The 2016 First-Year Student Survey marks the 22nd cooperative study undertaken by the Canadian University Survey Consortium/Consortium canadien de recherche sur les étudiants universitaires (CUSC-CCREU). The 2016 survey involved 34 universities and almost 15,000 first-year university students from across Canada.
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’.
Leadership models of the last century have been products of top-down, bureaucratic paradigms. These models are eminently effective for an economy premised on physical production but are not well-suited for a more knowledge-oriented economy. Complexity science suggests a different paradigm for leadership—one that frames leadership as a complex interactive dynamic from which adaptive outcomes (e.g., learning, innovation, and adaptability) emerge. This article draws from complexity science to develop an overarching framework for the study of Complexity Leadership Theory, a leadership paradigm that focuses on enabling the learning, creative, and adaptive capacity of complex adaptive systems (CAS) within a context of knowledge-producing organizations. This conceptual framework includes three entangled leadership roles (i.e., adaptive leadership, administrative leadership, and enabling leadership) that reflect a dynamic relationship between the bureaucratic, administrative functions of the organization and the emergent, informal dynamics of complex adaptive systems (CAS).
Keywords: leadership, complexity theory, complex adaptive systems (CAS), Knowledge Era, creativity, adaptive organizations, bureaucracy
The essay explores how the dynamics of competition and collaboration among Ontario’s higher education institutions contribute to the system’s differentiation strategy. The essay implements a content analysis approach to the Strategic Mandate Agreement submissions signed between the Ontario Government and the Ontario Colleges and Universities in 2014. The study finds that the dynamics of competition for students, resources, and prestige are influenced by government policies and decisions, which have created a uniform environment where all institutions respond similarly to challenges and opportunities. As a result, system homogeneity prevails. Moreover, Ontario institutions are very internally diversified; yet, their future directions have a limited impact on the entire system differentiation.
It is entirely possible that a common definition of quality in education is an impossible goal. This is puzzling, since everyone knows what it looks like. It is the transfer of enthusiasm for knowledge and discovery from professor to student. It sparks the desire in a new generation to push the envelope of human understanding further than it has ever been pushed. It teaches the weight of responsibility to conduct this discovery responsibly, ethically and with future generations in mind.
As the year 2015 has begun, a worldwide racialized conversation continues about the inability of police, judicial systems, and public policy to address what Derrick Bell (1992) has long framed as the “permanence of racism” (see also Knaus, 2011; Ladson-Billings, 1999). Race riots and police brutality in Ferguson and the Charlie Hebdo murders and their aftermath in Paris punctuate a constant backdrop of racialized policy-making, violence, and inequity. While small, short-lived protests sprang up in reaction to these events, systemic and long-term responses to the larger global context of racism are less common and largely not deemed media-worthy. Within the U.S. context of charges of sanctioned, racialized police brutality representing American racism being framed around the killing of individual Black men, larger arguments about the role of public education in challenging the very conditions that lead to such racism become silenced.
Wilkins presents interesting concepts in Education in the Balance: Mapping the Global Dynamics of School
Leadership regarding principles of school leadership. Wilkins notes that innovation and greater ownership are needed in leadership. In the introduction, he identifies that Education in the Balance connects several
related but different fieldseducational policy, globalization, philosophy, the future purpose of schooling,
leadership publications, school effectiveness, comparative education, and academic disciplinary writing
centered around educational geography.
The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has linked data from the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) of teachers of 15-year-old students with school-level data from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), a survey of 15-year-old students. The purpose of this study is to present an exploratory analysis of the combined TALIS-PISA data by examining the relationship of school-level student measures to teacher outcomes. In other words, this paper examines how student factors in a school may influence teachers’ work, their attitudes, and their perceived needs for support. Survey responses were collected from teachers and students in eight countries. Data from 26 610 teachers were combined with student measures, aggregated by school, from 103 077 students.
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees Americans freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly, freedom of the press and the right to petition the government without retribution. The ways in which the First Amendment has been interpreted and applied over time have formed the contours of our modern society, determining the types of expression that American institutions and citizens will and will not defend, as well as the role of the press and media in supporting an informed society.
As an instructional technologist at the University of Washington’s School of Social Work, Tom Baer is no stranger to
working with faculty who struggle to understand the role of instructional designers. It’s not unusual for him to encounter instructors reluctant to give up their go-to lecture or PowerPoint Presentation, unsure of online learning’s effectiveness or resistant to a change in teaching style.
Enrollment in online courses at colleges and universities continues to grow, along with the need for IDs who help design curriculum and implement digital tools. IDs work closely with faculty members and subject experts to create measurable learning objectives, produce course content and craft engaging activities. But during the process, faculty may give IDs the cold shoulder for fear of having to give up control or appearing less knowledgeable in front of their students.
Canada needs to take an integrated and innovative approach to enhancing student mobility, according to participants at a workshop held December 2014 by Universities Canada. The workshop – held in Calgary and attracting university and private sector leaders – called for Canada to step up its efforts to get university students moving beyond their province
and beyond our borders.
