A revolution is occurring in our nation’s schools, and it’s all about the role of technology and the shift from paper and textbooks to digital content. Smartphones,laptops, tablets, e-readers, social media and interactive whiteboards are infiltrating classrooms and changing the way learning happens. Technology makes school fun for kids and inspires collaboration, creativity and selfdirected learning. Apple’s iPad textbook announcement in early 2012 will undoubtedly encourage a new level of innovation, with follow-on offerings from other high-tech companies and publishers.
In many school districts, this revolution is more of an evolution — but digital teaching is where our future is headed; how you plan to get there could make all the difference in the results for your faculty and students. The right strategy incorporates not only adopting the optimal content providers and hardware platforms for your student population, but devising an A to Z approach for the underlying technology infrastructure.
This paper will discuss how this digital shift at K-12 schools and community colleges will impact IT decisions, particularly as it relates to wireless networks. Wireless technology is quickly evolving to better meet the needs of schools from a cost, functionality and management perspective.
Importantly, the right wireless strategy helps schools successfully deliver on the promise of digital education.
• As part of the Open Ontario Plan outlined in the 2010 Speech from the Throne and the 2010 Budget, the government announced the intention to establish an Ontario Online Institute (OOI).
• While Ontario has a strong foundation to build on including existing elearning initiatives such as Contact North/Contact Nord, elearnnetwork/ reseauelearning and OntarioLearn, it was recognized that these initiatives do not capture the full scope of elearning activity taking place at our institutions. As a result, a survey of colleges and universities was done in spring 2010.
As a result, a survey of colleges and universities was done in spring 2010.
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.
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.
ABSTRACT
In analyses of higher education systems, many models and frameworks are based on governance, steering, or coordination models. Although much can be gained by such analyses, we argue that the language used in the present-day policy documents (knowledge economy, competitive position, etc.) calls for an analysis of higher education as an industry. In this paper, the university sector in Ontario’s higher education industry is analyzed by applying Michael Porter’s five forces framework defined by the following forces: the threat of new entrants, supplier power, buyer power, the threat of substitutes, and industry rivalry. Our assessment revealed that competition in Ontario’s higher education industry (university sector) is currently mixed. The findings suggest that policy-makers, the sector, and individual institutions will need to consider more seriously the impact of technology and globalization when seeking a competitive position for the Ontarian higher education system.
RÉSUMÉ
En termes d’analyse des systèmes d’enseignement supérieur, de nombreux modèles et cadres de référence sont fondés sur des modèles de gouvernance, de pilotage ou de coordination. Malgré la pertinence de ces analyses, nous soutenons que la langue utilisée dans les documents de politique actuels
(économie du savoir, position concurrentielle, etc.), notamment, incite à une analyse de l’enseignement supérieur en tant qu’industrie. L’article revoit le secteur universitaire de l’industrie de l’enseignement supérieur de l’Ontario en appliquant le modèle des cinq formes de Michael Porter, définies en fonction des forces suivantes : la menace d’entrants potentiels, le pouvoir de négociation des fournisseurs, le pouvoir de négociation des clients, la menace des produits de substitution et l’intensité de la concurrence intrasectorielle. Notre évaluation a révélé que la concurrence au sein de l’industrie de l’enseignement supérieur en Ontario (secteur universitaire) est présentement mixte. Les résultats suggèrent que les décideurs politiques, le secteur et les institutions individuelles devront prendre en compte plus sérieusement les répercussions de la technologie et de la mondialisation pour positionner de manière concurrentielle le système d’enseignement supérieur de l’Ontario.
The Accord on the Internationalization of Education emerges from the Association of Canadian Deans of Education (ACDE), a network of deans, directors, and chairs of faculties, colleges, schools, and departments of education from across Canada. ACDE members are committed to “national, public discourse on the importance of public education in developing and sustaining a civil society (ACDE General Accord, 2006a, p.1). This Accord is the product of a shared commitment across members of the ACDE network, and is intended to speak to a diversity of stakeholders and audiences, within and external to the university communities from which it emerged. In particular, the Accord seeks to stimulate discussion of critical issues and institutional responsibilities in the internationalization of education, and to give careful consideration to representations of marginalized individuals, groups, and communities.
