14, October 2025
A VIEW TO THE FUTURE
How might university science change in the years ahead?
Universities helping to develop new industries
Training the future workforce | Leading in innovation
How will the Bachelor of Science evolve? p6
Will funding impact university research? p8
How to build trust in university science? p10
PRESIDENT’S WELCOME
Welcome to Issue 14 of the Australian Council of Deans of Science (ACDS) magazine. In this issue we focus on the future shape of university science education and research, including a Foreword from Craig Simmons and an opinion piece by David Lloyd. I’d like to start by thanking them both for their generous and excellent contributions.
FOREWORD
Thirty years ago, the Australian Council of Deans of Science (ACDS) was established to champion university science across Australia. Since then, it has shaped national conversations, strengthened science education, and fostered collaboration across institutions. Today, we honour that legacy – and face the future with urgency and optimism.
Using technology to its full potential can improve the educational experience for all our students. It can provide the key to achieving our collective ambitions of equity and access.
Tertiary education has traditionally served school-leavers studying full-time at a university campus. This is a luxury that many prospective students simply can’t afford, including those in remote areas and those who have family or financial commitments. Educational experiences have benefited from our working more closely with industry and the embedding of First Nations knowledges throughout our programs. Various initiatives, including some discussed in this issue, enable us to provide an engaging quality education to an increasingly diverse cohort of students.
It would be remiss of me not to mention the financial challenges facing the university sector. Science education, research and infrastructure is expensive compared to many other disciplines, yet is vital for the future of our nation. In order for government and the community to confidently invest in university science, they need to understand the benefits. It is up to us to communicate them. This includes communicating the benefits of educating international students. There is a significant soft diplomacy role played by our international alumni. They are passionate, committed and excellent ambassadors for Australia.
Times have changed and we must adapt. We must work to overcome challenges, lobby to influence change and make the most of all the opportunities that present themselves. The future of university science depends on us. I look forward to discussions of these and other issues at our ACDS annual conference in Canberra in October.
Professor Jacqui Ramagge President,
ACDS
AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY SCIENCE
Australian University Science advocates the value of university science to the broader community.
Australia’s strong science research and training is integral to driving new economies. Universities have a critical role as partners in establishing innovation and technological change in industry. As science delivers new insights and tools, new industries are emerging, and people with science skills will be essential to these new industries. AustralianUniversity Science magazine highlights these stories, showcasing exceptional science teams and Australian science graduates working in industry. To provide feedback or suggestions, subscribe or order additional copies, visit acds.edu.au/AustUniScience
I grew up in Semaphore Park, near Port Adelaide, and am the first in my family to attend university. Science opened doors I didn’t know existed. Now, as Chief Scientist for South Australia and Pro Vice-Chancellor at The University of Newcastle, I’m committed to keeping those doors open for others.
University science is essential – not only for discovery and innovation, but for building Australia’s future workforce and addressing the complex challenges ahead. Between 2021 and 2023, enrolments in natural and physical sciences declined by 11%. This “brain drought” threatens our capacity to respond to climate change, technological disruption, and global uncertainty. In addition to university pathways, vocational education and training (VET) also plays a key role in developing complementary skills and strengthening national capabilities.
Trust in science is fragile and understanding of the possibilities it enables is at an all-time low. Australia’s R&D investment sits at just 1.68% of GDP – well below OECD averages. While universities collaborate strongly with government, non-profits, and international organisations, their engagement with domestic industry continues to be relatively weak. To reinforce trust and drive impact, science must be embedded in policy, connected to community, central to industry, and part of our national conversation.
Thank you to the ACDS for three decades of leadership and impact. The challenges ahead are real – but so are the opportunities. The next chapter of university science must be written by all of us: educators, researchers, industry, government, and community – working together to build a more resilient, inclusive, and innovative Australia.
