A quintessential Canadian success story Canada’s post-secondary institutions made major contributions to our country’s social progress and economic success in the last half of the 20th century. In the span of several decades, Canada evolved from a
country where an advanced education was reserved for the society’s elite to one that produces one of the world’s best-educated populations. By the turn of the century, Canada boasted the second-highest number of postsecondary
educated citizens per capita of any country —a comparative advantage in a global knowledge economy. Since knowledge is now the currency of the economy, improved post-secondary outcomes increase a country’s ability to develop the skilled human resources and conduct the innovative research it needs to remain productive and competitive.
Canada’s past performance is a remarkable achievement, considering that in the 19th century, just two percent of Canadian 20- to 24-year-olds went to university—usually to join the clergy, or become a doctor or lawyer. Even by the early 1940s, that number had only doubled to four percent. It wasn’t until the post-war period, when the federal government provided educational opportunities to returning servicemen after World War II and began investing heavily in post-secondary education to accommodate the Baby Boom population that enrolment rates swelled. There are now close to 100 public universities and roughly 200 public community colleges, degree-granting and other institutions all across the country. Today, 44% of Canadians possess postsecondary credentials. Much of Canada’s success is attributable to governments’ extensive investments in post-secondary education. Over the past 10 years, Canada has ranked in the top three internationally for public investment in post-secondary education institutions (PSIs). Collectively, the provincial,territorial and federal governments invested roughly $29 billion in 2004. A number of provinces have recently increased their expenditures on post-secondary education to ensure that PSIs are better able to respond to growing public demand. The creation of innovative research bodies and the infusion of new federal funds in national granting councils over the past decade have also enabled Canada’s universities and colleges to pursue an ambitious research agenda—the very heart of academic life.
Shortcomings
In spite of this solid foundation and the impressive track record of Canada’s post-secondary institutions, we cannot
be complacent. The PSE sector’s capacity to sustain its present progress is strained at the very time the world is placing a premium on higher education. Unprecedented demand for post-secondary graduates in the job market, coupled with an aging PSE workforce and deteriorating infrastructure, limit post-secondary institutions’ abilities to meet Canadian economic needs and social expectations. At the moment, there are few means to gauge just how well our PSIs are responding to Canada’s shifting social and economic needs or how post-secondary education in Canada compares with higher education systems in other countries facing similar challenges. Nor are there sufficient data to assess whether Canadians are fully benefitting from the money they and their governments spend on post-secondary education. There is a critical shortage of reliable research on the state of PSE in this country, making it difficult to determine whether PSE effectively prepares Canadians for the challenges and opportunities posed by the knowledge economy, if PSE provides value for money, or how Canada’s PSE system measures up against others elsewhere in the world. Compounding these issues is the fact that, despite widespread agreement that PSE
makes a vital contribution to economic growth and social cohesion, unlike most developed countries, Canada does not have a harmonized set of national objectives and targets for post-secondary education.
Canada’s post-secondary institutions made major contributions to our country’s social progress and economic success in the last half of the 20th century. In the span of several decades, Canada evolved from a country where an advanced education was reserved for the society’s elite to one that produces one of the world’s best-educated populations. By the turn of the century,
Canada boasted the second-highest number of postsecondary educated citizens per capita of any country —a comparative advantage in a global knowledge economy. Since knowledge is now the currency of the economy, improved post-secondary outcomes increase a country’s ability to develop the skilled human resources and conduct the innovative research it needs to remain productive and competitive.
Canadians invest considerable energy, resources, and personal and societal aspiration postsecondary education. It is good public policy to assess how we are doing and outcomes we are achieving with that investment. One of HEQCO’s core mandates evaluate the postsecondary sector and to report the results of that assessment. To this end, in this report, we have assembled data that assess the performance of Canada’s 10 provincial public postsecondary education systems.
Canadians invest considerable energy, resources, and personal and societal aspiration into postsecondary education. It is good public policy to assess how we are doing and what outcomes we are achieving with that investment. One of HEQCO’s core mandates is to evaluate the postsecondary sector and to report the results of that assessment. To that end, in this report, we have assembled data that assess the performance of Canada’s 10 provincial public postsecondary education systems.