Executive Summary
The overall goal of the present study was to examine the employment experience of postsecondary graduates with learning disabilities (LD) in the province of Ontario. More specifically, employment success, job satisfaction, impact of LD within a job setting and experience with employment transition services during postsecondary education were examined. Utilizing a uniform and current definition of LD (LDAO, 2001), this study surveyed graduates from 20 of Ontario’s colleges and universities to capture their employment experiences. The research was conducted through Ontario’s two Assessment and Resource Centres (ARCs), which collectively provide comprehensive psycho-educational assessments for students enrolled in Ontario’s postsecondary institutions. The pool of participants for the study included graduates of postsecondary institutions who had received a diagnosis of LD from these centres between the years 2004/05 and 2007/08 and who had entered the labour market.
Key Findings from the Study
• Findings regarding the employment status of graduates with LD from Ontario’s colleges and universities showed that since graduation, 69.1% of the sample reported being employed on either a full-time or a part-time basis, while 16.4% reported being
unemployed. In addition, 10.9% indicated that they had returned to school, and 3.6% reported their occupational status as that of homemaker. The main findings regarding the impact of LD in the workplace centred on strategies to manage the impact of LD on these individuals, disclosure of their learning disabilities and the consequences of disclosure:
1. Low-profile, low-technology strategies such as time management and support from friends and family were favoured over highly visible or high-technology strategies such as assistive technology and self-advocacy.
2. The majority of respondents (71.9%) indicated that their LD impacted their performance in the workplace, yet the majority (62%) also chose not to disclose their LD in this setting.
3. The reasons for not disclosing were cited as fear of being judged, embarrassment and a belief that the LD did not impact job duties.
4. Gender, age, type of institution and job satisfaction were related with selfdisclosure in the workplace, with females, older students, college students (relative to university) and those indicating lower levels of job satisfaction being more likely to disclose their disability.
• Regarding job satisfaction, the sample reported being satisfied with their current employment, as 70.8% of respondents either strongly agreed or agreed with eight different aspects of job satisfaction. Differences in salary level, strategies used on the job to reduce LD impact and self-disclosure of LD occurred relative to job atisfaction. Job satisfaction and salary levels were higher for individuals who used more strategies
4 – Employment Experience of Ontario’s Postsecondary Graduates with Learning Disabilities on the job to reduce LD impact but not for those who engaged in more self-disclosure about their disability.
• Similar to the general Ontario college population, career services were not used to a great degree by this group of students. Work experiences such as co-op placements and job search training were accessed by approximately one-quarter of survey respondents.
• Focus interviews conducted post survey highlighted respondents’ sensitivity to their information-processing-speed problems and the extra time required to complete tasks relative to the time taken by coworkers. Comments regarding self-disclosure in the workplace tended to be negative, while comments pertaining to job satisfaction were typically positive. The respondents emphasized the valuable role played by disability services offices on various college and university campuses.
Conclusions
• For the most part, students with LD graduating from Ontario’s colleges and universities are obtaining employment that they find satisfying.
• LD continues its impact in the lives of these students, with the majority of them stating that such traits as slower speed of information processing, spelling and reading impede their performance on the job.
• LD graduates in the workplace often choose not to disclose their disability, primarily citing reasons of judgment and embarrassment as preventing them from making the
disclosure.
• This group of graduates with LD accessed the career services offered on the campuses of Ontario’s colleges and universities infrequently but at a rate similar to that of their nondisabled peers.
• The present study highlights areas very much in need of further exploration, including factors underlying the disconnect between stated LD impact on the job and unwillingness to disclose a disability in the workplace. The limited use of career services is a new and surprising finding. In addition, the preference for low-technology strategies over technological accommodations in the workplace is in need of further analysis.