Professor Craig T. Simmons FAA FTSE
Chief Scientist for South Australia
Cover image: Shutterstock. Published 8 October 2025 by Refraction Media on behalf of the Australian Council of Deans of Science. Designed by Jon Wolfgang Miller. Printed in Australia by IVE. ISSN: 2652-2403. © 2025 Australian Council of Deans of Science Inc., all rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any manner or form without written permission. If you would like to reproduce anything from this issue, email info@refractionmedia.com.au
CAN STEM GRADUATES BE AUSTRALIA’S LIFELINE?
Education and research are the twin engines of Australia’s future – powering a highly skilled workforce and driving the innovations needed to meet local and global challenges. The Federal Government’s 2024 National Science and Research Priorities make this clear: advancing national security, protecting our environment, elevating Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander knowledges, and progressing to net zero all depend on the talent and discovery generated through our universities.
The opportunity before us is to build a policy and funding environment that accelerates momentum. By creating the invitation and incentives for industry and universities to co-design education programs and research initiatives, government can help establish a stronger pipeline of talented students who contribute to research and innovation.
There are some models already in existence which point the way forward.
Our Software Engineering Degree Apprenticeship at the University of South Australia – delivered in partnership with the Government of South Australia and major industry partners such as BAE Systems –allows our students to earn and study simultaneously, a (l)earning program – while providing industry with direct access to highly skilled graduates. These enrolled students are paid a wage and their university fees are paid – by their employer. The content of their five-year honours degree has been crafted with
inclusion of industry content and curated with that industry. With national policy settings that encourage replication, this kind of Work Integrated Learning (WIL) model could be scaled, boosting STEM capability and delivering benefits for students, universities and industry.
The same opportunity applies to equity. Ensuring that universities –particularly those in rural, regional and low-income communities – have access to baseline research funding to build partnerships will mean more students can access high-quality science education. Initiatives such as the Regional Research Collaboration Program already demonstrate the value of targeted investment. So, by extending and deepening these programs, we can widen participation and ensure academic excellence and career success for many, rather than a select few.
Science education should not be determined by geography or legacy. It should be a national commitment – driven by collaboration and open to all. By prioritising career-ready models and strengthening equitable university/ industry partnerships, Australia stands to build a more resilient and inclusive science ecosystem; to meet challenges from climate change to public health with a collective ambition – and with the means to enact sovereign solutions.
Professor David Lloyd
Vice Chancellor and President University of South Australia
In addition to roles at the University of South Australia, Professor Lloyd is co-Vice Chancellor of the new Adelaide University, Australia’s newest major university that combines the strengths of the University of Adelaide and the University of South Australia. He is also former chair of Universities Australia, a member of the Australian Universities Accord Implementation Advisory Committee and has served on the Australian Research Council’s Advisory Committee.
A PIPELINE WITH A PROBLEM: HOW DO WE MAKE STEM MORE INCLUSIVE?
From insufficient role models to challenging pathways, intersectional obstacles are making it harder for students to choose science. How do we help clear the way?
The Universities Accord, released in February 2024, called for an increase in the proportion of university-educated Australians aged 25–34 from 45% currently to 55% by 2050. That involves doubling the number of uni students to 1.8 million. Meanwhile, the number of students undertaking a STEM degree is heading in the wrong direction. Despite numerous calls from industry and government for more STEM-qualified graduates, the overall picture is a pipeline with a problem.
Dr Jessica Danaher, associate dean of student experience in science at RMIT University, warns that emerging industries – such as in climate action, digital transformation, healthcare and
advanced manufacturing – all depend on science graduates. “There is a risk that companies searching for these skills will be forced to set up elsewhere, impacting Australia’s economy and prosperity,” Danaher says.
Meanwhile STEM disciplines have also been singled out for their lack of diversity. “More than a third of men in tertiary education are studying STEM qualifications,” says Cathy Foley, who was until last year Australia’s Chief Scientist. “But for women, the figure is only 9%.”
And it’s not only gender diversity. Science faculties across Australia are striving to boost diversity in their graduates across socio-economic lines, the rural-city divide, disability and race.
GROWING THE POOL
Professor Simon Ellingsen, executive director of the International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research University of Western Australia (UWA) and ACDS executive member, says one way to fill the pipeline is to grow the pool it draws from.
