College prices have increased by 45 percent on average over the past decade, while household income has declined by 7 percent in the same period. According to a Lumina/Gallup survey in 2015, more than three-quarters of American adults do not think education beyond high school is affordable for everyone in the nation who needs it.
The Canadian labour market suffered a severe blow during the last recession, with more than 430,000 persons losing their jobs and the unemployment rate reaching levels unseen since the latter half of the 1990s.
Subsequently, the labour market has shown great resilience, and there are now 900,000 more Canadians employed since the beginning of the recovery. Important weaknesses remain, however: long-term and youth unemploymentstill stand at obstinately high levels – despite a recent growth in job vacancies.
This E-Brief argues the best way to further support the Canadian labour market would be through policies that enhance labour mobility and emphasize skills training to help ensure unemployed Canadians have the right skill sets to
integrate into the workforce.
Michael L. Skolnik
University of Toronto
ABSTRACT
Community college systems were established across North America from the early 1960s through the early 1970s. The new systems had two principal models: in one model, the college combined lower-division, university-level general education with technical education programs; in the other, most or all of the colleges were intended to concentrate on technical education. Ontario was the largest of the provinces and states in North America that opted for the second model. Many of the issues that planners confronted when designing these college systems have either persisted or re-emerged in recent years. This article re-examines the debate on the design of Ontario’s colleges that took place when they were founded and considers its implications for the present.
RÉSUMÉ
Depuis le début des années 1960 et jusqu’au début des années 1970, lorsqu’on créait des réseaux de collèges communautaires partout en Amérique du Nord, deux modèles majeurs étaient proposés pour ces nouveaux réseaux. Dans un des modèles, le collège combinait l’enseignement général universitaire de division inférieure avec les programmes d’enseignement technique ; dans l’autre, la plupart des collèges, sinon tous, se concentraient sur l’enseignement technique. L’Ontario était la plus importante parmi les provinces et les États en Amérique du Nord qui ait opté pour le deuxième modèle. Beaucoup des défis
auxquels les planifi cateurs ont été confrontés lorsqu’ils ont conçu le réseau des collèges sont encore présents ou sont réapparus au cours des dernières années. Cet article réexamine l’ancien débat sur la conception des collèges de l’Ontario et considère ses implications actuelles.
News reports warn of an upcoming labour shortage that will be accompanied by high unemployment rates due to a large pool of workers who do not have the skills to participate in the Canadian labour market. Researchers and economists have suggested focusing on training populations of individuals who have historically been underrepresented in the labour market as a way of addressing this upcoming shortage.
Through its Employment Ontario – Literacy and Basic Skills program, the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities funds preparatory programs at all Ontario public colleges. These programs provide a pathway for non-traditional learners to access postsecondary education and training that would allow them to attain education, training and meaningful employment. Preparatory programs cater to prospective students interested in attending postsecondary programs, trades training or apprenticeships but who lack the admission requirements or who have been out of school for an extended period of time. Preparatory programs provide adult learners with the opportunity to improve their mathematics, communications, computer and science skills up to the level expected for college entry. The courses students take can also fulfill prerequisite requirements for entry into college programs. Other reasons students attend preparatory programs include personal development, career exploration, upgrading for employment purposes or interest in obtaining their high school equivalency.
ABSTRACT
The purpose of faculty development in terms of the educational role is to assist faculty in becoming better educators. Educational peer review (EPR) is one method of faculty development. This article is based on a study that explored the different development needs of nursing faculty within a school of nursing at an Ontario university. The study explored on three variables of interest: level of skill acquisition, type of faculty appointment, and type of teaching. A qualitative research design in the case-study tradition was employed. Findings indicated that faculty challenges could be grouped into three themes: job knowledge, skills development, and systems challenges. Job knowledge and skills development challenges varied by level of skill acquisition and type of teaching, while identifi ed systems challenges were related to type of appointment. A fl exible EPR program that allows for some customization may lead to an increased ability to meet individual faculty development needs and greater faculty buy-in.