Abstract
This review examines recent theoretical and empirical developments in the leadership literature, beginning with topics that are currently re-ceiving attention in terms of research, theory, and practice. We begin by examining authentic leadership and its development, followed by work that takes a cognitive science approach. We then examine new-genre leadership theories, complexity leadership, and leadership that is shared, collective, or distributed. We examine the role of relationships through our review of leader member exchange and the emerging work on followership. Finally, we examine work that has been done on sub-stitutes for leadership, servant leadership, spirituality and leadership, cross-cultural leadership, and e-leadership. This structure has the ben-efit of creating a future focus as well as providing an interesting way to examine the development of the field. Each section ends with an identi-fication of issues to be addressed in the future, in addition to the overall integration of the literature we provide at the end of the article.
What is Next for Mobile Learning?
In December 2015, there were 4.3 billion mobile phone subscribers in the world. In North America, 77% of families have at least one smartphone and 46% have access to a tablet at home. Worldwide, even though only 75% of the world has ready access to electricity, 75% of the world’s population has access to a mobile phone[1]. Some of the most remarkable learning development projects in the world, such as the Commonwealth of Learning’s Learning for Farmers initiative, use mobile phones and simple messaging systems to transform the livelihoods of thousands of families. Learning through mobile devices is possible anywhere and at anytime and is happening now.
This policy paper examines the various avenues in which entirely-online post-secondary learning, specifically entirely-online courses and programs, could develop in Ontario over the coming years.
Online education has the potential to make higher education more accessible, and it has the ability to overcome the financial, social and geographic barriers faced by some students via their pursuit of a post- secondary education. It also has the potential to enhance student learning, both inside the classroom and within distance education context. However, if implemented in the wrong way, it has the potential to be disengaging, impersonal, and costly. Broken down into sections based on OUSA’s mandate of seeking accessible, affordable, accountable, and quality post-secondary education for all willing students, this paper addresses some of the major concerns that surround fully-online learning, and provides possible solutions for these issues. There is currently a lot of potential for growth in this area, but a lot of questions remain as well. The following summary presents some of the topics discussed in this paper:
The government of Ontario has signalled the need to expand graduate education to create and sustain a highly skilled workforce in today’s knowledge-based economy. Ontario has grown its PhD capacity deliberately since 2005, beginning with its Reaching Higher initiative, to produce highly qualified personnel to work both inside and outside academia.
Hundreds of thousands of American families across all income levels are spending billions each year in extra college costs because our high schools are graduating too many students unprepared for college. That’s a fact most may not realize, because current discussions around postsecondary remedial education – prerequisite courses that carry zero credit toward a college degree and represent content and skills students should have learned in high school already – are often segregated to low-income students and community colleges. But in truth, many middle-class and upper-income families bear the brunt of extra costs that come with required remedial classes in all college sectors for students from all income levels. In fact, at private nonprofit four-year colleges and universities, the children of upper-income families are taking more remedial classes than students from low-income families. Out-of-pocket tuition and additional living expense costs for these courses represent an expansive failure of our K-12 education system to prepare students to be ready academically for college on day one.
As with any provider of products and services to be sold, the value proposition for community colleges depends on who’s buying. Community colleges are confronted with a diverse collection of potential buyers with different needs and their own valuation of what the services are worth. The local community, businesses, state and federal governments, donors, and individual students are potential buyers and community colleges are uniquely poised to fulfill their needs.
Students' understanding and participation in "work" affects their university in many ways. Employment can serve as both a motivator and hindrance to academic success. It can teach valuable lessons while also detracting from academic work. It is the number one reason why students attend post-secondary school. Unfortunately, numerous barriers stand in the way of increasing the employment rates of highly educated youth. These barriers must be treated as distinct yet interconnected, and necessitate multifaceted approaches. This OUSA policy paper outlines how government, employers, educators, and students can work together to overcome barriers and move towards a more prosperous, productive future.
This paper exploits data from the Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) to shed light on the link between measured cognitive skills (proficiency), (formal) educational attainment and labour market outcomes. After presenting descriptive statistics on the degree of dispersion in the distributions of proficiency and wages, the paper shows that the cross-country correlation between these two dimensions of inequality is very low and, if anything, negative. As a next step, the paper provides estimates of the impact of both proficiency and formal education at different parts of the distribution of earnings. Formal education is found to have a larger impact on inequality, given that returns to education are in general much higher at the top than at the bottom of the distribution. The profile of returns to proficiency, by contrary, is much flatter. This is consistent with the idea that PIAAC measures rather general skills, while at the top end of the distribution the labour market rewards specialised knowledge that is necessarily acquired through tertiary and graduate education. Finally, a decomposition exercise shows that composition effects are able to explain a very limited amount of the observed cross-country differences in wage inequality. This suggests that economic institutions, by shaping the way personal characteristics are rewarded in the labour market, are the main
determinants of wage inequality.
Key stakeholders all across higher education -- including boards, policy makers, administrators at all levels, faculty of all types, disciplinary societies, and unions -- increasingly have one. It's time to make it a reality, argues Adrianna Kezar.