Despite Canada having one of the world’s best-educated populations, numerous rationales have been presented to support the continued expansion and broadening of participation in post-secondary education (PSE). Not only do recent federal and provincial occupational projections suggest that future jobs will overwhelmingly require candidates with some form of PSE, the evidence on earnings premiums and private rates of return to PSE provide some indications that the labour market can still absorb large quantities of PSE graduates. Provinces have made higher PSE attainment a priority — for example, in the most recent Ontario budget, the government set as one of its goals to increase the PSE attainment rate from 62 per cent to
70 per cent (Ontario Ministry of Finance, 2010).
Yet, demographic trends suggest that maintaining, let alone increasing, the number of postsecondary graduates in coming years will prove challenging. Though there are currently supplyside constraints in some regions (principally urban Ontario), within 20 years, the pool of postsecondary- aged Canadians will be substantially shallower than it is today. To keep the supply of skilled workers at current levels, participation rates will have to keep climbing. As participation rates are already quite high among economically advantaged segments of the population, there is growing consensus that the best opportunity for growth in participation rates may be among groups that are currently under-represented in PSE, such as students from low-income families, students with no history of post-secondary education in their families and Aboriginal students. A strong case can be made as well that governments and PSE institutions should strive to close the gap in participation rates between under-represented groups and the rest of the population on the grounds that all Canadians should be provided with the same chances and opportunities to engage in PSE studies, independently of their socio-economic background. In short, increasing the participation rates of disadvantaged populations is an objective worth pursuing from both an efficiency and equity perspective.
The reasons why students need to be involved and engaged when they attend college are well established. Engagement can be the difference between completing a degree and dropping out. Research has sought to identify what makes student involvement more likely. Factors like student-faculty interaction, active and collaborative learning experiences, involvement in ex-tracurricular activities, and living on campus have all been shown to make a difference.
Lead-Deadwood Elementary School in the Black Hills of Western South Dakota has a problem. Students need science.
Real science for real kids — the kind that sparks students’ imagination. Second grade teacher Carol Greco contacts the world’s largest underground laboratory, the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Lab (DUSEL). One mile under South Dakota, the lab is not accessible to students. But this doesn’t stop Dr. Warren Matthews, DUSEL’s cyber-infrastructure chief engineer. As a scientist, Warren knows engaging elementary students with science means finding a “hook.” That hook comes in the form of puppets — and not the brown paper bag variety.
Patty Petrey Dees, distance learning director for the Center for Puppetry Arts in Atlanta, Ga., starts to work her digital magic and begins researching what scientific content the lab can use for Carol’s classroom. Patty envisions nanotechnology
dancing in virtual micro cities and students playing the role of engineers in a virtual mission control room as their astronaut puppets explore deep space. This is a far cry from the current most popular elementary school distance learning topics — the lifecycle of a butterfly and paleontology lessons from puppetized dinosaurs — at the Center for Puppetry Arts.
Watching first graders wiggle and giggle at the crystallization movements of crafted butterfly puppets is good, but watching them explore the world of dark matter through puppets is better.
This is extreme puppetry through technology with digital content that has supersized itself. For Carol, the ability to incorporate a sense of discovery and real-world problem solving into her classroom is critical. She wants to bring difficult science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) topics closer to home. Using every available technology in her classroom, from the electronic whiteboard to individual laptops, she sets the virtual puppet stage to bring STEM out of the physical text and into the virtual world. The infrastructure that seamlessly allows this to happen stays in the background, empowering Carol to teach, Warren to share his scientific expertise, and Patty to provide the instructional tools that link learning to laughing as the puppets play. This type of education really rocks. Teaching difficult STEM topics to elementary students does not immediately conjure up puppets and interactive video conferencing as critical tools, yet these technologies link the arts and science in a way that fully engages students’ imaginations.
Second graders cannot tour the remote South Dakota lab, but they can do the next best thing by inviting the lab to
come to them. Best of all, the lab is accessible through technology and content that they understand.
This research report examines how PLAR as an asset-based practice might broaden the participation of adults in lifelong learning, particularly those adults who are under-represented in existing learning activities.