RÉSUMÉ
Le but du développement de faculté dans le rôle éducatif est d’aider la faculté à devenir des meilleurs éducateurs. L’évaluation éducative par les pairs (EEP) est une méthode de développement de faculté. Cette étude a exploré les différences dans les besoins de développement de faculté d’une faculté d’infi rmiers dans une école d’infi rmiers à une université d’Ontario basée sur trois variables d’intérêt : niveau d’acquisition de compétence, type de désignation de faculté et type d’enseignement. Un protocole de recherche qualitatif dans la tradition d’étude de cas a été 54 CJHE / RCES Volume 40, No. 1, 2010 utilisé. Les résultats ont indiqué que des défi s de faculté pourraient être groupés dans trois thèmes: la connaissance de travail, le développement de compétences et les défi s du système. La connaissance de travail et les défi s de développement de compétences ont varié par le niveau de l’acquisition de compétence et le type d’enseignement, alors que
des défi s du système identifi és étaient liés au type de désignation. Un programme fl exible de EEP, qui tient compte de personnalisation, peut mener à la capacité accrue de répondre aux différents besoins de développement de faculté et au plus d’acceptation de faculté.
The internationally recognized series of Horizon Reports is part of the New Media Consortium’s Horizon Project, a comprehensive research venture established in 2002 that identifies and describes emerging technologies likely to have a large impact over the coming five years on a variety of sectorsaround the globe. This volume, the 2011 Horizon Report, examines emerging technologies for their potential impact on and use in teaching, learning, and creative inquiry. It is the eighth in the annual series of reports focused on emerging technology in the higher education environment.
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
This paper reports the results of an analysis of persistence in post-secondary education (PSE) for college students in Ontario based on the extremely rich YITS-B dataset that has been used for other recent studies at the national level. We calculate hazard or transition rates (and cumulative transition rates) with respect to those who i) graduate, ii) switch programs, and iii) leave PSE (perhaps to return later). We also look at the reasons for switching and leaving, subsequent re-entry rates among leavers, and graduation and persistence rates once switchers and re-entrants are taken into account. These patterns are then probed in more detail using hazard (regression) models where switching and leaving are related to a variety of individual characteristics, family background, high school outcomes, and early pse experiences. Student pathways are seen to be varied. Perhaps the single most important finding is that the proportion of students who either obtain a degree or continue to be enrolled somewhere in the PSE system in the years after entering a first program remains close to the 80 percent mark for the five years following entry. Seventy-one percent of students graduate within five years of starting, while another 6 percent are still in the PSE system.
In 2008, the OECD launched the AHELO feasibility study, an initiative with the objective to assess whether it is possible to develop international measures of learning outcomes in higher education.
Learning outcomes are indeed key to a meaningful education, and focusing on learning outcomes is essential to inform diagnosis and improve teaching processes and student learning. While there is a long tradition of learning outcomes’ assessment within institutions’ courses and programmes, emphasis on learning outcomes has become more important in
recent years. Interest in developing comparative measures of learning outcomes has increased in response to a range of higher education trends, challenges and paradigm shifts.
AHELO aims to complement institution-based assessments by providing a direct evaluation of student learning outcomes at the global level and to enable institutions to benchmark the performance of their students against their peers as part of their improvement efforts. Given AHELO’s global scope, it is essential that measures of learning outcomes are valid across
diverse cultures and languages as well as different types of higher education institutions (HEIs).
While Canada leads other OECD member countries in postsecondary education (PSE) participation rates, there still remain underrepresented segments of the population which are less likely to pursue PSE. Ontarians who come from low-income households, have parents with no PSE, live in a rural area, identify as an Aboriginal person, and/or have a disability are less likely to enrol in PSE (Norrie & Zhao, 2011).
Youth from some ethnic and racial groups are also less likely to pursue PSE, particularly university (Abada, Hou, & Ram, 2008).
This paper focuses on early intervention programs as one approach to support underrepresented youth to complete secondary school and make the transition to PSE. These programs are intended to provide youth with the resources, support and information necessary to avoid dropping out of school and to increase their chances of participating in PSE (Chambers & Deller, 2011). Early intervention programs can originate within the elementary and secondary school systems, colleges, universities, community centres or other community-based organizations.
