows from diverse sectors with a track record of achievement and accomplishment have come to Harvard to transition from their primary income-earning careers and prepare for their next phase plan as change agents for society."

Sounds a good idea to me.

Australia has a strong University of the Third Age targeted at older people, and our universities do take students from all ages and stages of life.

The Government is rightly concerned about the impact of ageing on our community and health care system.

Perhaps it's also time to get positive and think about the benefits older people provide to our society and how, through higher education, we can support and encourage their contribution.

- Steven Schwartz

I am in favour of such a campaign and, as I posted late last year, there also needs to be a concomitant openness and transparency from scientists about their research.

In the article, Peter Coaldrake, chair of Universities Australia, is quoted as saying he is worried about the "tabloid decimation of science".

Professor Coaldrake raises an important issue here, but I am not convinced that the usual suspects - the tabloid press and talkback radio – are the only media culpable when it comes to distorting scientific research. In an earlier post I referred to the MMR scare which resulted in many children contracting measles and its complications because their parents succumbed to a scare campaign conducted in the so-called quality media.

Now I have worked as a journalist and I know all too well the difficulties attendant to that noble profession.

For example, imagine this: your editor gives you a maximum of 500 words to write about some newly-released scientific discovery that may have involved years of work and which takes several hundred thousand words to explain, incorporating every nuance and contingency.

As that wise addendum to Murphy’s Law puts it - nothing is as easy as it looks.

It is almost inevitable that along the line some crucial element of the research will be omitted, misunderstood, exaggerated or understated, or, if it is reported, is chopped out by the sub-editors responsible for making the story fit in the page.

And let's face it, most media – even the "quality broadsheet" press - are businesses that need to drive up circulations and boost audience numbers. It's hard to resist those "miracle cure" and "shock horror" stories.

Here’s an example involving Macquarie University PhD candidate Duane Hamacher, an astronomer in our Department of Indigenous Studies.

A Macquarie news release about Duane's research concerning a meteorite crater was picked up by a Sydney newspaper, and after that by media around the world. The trouble was, in Duane's words –

"... with each new journalist adding their own twist, the story evolved into something completely different. This led to a lot of confusion and raised eyebrows. Many of the reported 'facts' in the media were actually wrong."

You can read what Duane's research is really about here.

To see what happens in the "Science News Cycle" take a look at this from the cartoonist Jorge Cham.

I agree that we need to do all we can to promote understanding of science and scientists. Even so, I'm not too sure we will see much change in the way the media report university research. It's really up to scientists to correct inaccuracies. If the public doesn’t understand science then it is the responsibility of scientists to educate them.

- Steven Schwartz

According to the KPMG Econotech report, Economic Modelling of Improved Funding and Reform Arrangements for Universities, university graduates make more money than those with only high school qualifications, so, ipso facto, this means they are more productive.

According to the report's authors, if the government increases its funding, universities will be able to turn out even more graduates who will make the economy even more productive and Australia will be much richer as a result.

Here is where the lawyers come in. Lawyers are among the most highly paid of all graduates. Following the logic of the Econotech report, this must mean that lawyers are more productive than lower paid graduates in, say, science or literature. It follows that producing more lawyers will make Australia richer than graduating more poets or scientists. If we send everyone to law school, Australia will become the most productive country in the world.

Sceptical? Well, there do appear to be a few flaws in this logic. First, if everyone in Australia were a lawyer, who would pour their champagne, light their cigars and unplug their drains? Second, if Australia were a nation of lawyers, there would no clients. (I guess we could all sue one another but this would probably not constitute what most people think of as productive work.)

The absurdity is obvious - we cannot make our country wealthier by sending everyone to law school because we also need other types of workers and there would not be enough useful work for a nation of lawyers to do.

The futility of making everyone a lawyer also applies to graduates in general. It is simply impossible to create high-productivity jobs for every new university graduate, without limit, forever and ever.

Indeed, the Econotech report itself expects productivity to decrease as more students graduate because "… expanding the university sector is likely to involve easing admission requirements so that the additional places are filled with students whose ability is below the average of existing students". In other words, less bright graduates make less productive workers.

Even if we could accept that graduates, no matter what their number, would find productive work, the whole idea of equating productivity with wages is rather dubious.

In her book, Does Education Matter? Alison Wolf uses the example of bus drivers.

According to Wolf, "… a bus driver - [is] a job found the world over, and involving highly uniform skills. Yet … a bus driver in Germany is paid thirteen times as much as one in Kenya …” If, somehow, a group of Kenyan bus drivers manage to transfer to bus driving jobs in Germany, their wages would skyrocket.

Does this mean that they would have suddenly become much more productive? Wolf asks. "Did something magical occur as they stepped across the border, endowing them with a whole new set of skills"? Or, as Wolf asks, are wages "a highly imperfect measure of an individual's 'productivity'?"

The Econotech report adopts an entirely mechanistic view of the relationship between higher education and the economy. Put more money in the hopper and it will be automatically transformed into economic productivity and greater prosperity.

University education will never be able to live up to such an expectation because economic productivity is not just the result of education. Productivity also requires an entrepreneurial spirit, efficient transport links, capital accumulation, flexible work practices, business-friendly government policies and perhaps a temperate climate.

A fulfilling career is part of a good life, and we who work in universities have an obligation to prepare our students for the world of work.

But higher education is, or should be, about more than a set of technical job skills. University education should give students the opportunity to tackle the eternal dilemmas of human existence. What do we mean by fairness and justice? What are the duties of citizenship? What do we value and what can we live without?

We want our graduates to question what they are told, to seek out proof for propositions and assess the value of different arguments.

If we do our jobs right, graduates will learn to discriminate doggerel from a poem, a jingle from a symphony and a scientific argument from mere superstition. They will learn to give credit where it is due, to appreciate the plight of those less fortunate and, if the higher education system is working properly, they will leave with the ability to tell when a facile theory needs a lot more thought - like the relationship between wages and productivity, for example.

- Steven Schwartz