Specifically, the report uses short composite narratives to describe how PLAR users (academic and workplace settings), PLAR service providers, and PLAR stakeholders (persons from literacy organizations, human resources, career development, and government) understand the effectiveness of PLAR as an asset-based approach to adult learning. These composite narratives are derived from data documented in a 2008 report, Effectiveness of PLAR: A qualitative study of the voices of Canadians, prepared by the Canadian Association of Prior Learning and Assessment (CAPLA).
In 2003 Ontario’s schools were in a troubled state. The achievement of students was ‘good’ but flat lined — stagnant results year after year. Morale of teachers was low; the schools as a whole could be characterized as ‘loosely-coupled’ and without focus. The system was downtrodden.
Now in early 2013, the overall performance of the almost 5,000 schools in the province has dramatically improved on most key measures, and continues to improve. According to international measures and independent expert assessment, Ontario is recognized as and is proven to be the best school system in the English-speaking world — and right up at the top with Finland, Singapore and South Korea.
Every year, schizophrenia disrupts the lives of hundreds of thousands of Canadians. While affecting only approximately
1% of the population, this complex, multifaceted illness places a disproportionate strain on patients, families,
clinicians and other care providers. Symptoms, which vary in severity and expression, can make it incredibly
difficult for patients to sustain relationships, engage in social networks or carry out routine tasks. Moreover, these
social burdens extend well beyond the affected patient. Families and health professionals who provide care often
find their lives interrupted and negatively impacted by the illness. Ineffective policy, poorly organized care systems and
expensive medications all contribute to placing the burden directly on families. The result is higher emotional costs and
lower standards of life among care providers.
Undergraduate college student borrowing has risen dramatically in recent years. Graduates who received a bachelor’s degree in 20081 borrowed 50% more (in inflation-adjusted dollars) than their counterparts who graduated in 1996, while graduates who earned an associate’s degree or undergraduate certificate in 2008 borrowed more than twice what their counterparts in 1996 had borrowed, according to a new analysis of National Center for Education Statistics data by the Pew Research Center’s Social & Demographic Trends project.
Increased borrowing by college students has been driven by three trends:
ï‚· More college students are borrowing. In 2008, 60% of all graduates had borrowed, compared with about half (52%) in 1996.
- College students are borrowing more. Among 2008 graduates who borrowed, the average loan for bachelor’s degree recipients was more than $23,000, compared with slightly more than $17,000 in 1996. For associate’s degree and certificate recipients, the average loan increased to more than $12,600 from about $7,600 (all figures in 2008 dollars).
- More college students are attending private for-profit schools, where levels and rates of borrowing are highest. Over the past decade, the private for-profit sector has expanded more rapidly than either the public or private not-for-profit sectors. In 2008, these institutions granted 18% of all undergraduate awards, up from 14% in 2003.2 Students who attend for-profit colleges are more likely than other students to borrow, and they typically borrow larger amounts.
Other key findings from the Pew Research analysis:
- One-quarter (24%) of 2008 bachelor’s degree graduates at for-profit schools borrowed more than $40,000, compared with 5% of graduates at public institutions and 14% at not-for-profit schools.
- Roughly one-in-four recipients of an associate’s degree or certificate borrowed more than $20,000 at both private for-profit and private not-for-profit schools, compared with 5% of graduates of public schools.
- Graduates of private for-profit schools are demographically different from graduates in other sectors. Generally, private for-profit school graduates have lower incomes, and are older, more likely to be from minority groups, more likely to be female, more likely to be independent of their parents and more likely to have their own dependants.
In 2011, CASE founded the Center for Community College Advancement to provide training and resources to help community colleges build and sustain effective fundraising, alumni relations and communications and marketing programs. A goal for the center is to collect data on best practices in community colleges. This white paper summarizes the results of a groundbreaking survey on alumni relations programs at community colleges across the United States and Canada. The purpose of the survey was to help community college staff benchmark their experiences and programs in alumni relations with peers.