Canadians invest considerable energy, resources, and personal and societal aspiration into postsecondary education. It is good public policy to assess how we are doing and what outcomes we are achieving with that investment. One of HEQCO’s core mandates is to evaluate the postsecondary sector and to report the results of that assessment. To that end, in this report, we have assembled data that assess the performance of Canada’s 10 provincial public postsecondary education systems.
In Canadian universities and colleges, the registrar role appears to be evolving. It absolutely remains a position focused on the diligent care and oversight of student academic records and related student services. However, those holding these roles are more often being called upon to create interesting and unique partnerships; actively support or steer enrolment management; oversee significant pan-institutional responsibilities and related accountabilities; and develop policies, procedures, and integrated systems that serve as the backbone for the institution and support overall student success. Registrars are exercising their duties in an increasingly virtual world where institutional boundaries are becoming less rigid and new approaches are becoming the norm. Examples include different course delivery models, online course and program offerings, new forms of inter-institutional collaboration, cross-boundary sharing of data, targeted access programs, increasingly mobile students, etc. The evolving role of the Canadian registrar suggests a close examination of current reporting line practices and responsibilities is timely.
Around the world, new digital technologies are transforming organizations. Digital innovations present boundless opportunities, helping organizations improve their effec- tiveness, efficiency, creativity and service delivery. Higher education is profoundly affected by these transformations and Canada’s universities are actively exploring the powerful possibilities of our shared
digital future.
Universities Canada members voted to uphold seven “inclusive excellence” principles and to undertake an action
plan from 2017 to 2022.
At Universities Canada’s fall membership meeting, university presidents endorsed a set of principles to advance
diversity, equity and inclusion on their campuses, and committed to a five-year action plan to measure their progress
and outcomes.
“It’s the coming together of a number of things that have led us on this path,” said Mike Mahon, the president and
vice-chancellor of the University of Lethbridge, who was voted in as the new board chair of Universities Canada at
the meeting on Oct. 25. On top of the many conversations over the years in the university community around
creating inclusion, “there is this landscape around us – the commitment of the federal government to be as
inclusive, diverse and equitable as possible,” he said, and that includes efforts to increase equity and diversity in the Canada Research Chairs program.
On behalf of Universities Canada, Abacis cpmdicted amd extensive online nationwide study of Canadian's views of Universities.
A March article in The New York Times, "Want to Fix Schools? Go to the Principal’s Office," piqued our interest. We
wondered: If we could "fix" the problems we see going on in academe, particularly at universities, at whom would we
aim attention and money?
That’s not a simple question. Universities are complex creatures. Systems have been built upon systems. Decades,
if not centuries, of calcified processes and cultural norms can be traced back to the German model of the research
university and the teaching and hierarchical models of 11th-century Bologna.
This report was commissioned by the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE) as part of a multi-year effort to improve the quality of education and skills training in Canada while enhancing young people’s ability to succeed in the 21st century job market. Opinions in the paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the CCCE or its members.
Prior work has established robust diversity in the extent to which different moral values are endorsed. Some people focus on values related to caring and fairness, whereas others assign additional moral weight to ingroup loyalty, respect for authority and established hierarchies, and purity concerns. Five studies explore associations between endorsement of distinct moral values and a suite of interpersonal orientations: Machiavellianism, prosocial resource distribution, Social Dominance Orientation, and
reported likelihood of helping and not helping kin and close friends versus acquaintances and neighbors. We found that Machiavellianism (Studies 1, 3, 4, 5) (e.g., amorality, controlling and status-seeking behaviors) and Social Dominance Orientation (Study 4) were negatively associated with caring values, and positively associated with valuation of authority. Those higher in caring values were more likely to choose prosocial resource distributions (Studies 2, 3, 4) and to report reduced likelihood of failing to help kin/close friends or acquaintances (Study 4). Finally, greater likelihood of helping acquaintances was positively associated with all moral values tested except authority values (Study 4). The current work offers a novel approach to characterizing moral values and reveals a striking divergence between two kinds of moral values in particular: caring values and authority values. Caring values were positively linked with prosociality and negatively associated with Machiavellianism, whereas authority values were positively associated with Machiavellianism and Social Dominance Orientation.
OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS OR SO WE HAVE HEARD A great deal about something called the Knowledge Society. The term ‘knowledge’ is appearing in places we wouldn’t have expected to see it a decade or so ago. The media is full of references to the knowledge economy and the knowl-edge revolution; business discussions now routinely talk about knowledge management, knowledge resources, knowledge clusters, knowledge work, and knowledge workers; and policy documents argue for the need to ‘catch’ the knowledge ‘wave’.
In recent years educators and policymakers have set a goal that students graduate from high school ready for college and careers. However, as a nation we are far from achieving this goal, particularly for low-income and minority students. For example, in states where all eleventh-graders take the ACT®, only 27 percent of low-income students in 2010 met the ACT College Readiness Benchmark in reading, with 16 percent meeting the Benchmark in mathematics, and 11 percent meeting the Benchmark in science.
Efforts to improve students’ academic preparation have often been directed at the high-school level, although for many students, gaps in academic preparation begin much earlier. Large numbers of disadvantaged students enter kindergarten behind in early reading and mathematics skills, oral language development, vocabulary, and general knowledge. These gaps are
likely to widen over time because of the “Matthew effects,” whereby those who start out behind are at a relative disadvantage in acquiring new knowledge.
Educators and policymakers have set a goal that all students graduate from high school ready for college and careers. As a nation, however, we are falling short of achieving this goal, particularly for students from at-risk groups. In 2013, in states with the highest percentages of students taking the ACT® college readiness assessment, 41% of students from the two lowest family income categories met ACT College Readiness Benchmarks1 in English, 19% in mathematics, 23% in reading,
and 17% in science.
International Ph.D. students at U. of Western Ontario say their program can't be completed in four years, and that without fifth year of funding they risk having to leave empty-handed.
The Conference Board is launching the Centre for Skills and Post-Secondary Education (SPSE)—a major five-year initiative—–to address the advanced skills and education challenges facing Canada today.
Skills and education are very closely linked. We define skills in a broad sense, so that:
A skilled person is a person who, through education, training, and experience, makes a useful contribution to the economy and society.
As Canada’s youth consider their increasingly broad and complex array of post-secondary education (PSE) options, they are faced with potentially costly decisions. Moreover, they often do not have the information they need to make appropriate choices, which can negatively impact their participation and persistence in PSE. For many students, it is a challenge to choose, design and follow a post-secondary pathway to its conclusion without deviating from their original plan. Students are increasingly taking non-linear pathways through PSE. Some may need to relocate and attend a different institution. Many students may decide to change the focus of their study, while others may wish to change their program entirely. Some may shift their goals from academic to applied forms of study, or vice versa. However, the structures of post-secondary systems in our provinces, and the various mechanisms that bind them, do not always provide clearly apparent and unobstructed pathways for students, particularly for mobile students. These problems are exacerbated by shifting mandates, roles, and labels of institutions across the Canadian PSE sector.
Canada does not have a clear framework for understanding the many changes that have occurred within its PSE sector over the past 15 years. This monograph sets out to explain these changes, with a view to clarifying their potential effects on students’ comprehension of, and mobility through, the structures that comprise our current PSE landscape. In the past, Canadian post-secondary education has been described as binary, a term that indicates the presence of two separate institutional sectors: public universities offering academic and professional programming at the degree-level; and public colleges providing diplomas and certificates in programs of a more technical or vocational nature. However, this conceptualization overlooks private post-secondary institutions and, as Marshall (2006) notes, “significant growth in the number and types of degrees offered by a wider variety of Canadian post-secondary institutions” over recent decades.1 As a result, the distinction between the university and college sectors has become increasingly blurred, and the nature of some Canadian post-secondary institutions is no longer made clear by their names. Canada’s PSE sector is now characterized by a broad and complex mix of institutions for which a clear and comprehensive taxonomy has yet to be developed.
Evolutionary and legislative changes in many Canadian jurisdictions challenge the transparency of current Canadian post-secondary education vocabulary. Students’ ideas about which institutions offer which programs, and which programs lead to which opportunities, may not be aligned with these changes. It is arguable that Canadian PSE has become less transparent in recent years, exacerbating the potential that students make PSE decisions inappropriate to their aspirations. Issues of program choice and fit might be better addressed through the provision of a classification framework aimed at making Canadian PSE more transparent to its users.