This means finding ways to diversify the kinds of people that a science qualification appeals to.
As he sees it, people go into a degree based on two things: whether they are interested, and whether they are suitably prepared. He says Australia is currently failing potential STEM graduates on both counts.
Danaher and Ellingsen say it’s the classic “if you can’t see it, you can’t be it”: women and girls and people from some minorities don’t have role models of future STEM careers.
“Our society doesn’t really value science and that sort of critical thinking, and so people who show aptitude in that area, they’re not really encouraged,” Ellingsen says.
Programs such as Science in Australia Gender Equity (SAGE), Girls in Science and Technology, Women in STEMM and the Australian Academy of Science’s STEM Women, are attempting to address some of the gender diversity challenges, but diversity is more than gender.
Dr Laura McKemmish
Dr Jessica Danaher
Professor Megan Smith
Ellingsen says he believes science is seen by many people as a high-minded passion career, not a workaday income provider, reducing its appeal to some sections of society.
In addition to a cultural shift needed to broaden Australia’s perception of a working scientist, the university preparation path fails many potential STEM enrollees.
Ellingsen says the shortage of good high-school science teachers means there is a risk they will be lured with competitive salaries to elite schools, or other opportunities, leaving the rest of Australia missing out.
“Some of the science and mathematics teaching done in other places is done by staff who are not particularly well-trained, not particularly well-motivated, and not surprisingly, therefore, the students don’t have the best experience,” he says.
Many universities offer catch-up courses for people wanting to prepare for a science degree – both school-leavers and older students. But Ellingsen says greater coordination between these institutions would bring much-needed efficiencies, with many universities eating up precious resources competing with each other when they could team up.
SCIENCE IN THE REGIONS
Meanwhile, regional universities say that they may have a part to play in encouraging more diversity. Professor Megan Smith, executive dean of the Faculty of Science and Health at Charles Sturt University and ACDS executive member, says that “the thing
that regional universities do provide is opportunity.”
Smith believes the problems regional areas face will be solved by science graduates with local knowledge and that regional students shouldn’t be at a disadvantage because of their location. “Regional communities need science and they need a science foundation,” she says. Regional universities mean students can stay in their home areas, while still earning their Bachelor of Science.
Linda Pfeiffer, Central Queensland University’s (CQU) associate professor and deputy dean of research in the School of Education and the Arts, says that CQU, decentralised across 12 campuses, offers many courses heavy with onlineonly components, which students can undertake at a time that works for them. It allows people to fit study around work and family commitments, providing a flexibility that is attractive for people in circumstances that don’t fit the typical school-leaver mould.
“We have a lot of people that work, because the cost of living has risen. People find online more convenient. It saves the travel time, it saves the parking, you know, you can watch it later,” she says.
CQU enrols a high proportion of Indigenous students and the highest proportion of people from low socio-economic circumstances. Courses are designed to tap into local community and knowledge. “We have a lot of connection to the local industries. We have a lot of co-design of our degrees,” says Pfeiffer.
But Dr Laura McKemmish, director of research- and work-integrated learning at UNSW Science, says that universities in major cities can offer a different kind of connection: “In a city, you’ve got the people, you’ve got the facilities, you’ve got the expertise – there’s advantages in being a big city uni.”
McKemmish believes Australia should work towards different universities offering different STEM experiences, rather than one university trying to be all things. Some universities could focus on industry-focused STEM training, while another could specialise in producing world-class research scientists, she suggests.
“I actually think it’s really, really healthy when you’ve got both models,” McKemmish says.
– Sara Phillips
Associate professor Linda Pfeiffer
Professor Simon Ellingsen
teaching and learning
EVOLUTION OR REVOLUTION: HOW
MIGHT THE BACHELOR OF SCIENCE CHANGE IN THE FUTURE?
Universities are evolving the format and content of the Bachelor of Science to keep it modern and relevant. So how will it transform next?
University science education is being disrupted by changes in technology, including AI, and by changes in student and employer expectations.
