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.
In 2007 one of the key conclusions from the synthesis report 'Sharing eLearning Content'1 (SELC)was that, while evidence may exist in support of it, the business case for an institution to share learning materials has not been sufficiently well articulated in the UK. In fact, the issue highlighted is rather broader. There is evidence that would support a range of business cases, such as those for:
. lecturers sharing learning materials;
. lecturers using and attributing others’ materials;
. institutions putting in place policies whereby learning materials are well managed, so that they can be shared appropriately and reused over time;
. the UK tertiary education sector as a whole putting in place arrangements in support of sharing learning materials.
This report aims to articulate the advantages and imperatives for sharing learning resources using evidence from the UK and elsewhere. This JISC funded study has also identified a number of compelling business cases and has developed a set of variations as a result of studying a range of business models. It highlights some interesting trends as many of the existing business models have reached a level of maturity and are currently under review.
What’s working in adult learner recruitment and marketing and which practices are most widely used? To find out, Ruffalo Noel Levitz conducted a 72-item, web-based poll in April 2015 as part of the firm’s continuing series of benchmark polls for higher education. Because undergraduate and graduate programs often employ similar practices to attract adult learners, this report combines its findings across undergraduate and graduate levels. For a profile of the poll respondents, please refer to the Appendix, page 41. Note that all respondents in this study had at least one adult-focused degree program.
Interest in leadership increased during the early part of the twentieth century. Early leadership theories focused on what qualities distinguished between leaders and followers, while subsequent theories looked at other variables such as situational factors and skill level. While many different leadership theories have emerged, most can be classified as one of eight major types:.
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.
This report documents the central role of the college-educated workforce in improving labour productivity across the economy and supporting an innovation culture in the workplace. It describes critical “enabling occupations” that play a key role in allowing companies to build a culture of innovation in the workplace which they need if they are to continually restructure for success. It develops a “Prosperity Cycle” model and demonstrates the importance of college graduates in building a culture of innovation in a dozen key Ontario industries.
A few years ago my teaching life had reached what felt like a dead end. Daily, I would see newspaper announcements about the retirement of public school educators who had the same number of years of experience as I had. Subsequently, I found myself longing to be in those photographs or articles. A significant challenge existed in that I was not old enough to touch my retirement funds plus I lacked another viable source of income—a major financial dilemma. At the time it seemed that I was going through the motions of my teaching job, and I had definitely lost a sense of joy.
The National Student Financial Wellness Study (NSFWS) is a national survey of college students examining the financial attitudes, practices and knowledge of students from institutions of higher education across the United States, and was developed and administered by The Ohio State University. The purpose of the 2014 NSFW is to gain a more thorough and accurate
picture of the financial wellness of college students.
She has been contributing to the field of counseling and sociology since the early 1950’s.
Bachelors of Arts in Sociology in 1951 from Barnard College in 1951.
Ed.D in Counseling in 1961 from Teachers College, Columbia University.
Served on the faculties of Wayne State University, Howard University and Pratt University and at the University of Maryland, College Park.
Currently she is a professor emeritus in the Department of Counseling and Personnel Services, College of Education, and Director of Counseling of the Center of Human Services Department, University of Maryland, College Park
(Schlossberg et al., 1995).
Quality learning takes place when students connect with information and can internalize it in a way that alters or enriches their thinking. In a world of rich media, instantaneous connectivity and high expectations, educators must deploy techniques that focus student attention while providing meaningful presentations that encourage and engage. This Special Report focuses on those classroom technologies that enable teachers to more effectively capture student interest, develop lifelong learning skills, deliver content relevant for each student and efficiently assess student understanding.
Chalk and filmstrips don’t cut it anymore. Along those same lines, the classroom must be redefined. Today’s classroom is not only that which is contained within four walls of bricks and mortar. A classroom in the 21st century is any location where a convergence of instruction and learning can take place. These new classrooms can include online sessions, collaborative sessions and other virtual sessions in addition to more traditional settings. Regardless of the setting, students and teachers
expect to have access to pertinent resources that support the learning process.
In this report the term classroom refers to all of these locations. To be an effective learning locale, the site must possess appropriate technology along with other vital resources including subject content, instructional modality and assessment tools.
Overview of the Special Report This Special Report’s prime objective is to help policy decision-makers and educational leaders understand what today’s classroom technologies are evolving toward, and, more importantly, why. It is hoped that examining current classroom technologies will spur conversation as to how the practice of teaching is evolving and why that evolution makes sense.
The most difficult challenge in putting this report together was to adequately address all of the key technologies
deployed in classrooms today. Technologies range from tactile objects in Pre-K to hyper-dense 3D modeling programs in graduate-level science classes at research universities. They involve devices, interactive software and assessment tools.
Ultimately we chose to group technologies by function as they would be used in the classroom, regardless of curriculum subject or grade level.