The first section of this report is a literature review summarizing the key thinking on the role of early
intervention programs in supporting access. Much of what we know in Canada about these programs is
drawn from the American context, where research on the topic has been extensive. As a result, the
literature review draws heavily from American sources, making links to the Canadian context where
possible.
What are the most popular practices and tactics for electronic student recruitment at the undergraduate level? To find out, Noel-Levitz conducted a web-based poll in the spring of 2014 as part of the firm’s continuing series of benchmark polls for higher education. As a special bonus, a number of gaps between campus practices and prospective students’ expectations are identified based on a parallel study of college-bound high school students in spring 2014 (see information at bottom).
This report reflects the enthusiasm and commitment of students, staff and faculty in realizing the vision of environmental sustainability on Ontario’s university campuses.
The report is based on an annual survey of 20 Ontario universities conducted by the Council
of Ontario Universities (COU).
“Pop leadership” philosophy abounds in our culture today. Book stores have shelves full of books on leader ship. Leaders and leadership are discussed daily on tele vision, radio, newspapers, magazines and on the web. As a result, many mixed messages about leadership are expressed. So – how do you decide what is accurate?
In Canada, 1,172,785 persons identify as Aboriginal, and 698,025 identify as First Nations.
• Aboriginal youth are the fastest growing demographic. The First Nations population grew 3.5 times faster than the on-Aboriginal population in 2006.
• Approximately 30% of the First Nations adult population is less than 30 years of age while 13% are 60 years of age and older.
A New Model for Effective Teaching
How might education change if classrooms become places of active learning, not just passive listening? Higher education students are already active learners, using e-books, Web content, and social media to explore and discover in their daily lives. But what happens when these students go to the classroom, especially for high-enrollment courses? They sometimes experience the curiosity-stifling thud of having to listen to and take notes on a lecture, with its mostly one-way communication format. And with limited opportunities for Q&A during the class session and no ability to review the lecture content later to study a difficult concept, it’s no wonder students may become discouraged and disengaged.
This traditional learning model won’t cut it with students who are accustomed to active learning, either on their own or in small groups of classmates. Students increasingly expect a classroom experience that helps them develop knowledge for themselves, not just passively receive one-dimensional information. Students want to do something meaningful with content instead of just listening to a lecture. They also expect to meet with discussion groups and project teams and
do much of their assigned work during class time instead of meeting separately.
Another factor that is playing a role in student perceptions: the value gained from education in a tough economy. Instructors need to make education worth a student’s investment of time and money by ensuring the classroom experience is productive and meaningful. These expectations are leading higher education toward “flipped” classrooms and a learning model that blends online and in-class learning. Respondents to the Center for Digital Education’s 2011 Community Colleges Survey indicated the majority of their students enroll in online or blended courses and that more than two-thirds of online courses used some type of online collaboration tools to promote learning.
This report represents the second annual survey on Twitter usage and trends among college faculty. This year's survey, like that conducted in 2009, sought answers to some of the fundamental questions regarding faculty members' familiarity, perception, and experience with the micro-blogging technology, as well as whether they expect their Twitter use to increase or decrease in the future. We also examined year-to-year comparisons to see how the Twitter landscape has changed during the past 12 months. The 2010 Faculty Focus survey of nearly 1,400 higher education professionals found that more than a third (35.2 percent) of the 1,372 respondents who completed the survey in July-August 2010 use Twitter in some capacity. That's up from 30.7 percent in 2009. Meanwhile, the percentage of educators who never used Twitter decreased from 56.4 percent in 2009 to 47.9 percent in 2010. The remaining 16.9 percentage consists of those who tried Twitter, but stopped using it —an increase from 12.9 percent in 2009.
Of those who currently use Twitter, the most common activities include “to share information with peers†and “as a real-time news source.†Instructional uses, such as “to communicate with students†and “as a learning tool in the classroom†are less popular, although both activities saw increases over the previous year. Meanwhile, a number of non-users expressed concerns that Twitter creates poor writing skills and could be yet another classroom distraction. Many also noted that very few of their students use Twitter. Finally, a new trend that emerged this year centred on the belief that many feel they already have too many places to post messages or check for student questions/comments. As one professor put it, “I have no interest in adding yet another communication tool to my overloaded life. In terms of future use, just over half (56.8 percent) of current Twitter users say they expect to increase their use during the coming academic year. Only 2.5 percent say their Twitter use will likely decrease, and 40.7 percent say it will stay about the same.