TRAINING VERSUS EDUCATION
A key part of evolving the Bachelor of Science (BSc) is navigating the balance between vocational training and broader education, according to Brian Yates, emeritus professor at the University of Tasmania and ACDS executive member. While training equips students with job-specific skills for a smooth transition into the workforce, education in a research-led environment fosters more adaptable capabilities like problem-solving and teamwork.
At the moment, Yates sees a strong focus on producing “job-ready” graduates, with curricula packed with industry-relevant knowledge. However, as specialised information becomes more accessible, he suggests the emphasis might shift from “having knowledge” to developing the skills needed to find and apply it.
It’s a view that Professor Ingo Koeper, associate dean of learning and teaching at Flinders University shares, in part. “I think we need both. We need a solid understanding of foundation in the discipline, but then you have to be able to extrapolate or take that and apply it to various different concepts,” he says.
JOB-READY GRADUATES
The problem that Koeper identifies is that science graduates don’t all follow the same career trajectories. Some go into academic research, some go into commercial science, some wind up in unexpected places, such as banking, “because they have critical thinking and analytical brains”. Therefore he says teaching “job-ready” is a balance between vocational knowledge and transferable skills.
He believes the BSc of the future could dispense with traditional lectures and move to online or face-to-face workshops, supplemented by in-person practical classes where students can gain hands-on experience in their chosen discipline of science.
Workshops are a more active form of learning, says Koeper, but they come with a cost. Mass lectures are a financially efficient way of teaching lots of students and are well-suited to identifying important information. More active forms of learning take up more lecturer resources. But the move from mass lectures also opens opportunities.
PERSONALISED LEARNING
Victoria University (VU) has embraced the new hybrid-learning environment with a trial of a new assessment protocol. In recent years VU developed the Block Model, where subjects are run for
a four-week intensive block, and students are enrolled in only one subject at a time, so they concentrate and consolidate their learning in one area. Joshua Johnson, chair of the Assessment Taskforce, says that the new “two-lane” assessment embraces AI-assisted learning in the open assessments lane. But in the secure assessments lane, the focus is on practical skills.
“For science education specifically, this includes hands-on experimental work, live data analysis and real-time scientific communication,” he says. Johnson says the framework strikes a balance between collaborative, handson learning essential to science while preparing students for a workforce where technological fluency is paramount.
A vision of the future of Macquarie University, as it puts the finishing touches on its new Engineering and Australian Astronomical Optics (AAO) Building
Macquarie University in Sydney is putting the finishing touches on its new Engineering and Australian Astronomical Optics (AAO) Building. The $150 million facility – due to be officially opened around February 2026 – will house AAO which designs instrumentation and software for the world’s largest telescopes.
“Students will be going to classes there, but they’ll be walking past a group of professionals that are building an instrument that’s going to go for an international client on a giant telescope in Chile,” says dean of the school of engineering and director of the AAO, Richard McDermid. “I think that it’s great for the students to get exposure to how professional work happens.”
McDermid speculates that the defining feature of the future BSc might be personalised learning, with students able to mix and match their skills or knowledge acquisition, tailored to their personal career trajectory. Multiple self-directed online units might be pre-prepared so that students can gain relevant skills while the impost on teaching resources is minimised.
work, because they’ve had experience in them. “So they stand in an interview situation and talk from experience rather than theory,” he says.
In this vision of the future, practical experience with industry professionals, such as that offered in the new AAO building will be essential. McDermid says students should graduate feeling like they didn’t just spend three years getting information they could have looked up online, but come out feeling that they understand how their potential industries
But Macquarie’s edifice is being completed at a time when universities are increasingly exploring the advantages of online learning. The question now is what lessons science schools can take from Macquarie’s engineering co-location project, what a BSc will look like, and whether facilities like the AAO building will be required as we transition to the future.
– Sara Phillips
Professor Ingo Koeper, Flinders University, with students
FOLLOWING THE MONEY: HOW IS FUNDING INFLUENCING UNIVERSITY RESEARCH?
As funding tilts toward programmatic research and mission-led outcomes, Australian universities are under pressure to justify every research dollar. So what happens to curiosity, creativity and the risks that lead to unexpected breakthroughs?