When viewed holistically, Canada lacks a clear and common understanding of the future directions and top priorities of its post-secondary education (PSE) sector. Perhaps as a result, Canada has not yet comprehensively addressed a fundamental question: How do we demonstrate quality in PSE? To answer this question requires clarification of many issues, including the roles that various institutions and sectors play. It also requires the development of a shared vision of PSE, of what can and should be achieved. Despite much discussion among leaders of various education sectors in Canada, an agreement on a plan of action has yet to be reached. Indeed, a national dialogue on this critical issue is needed.
As a starting point for a national dialogue, the Canadian Council on Learning (CCL) has published three annual reports on the state of post-secondary education in Canada over the last four years. These reports provided an overview of the Canadian PSE landscape while highlighting various issues common among education jurisdictions and institutions. For instance, CCL’s 2006 report, Canadian Post-secondary Education: A Positive Record¯– An Uncertain Future, identified eight goals common among the post-secondary strategies of provinces and territories. One of these common goals was addressing the issue of quality in PSE.
CCL’s new monograph series, Challenges in Canadian Post-secondary Education, focuses on important considerations identified in our previous reports. Here, with the inaugural monograph, “Up to Par: The Challenge of Demonstrating Quality in Canadian Post-secondary Education,” CCL discusses the complex challenges associated with defining and demonstrating quality in PSE. As the monograph asserts, a necessary step toward understanding and demonstrating quality in PSE is clarification of the overarching purposes and objectives of Canada’s collective post-secondary efforts. The common goals identified by CCL suggest convergence among Canadian education jurisdictions upon which a pan-Canadian strategy for PSE could be built. Nevertheless, debate persists on how best to structure institutions and systems—debate which further confuses our understanding of quality in PSE. Acquiring PSE has been linked to a number of individual benefits, such as better health and quality of life, and a greater likelihood of increased lifetime earnings. In turn, countries with higher levels of PSE participation enjoy greater economic prosperity, employment stability, labour flexibility, productivity and civic participation.1 Increased PSE enrolment rates reflect a growing awareness of the economic benefits of a PSE qualification. Following a period of decline in the 1990s, university enrolment has increased markedly. Between 2001 and 2007, total university enrolment in Canada rose by 19.2%, from 886,700 to over 1 million. Over the same period, the level of graduate studies enrolment grew by 25.3% to over 150,000. This increase has not been limited to universities. In fact, the share of the working-age population in Canada with any type of post-
There is no formal mandate for or tradition of inter-sectoral collaboration between community colleges and universities in Ontario. Follow- ing a regulatory change introduced by the College of Nurses of Ontario in 1998, all Registered Nurse educational preparation was restructured to the baccalaureate degree level through province-wide adoption of a college-university collaborative nursing program model. Despite complex sectoral differences in organizational culture, mandates, and governance structures, this program model was promoted by nursing educators and policy-makers as an innovative approach to utilizing the post-secondary system’s existing nursing education infrastructure and resources. This paper provides an overview
of the introduction of Ontario’s collaborative baccalaureate nursing programs and discusses some of challenges associated with implementing and maintaining such programs.
En Ontario, il n’y a pas de mandat offi ciel ni de tradition de collaboration intersectorielle entre les collèges communautaires et les universités. À la suite d’une modifi cation réglementaire apportée par l’Ordre des infi rmières et infi rmiers de l’Ontario en 1998, toute la formation pédagogique de niveau baccalauréat du personnel infi rmier a été restructurée par l’adoption à la grandeur de la province d’un modèle de programme de formation en sciences infirmières offert conjointement par les collèges et les universités. En dépit de différences complexes entre ces deux secteurs aux plans de la culture organisationnelle, des mandats et des structures de gouvernance, les enseignants en soins infirmiers et les décideurs ont fait la promotion de ce modèle de pro- gramme en tant qu’approche novatrice pour utiliser l’infrastructure et les ressources de formation en sciences infirmières déjà en place dans le réseau postsecondaire. Cet article offre un aperçu de l’introduction des programmes ontariens de baccalauréat conjoint en sciences infir- mières et examine quelques-uns des obstacles associés à la mise en œuvre et au maintien de ces programmes.