Students from a number of groups remain underrepresented in Ontario’s universities and colleges, including low-income students, Aboriginal students, first generation students whose parents did not attend a post-secondary institution, rural and northern students, and students with dependants. Improving access to higher education for these and other underrepresented groups is widely acknowledged as essential to building a more equitable society and to competing in the increasingly knowledge-based economy. Indeed, Premier McGuinty has stated his desire to see 70 per cent of Ontarians complete post-secondary education, and achieving this target will require a concerted effort to reduce participation gaps.
SUMMARY
This paper analyses business-driven innovation in education by looking at education-related patents. It first draws a picture of the challenges for innovation in the formal education sector, which suffers from a poor knowledge ecology: science is hardly linked to core teaching and administrative practices. It then turns to a common indicator of innovation: patents. In the case of education, patents typically cover educational tools. An analysis of education-related patents over the past 20 years shows a clear rise in the production of highly innovative educational technologies by businesses, typically building on advances in information and communication technology. While this increase in educational innovations may present new opportunities for the formal education sector, the emerging tool industry currently targets the nonformal education rather than the formal education system. We shortly discuss why business entrepreneurs may be less interested in the market of formal education.
RÉSUMÉ
Cet article porte sur l’innovation entrepreneuriale dans le secteur de l’éducation, à partir d’une analyse des dépôts de brevets dans le secteur éducatif. Premièrement, il propose un tableau des défis de l’innovation dans le secteur de l’éducation formelle, dont l’écologie du savoir est faible : la science y est peu liée avec le cœur des pratiques pédagogiques et administratives. L’étude porte ensuite sur un indicateur courant de l’innovation : les brevets. Dans le cas de l’éducation, les brevets couvrent généralement des « outils » éducatifs. L’analyse des brevets éducatifs durant les vingt dernières années montre une claire croissance de la production de technologies éducatives hautement innovantes par des entreprises privées, qui s’appuient souvent sur les progrès des technologies d’information et de communication. Bien que cette croissance des innovations éducatives puisse donner de nouvelles opportunités au secteur formel de l’éducation, l’industrie émergente d’outils éducatifs cible actuellement les secteurs informels d’éducation. Nous discutons brièvement les raisons pour lesquelles les entrepreneurs privés semblent moins intéressés par le secteur de l’éducation formelle.
This paper examines the implications of expanding the number and scope of college-to-university transfer arrangements as a means of meeting the demand for undergraduate degrees in Ontario. It focuses on two research questions:
1. What are the differences in the learning outcomes of students in college-to-university transfer arrangements compared with those in four-year university programs?
2. What are the differences in the cost per student for college-to-university transfer arrangements compared with four-year university programs?
The time for meaningful transformation in Ontario’s postsecondary system is now. To meet the needs of the emerging economy, reform must focus on innovation and applied learning that vaults our province ahead of its competition in creating the best-educated, best-prepared workforce in the world. Composed of distinct but equally valued and complementary partners, Ontario’s transformed postsecondary system will ensure that all students can reach their full potential through a broad array of theoretical and applied learning opportunities. Colleges will continue to be student focused, specializing in applied learning that leads to good jobs for graduates, addresses labour market needs and affords access to the broadest possible population. Colleges and universities will offer a range of credentials within their systems and collaborate on a multitude of programs that offer students the best of both. Expanded pathways will give students the opportunity to customize their post-secondary experience to match their interests. Online and blended learning, married to leading-edge technology, will enable students to learn anywhere, anytime, and in ways best suited to their learning styles. Students will be better prepared than ever before to meet the demands of the economy, and they will achieve their goals faster and at less cost.
One of the important questions to consider in a review of policy for postsecondary education is what kind o f system do we need. To provide a reasonably complete answer to that question would require addressing many different dimensions of postsecondary education including structures, processes, and relationships. In this paper, I will concentrate on two important and closely related subsidiary questions within the broader question of what kind of system we need. Those subsidiary questions are what is the most appropriate mix of different types of postsecondary institutions, and what should be their relationships with one another?1 As those are pretty large questions, within them my principal focus will be even narrower, on the balance and relationship between universities and community colleges.