A VISION OF BLUE SKY
Light makes the sharpest of knives. Stretch a short laser pulse, amplify and squeeze it together again. That intense light burst, now the basis of laser eye surgery, originated as a way of exploring light’s interactions with matter in 1985.
Its inventors, professors Donna Strickland and Gérard Albert Mourou, won a Nobel Prize for the discovery.
Neither could have foreseen the impact their laser research would have on millions of eyes around the world.
“Strickland is a pure scientist,” says Scientia Professor Sven Rogge, dean of the Faculty of Science at the University of New South Wales. “She doesn’t give a toss about any kind of application, [has] never done in her life. She just basically did it for the sake of doing amazing things in the lab.”
“Without fundamental, blue-sky discovery-driven research, we would not get the pipeline to the big things that change the world,” says Rogge.
But for the last few decades, Australian universities – the bastion of fundamental research – have increasingly followed the money. Blue-sky research has declined by at least 20% since 1996, replaced by mission-driven program-based science.
“Time and dollar pressures are crucial differences between curiosity-driven and program-based science, says Professor Mark Hutchinson, interim director of the Institute for Photonics and Advanced Sensing (IPAS) at the University of Adelaide.
Industry prioritises deadlines over cost, academia values funding over speed, he says. “I think that there’s a mismatch there, especially in the Australian context.”
FUNDING
THE FUTURE
Australian Research Council (ARC) and the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) account for most blue-sky research funding in Australia.
“The beauty of ARC funding is that an element of that discovery research is available to non-priority, non-mission driven activities,” according to Hutchison.
Although 47% of ARC Discovery Projects were funded for 2025, this is after 72% of the initial applications were removed at the expression of interest stage. In 2024, just 17% of Future Fellowships of Future Fellowships got up, with other schemes faring worse – between 10% and 32%.
Which means much curiositydriven Australian science is unrealised. What then is the future for such bluesky research?
“That’s the critical question,” says Hutchinson, and “highlights why the health of Australia’s research sector is so important. Competition for ARC
Professor Sven Rogge, University of New South Wales
Professor Bronwyn Fredericks, University of Queensland
Dr Katrina Wruck (right), Queensland University of Technology
Image: Supplied
funding is fierce, and some excellent science will miss out.”
“However, for the first time, the ARC’s core mission to fund fundamental, bluesky research is now protected by law. This provides a guaranteed, stable home for those investigator-led projects,” she says. “We will keep working to increase the funding in a strategic and sustainable manner across the whole sector.”
Rogge is less sanguine. “What is very worrisome is that the ARC budget has basically been flat.” Total federal government research spend is 1.7% of GDP, well below the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) average [2.7%].
“That is a serious problem for a country that should move away from only basically digging stuff up, but actually start to manufacture higher value chain products.”
Research provides a good “bang for buck” adds Rogge. “The government has to think, with industry, about how we can be attractive for that R&D and building more pathways to get knowledge outside, from the universities into societies. It’s a huge opportunity.”
“There’s a lot of very, very good fundamental research going on at universities,” he says. “Putting further pressure on that is counterproductive, because if you look at the way knowledge transforms into productivity, into dollars in the society, it’s a long pipeline”
MATCHING INDIGENOUS COMMUNITY PRIORITIES
Curiosity-driven research must also match community-priorities, says Professor Bronwyn Fredericks, University of Queensland’s Deputy Vice Chancellor (Indigenous Engagement). Otherwise, it’s just knowledge mining for the good of the researchers, she says. Indigenous people have lost land and resources. “The knowledge base may be the only thing some people have left.”
Dr Katrina Wruck of the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) agrees, and would like to see “Indigenous knowledge elevated so that people who go to university understand the depth of knowledge. Also so community can see their own knowledge as being elevated in the curriculum, and then also
providing opportunities for economic self-determination, commercialising traditional knowledges and patenting their own traditional knowledge and copyright.”
Wruck is 2025 Young Australian of the Year and descended from the Panaylayg Nation of Mabuyag Island, Zenadeth Kes/Torres Strait Islands.