This 22-page report gives a breakdown of each survey question, including a sampling of the comments provided by the respondents. The comments allowed faculty to further explain how they are using Twitter, why they stopped, or why they have no interest in using it at all.
Over the last few decades there has been a great deal of ink spilled about the importance of postsecondary education (PSE) in Canada and globally. We are moving from a mid-20th century idea of postsecondary education as “elite†to a new understanding of “mass†postsecondary education (Trow, 1974), and potentially to a newer view of postsecondary education as “universal.†The growing consensus is that postsecondary education is important to society, in providing the skills workers require in the labour market, in supporting the social and economic health of society, and in ensuring individuals have the necessary abilities to participate and contribute fully in that society and labour market. What once was accepted as the luxury of the upper and middle classes is now understood to be a prerequisite for full inclusion in the benefits and functioning of society.
As PSE in Ontario grows to “universal†proportions and beyond, youth from low-income backgrounds stand to gain in terms of their socio-economic status. Nevertheless,potential students from low-income backgrounds continue to take up postsecondary education with less frequency than their middle- and high-income counterparts, particularly at the university level (Drolet ,2005; de Broucker, 2005; Berger, Motte and Parkin, 2009; HEQCO, 2010). Income is an important determinant of participation in PSE. Knowing this, the public policy response has long been a focus on keeping tuition relatively low and providing student assistance to students who demonstrate need. However, recent research has revealed that income alone is not as strong a determinant as academic achievement or parental education (Drolet, 2005; Frenette, 2008a; Finnie, Childs and Wismer, 2010).
Characteristics often associated with income make the barriers to postsecondary more complex and multi-faceted. Furthermore, it has also been shown that changes to student assistance and tuition levels over time have had very little effect on the participation of the lowest income quartile (Berger et al., 2009); meaning that other policy levers may be required to address the complexity of the barriers in a more sophisticated way.
This is the first in a series of @ Issue Papers that looks at the participation of traditionally under-represented cohorts in postsecondary education.1 The purpose of this @ Issue Paper is to summarize what is currently known about the participation of low-income students in PSE, with a particular emphasis on low-income students in Ontario. Where relevant data or research is not available for Ontario, the discussion will focus on the larger Canadian picture.
I. Introduction
Entering a (first) postsecondary education (PSE) program represents a critical transition in a person’s life, but it is just the beginning of a whole new set of dynamics that can take many different forms. Some students continue in their programs until graduation, proceeding at faster or slower rates. Others switch to another program at the same institution, at an institution of the same kind (college or university) or at a different level of study. Still others abandon their studies, some to return at a later date.
Those who persist in their initial programs directly through to graduation could be considered cases where the system has successfully helped students realize their PSE aspirations and then move into the labour market, go on to further schooling or pursue other life goals. In short, they could be considered student “success” stories as far as the PSE system is concerned.
Those who obtain a diploma/degree after moving across different programs, institutions or levels of study
– perhaps with a break in their studies along the way – may have taken, to some extent, a wasteful diversion on the path to their preferred postsecondary credential. This may result from an initially flawed program choice or a PSE system that has somehow not served these students as well as it could have.
However, such pathways could also represent the student’s acquisition of necessary learning about different programs and the careers they lead to, or they could reflect developments in the student’s personal life apart from his or her schooling, or they may result from an individual’s change of plans. In at least some of these cases, the postsecondary system and the postsecondary institutions with which the individual was involved may have performed as well as could be expected despite the time required and the circuitous pathway that the student took to complete the program. Finally, although individuals who fail to complete their postsecondary studies may be regarded as being part of a system that is not working as it should, such pathways may again represent necessary learning experiences or be related to personal factors that have little to do with the PSE system. In fact, the system may have performed as well as could be expected, including providing an initial opportunity for the individual to pursue or explore their PSE ambitions.