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.
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.
Writing assignments, particularly for first- and second-year college students, are probably one of those items in the syllabus that some professors dread almost as much as their students do. Yet despite the fact that essays, research papers, and other types of writing assignments are time consuming and, at times, frustrating to grade, they also are vital to furthering student learning. Of course part of the frustration comes when professors believe that students should arrive on campus knowing how to write research papers. Many do not. With as much content as professors have to cover, many feel they simply can’t take time to teach the research skills required to write a quality, college-level term paper. But as teaching professors who support the writing across the curriculum movement would tell you, improving students’ writing skills is everyone’s business, and carries with it many short- and long-term benefits for teachers and students alike. Further, many instructors are finding ways to add relevance to writing assignments by aligning them with the type of writing required in a specific profession as an alternative to the traditional, semester-long research paper. This special report was created to provide instructors with fresh perspectives and proven strategies for designing more effective writing assignments. It features 11 articles from The Teaching Professor, including:
. Revising the Freshman Research Assignment
. Writing an Analytical Paper in Chunks
. Designing Assignments to Minimize Cyber-Cheating
. Chapter Essays as a Teaching Tool
. Writing (Even a Little Bit) Facilitates Learning
. How to Conduct a ‘Paper Slam’
How S y s t e m s I m p r o v e : A C o n s t e l l a t i o n o f F o r c e s
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.
The founding of the Canadian Society for the Study of Higher Education took place over 40 years ago and this year marks the 40th anniversary of its critically important Canadian Journal of Higher Education. It is time to look back, and time to imagine the future of both the Society and the Journal. I attended that intimate founding meeting in Winnipeg. It was held on May 29, 1970. With no more than 40 people in attendance, we listened to the late Edward (Ted) Sheffield open the meeting. He had prepared a paper in 1969 on “Canadian Research in Higher Education.” He told us that it was only an “impressionistic survey but it served to highlight the fact that research in this field is being undertaken by a great variety of persons in a great variety of organizations: universities, voluntary associations, and government agencies.” Ted Sheffield noted, however, that little research in higher education was being conducted in university faculties of education. Underscoring that Canada was slow to make higher education a specialized field of study, he reminded the audience that Robin S. Harris, Canada’s first Professor of Higher Education, was appointed in 1964. Six years later, Ted Sheffield summarized the progress observing that “the Higher Education Group at the University of Toronto has increased to four and there is now a good deal of activity. . . at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.” In addition, he noted the emergence of recent program initiatives at the Universities of British Columbia, Calgary, and Alberta.
Keywords: Canadian Society for Studies in Higher Education; Glen Jones
This research was conducted to gain in-depth knowledge about mature1 students’ persistence2 in a university-college environment, with the ultimate aim of informing institutional student retention policies and practices. The specific purpose of this exploratory study was to broaden and deepen our understanding of the multifaceted nature of mature students’ lives and those factors exerting important influences on mature students’ educational commitment and persistence. Of particular interest were those quality of life dimensions and relevant contextual factors that are associated with mature students’ decisions to persist or withdraw in their first year of post-secondary education. This research is important, as there are few studies that take into consideration adult learners’ unique life circumstances and educational challenges, and fewer still that explore adult quality of life influences on student retention.
This report aims to introduce the reader to the apprenticeship sector in Ontario by providing an overview of the current state of affairs. We begin by outlining the structure and governance of apprenticeship in the province and survey the literature relevant to some of the policy debates regarding apprenticeship. The report then identifies and consolidates key data concerning the various components of this complex system, providing comparative Canadian data where relevant to identify areas of strength and weakness. The intent is for this report to provide a firm foundation from which further discussions concerning apprenticeship might proceed.
When teachers think the best, most important way to improve their teaching is by developing their content knowledge, they end up with sophisticated levels of knowledge, but they have only simplistic instructional methods to convey that material. To imagine that content matters more than process is to imagine that the car is more important than the road. Both are essential. What we teach and how we teach it are inextricably linked and very much dependent on one another.
This special report features 11 articles pulled from the pages of The Teaching Professor to help you discover new ways to build connections between what you teach and how you teach it. The report offers tips on how to engage students, give feedback, create a climate for learning, and more. It also provides fresh perspectives on how faculty should approach their development as teachers.
It’s been said that few things can enhance student learning more than an instructor’s commitment to ongoing professional development. Here’s a sample of the articles you will find in Effective Strategies for Improving College Teaching and Learning:
• Faculty Self-Disclosures in the College Classroom
• A Tree Falling in the Forest: Helping Students ‘Hear’ and Use Your Comments
• Understanding What You See Happening in Class
• Can Training Make You a Better Teacher?
• Striving for Academic Excellence
Although there is no single best teaching method, approach, or style, this special report will give you a variety of strategies to try. Those that work effectively with your students you should make your own.
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.