“I think it comes down to the land councils and the communities or Aboriginal corporations working with universities and researchers to help find ways, new ways to help community,” she says.
Public understanding of science is the key. “The biggest problem is that the community does not understand the impact and importance of science; the practical outcomes that are created,” says Rogge. “And since that’s not known, there’s not a lot of sympathy.”
The future Rogge would like to see is a mix of mission-based and curiosity-driven research. One where science is thriving and recognised for real-world contributions.
Where scientists are working on real-world problems, involved with Indigenous and other communities, in industry and community-based science, he says. Community involvement means more effective illustration of the power of science.
According to Rogge, it’s vital to “make the university a more porous place where we bring the public in to be part of the science that happens”.
– Richard Musgrove
outcomes
HOW CAN UNIVERSITIES BUILD TRUST IN SCIENCE?
Around the world, universities are rethinking how they teach, communicate and collaborate to win public trust in science
Previous issues of this magazine have emphasised the role of university science in creating knowledge and innovative solutions. A key challenge for the future will be fostering genuine, evidencebased dialogue about the pressing issues confronting our world.
There are no clear answers for how Australia should best navigate climate change, artificial intelligence and our myriad other challenges – but data alone doesn’t build the trust needed to change minds and hearts. Our universities must rethink how science is communicated, who gets to speak and who is heard.
“Public trust in science is essential for empowering our communities and governments to make evidence-based decisions, to ensure the outcomes of scientific research are accepted and embraced by end-users, and to foster the social license of scientists to operate in public institutions,” says Melissa Brown, executive dean of the Faculty of Science at the University of Queensland and immediate past president of the ACDS.
For this purpose, trust in science remains “moderately high” globally, according to a study published in Nature Human Behaviour last year.
“Whilst it was good to see that globally, and particularly in Australia, trust in scientists is moderately high [3.6 globally, 3.9 Australia, on a 5 point scale], this also suggests that there is room for improvement,” says Brown.
Professor Joan Leach, Deputy Vice Chancellor at the Australian National University (ANU) and past director
of the Centre for Public Awareness of Science, believes democratising the way we communicate science can be part of the solution. This approach allows information to flow freely and fairly, encouraging participation from all voices and perspectives.
While industry voices are important, Leach says balancing that with a strong government-funded R&D sector is vital. “People follow the money,” she explains. “If what people see is industries calling the shots because they’re paying the dollar, then we have a problem.
“We’re still very much in ‘telling people about science’ mode. We need to flip that and ask people instead. If you listen to people, they also want research on the environment… and new forms of energy,” Leach says. “People are quite engaged.”
NOT ABOUT US WITHOUT US
If listening is key to building trust and moving forward together, who should we be listening to?
The diversity of voices at the table is vital. We need to move past a “business as usual” Western science mindset.
In Aotearoa New Zealand, Mātauranga Māori knowledge systems are core to every science degree at the University of Waikato. Professor Margaret Barbour, Dean Te Aka Mātuatua – School of Science, says co-learning develops students’ ability to think critically and embrace multiple points of view.
“Being creative in the way we’re asking questions, and the kind of questions we’re asking, is always going to expand
our knowledge system for the better,” Barbour says.
In Australia, similar lessons are being learned, with universities recognising the need to listen and learn from Indigenous ecological, astronomical, and medicinal perspectives. The ANU, Macquarie University, UniSA and Murdoch University, for example, offer co-designed units in Indigenous Science. The ACDS has also helped to develop a suite of resources to improve the cultural competency of Australia’s educators. These are all steps towards encouraging participation from a range of people and perspectives.
WHAT’S NEXT?
University science has the opportunity to listen and learn from a broad range of different views to build trust, even beyond the addition of Indigenous perspectives. There are many ways this may play out.
“It’s okay to hold more than one knowledge system in your head at one time,” Barbour says. “We need to be able to say: ‘You will be listened to. Your response and your point of view is important, and we’ll be taking that forward together’.”
– Cristy Burne and Jasmine Fellows
Image:
Professor Melissa Brown