Underlying many of these dynamics are policy issues relating to ways in which these pathways and outcomes could be improved. Could better information provided in more effective ways help students make more informed and appropriate program choices at an earlier point during their studies? In the case of students who struggle in their PSE studies, could certain interventions help these individuals or targeted groups of students overcome those challenges and complete their programs in a more timely fashion? Are there means of reducing the need for some students to take breaks from their studies or are such pauses a necessary part of the PSE experience for at least some individuals? Answering such questions, and developing the appropriate policy response, could potentially result in more satisfied students, reduced costs for the PSE system and higher graduation rates. Before addressing these issues, however, more information on PSE pathways is needed, including program retention, drop-out and completion rates and student transfers within, between and across programs, institutions and levels of study.
The general objective of this report is to provide new and unique empirical evidence concerning the patterns of “persistence” (or what is sometimes alternatively referred to as “retention,” especially when viewed from the perspective of individual institutions), as well as educational pathways more generally, of PSE students in Ontario. We present an analysis of the frequency of various trajectories and graduation rates and use both descriptive statistics and econometric modelling to show how pathways and outcomes vary by students’ individual characteristics, family background and educational outcomes at the high school and PSE levels.1 Throughout, the focus is on Ontario, but comparisons are made with the rest of Canada.
This document represents the first review and summary of existing research on student course evaluations from a Canadian perspective. The scholarship in this area is vast and of varying quality and scope. Our review is an attempt to capture and synthesize the key issues and findings regarding the validity and utility of student course evaluations. We have organized our research into the following seven sections:
Section 1: Introduction provides an overview of the scope, methodology and limitations of this study.
Section 2: Context identifies the current state of scholarship and interest in course evaluations and the evaluation of teaching more generally. It also reviews student, faculty and administrator perceptions of course evaluation systems.
Section 3: Current Policy and Practice in North America offers an overview of evaluation instruments, policies and processes from 22 post-secondary institutions in Canada and the United States as well as policies related to course evaluations from system-level and government agencies.
Section 4: Reliability, Validity and Interpretation of Course Evaluation Data summarizes and reviews the findings from previous studies conducted over the past 40 years with a particular emphasis on the last two decades.
Section 5: Implementing Effective Evaluation Measures: Recommendations from the Research synthesizes research findings and identifies recommendations for improved administration and interpretation of course evaluations.
Section 6: Emerging Trends, Existing Gaps and Suggestions for Further Research highlights issues currently being considered in the scholarship along with those that have been identified as areas requiring more in-depth analysis.
Section 7: Concluding Remarks provides a brief summary of our most important findings and recommendations.
Overall, our findings indicate that while course evaluation instruments generally provide reliable and valid data, significant barriers to the effective use of such evaluation systems continue to exist due to: Persistent myths and misconceptions about variables affecting evaluation results; Unclear concepts and definitions of effective teaching; Student Course Evaluations: Research, Models and Trends Insufficient education about the goals, uses and validity of course evaluations for students, faculty and administrators; Poor presentation and contextualization of evaluation data; and Inconsistent and inequitable policies and practices regarding the implementation and administration of course evaluations.
Our findings suggest that no matter the reliability and validity of the evaluation instruments themselves, the policies, processes and practices at an institution determine the degree to which evaluations are an effective measure of teaching quality.
Abstract
This report presents the results of a study examining the experiences of students with disabilities who graduated from five Ontario colleges between 2007 and 2010. The five colleges were representative of four geographical areas (central, eastern, western and northern) and of differing sizes, from small to large. The study used administrative data obtained from each college’s disability service office to examine two groups: graduates with disabilities (GwD) and graduates without disabilities (GwoD). These groups were compared in order to determine whether GwD required a longer time to graduate than GwoD. Program and academic factors related to the length of time taken to complete the program, such as the type of disability and the use of accommodations and services, were examined. The results show that when graduates with disabilities are compared to a similar group of students without disabilities, they require slightly but significantly more time to graduate. In addition, regression models show that within the GwD population, the credential type, program area, type of disability and GPA score all influence whether a graduate takes extra time to complete his or her program.