This research report represents the first phase of a multi-year collaborative research initiative of the Association of Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology of Ontario.1 The initiative is designed to develop a cohesive picture of the pathways from secondary school to college. The major purpose of this phase of the research was to identify secondary school students’ perceptions of Ontario colleges and of college as a possible post-secondary educational destination for them, and to determine the factors that have shaped these perceptions. A second purpose was to identify secondary school student achievement patterns, graduation rates and course enrolments in order to consider their influence on current and future college enrolments.
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.
The PSE Outcomes Study was commissioned by the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO) to explore the pathways of applicants from postsecondary education (PSE) application to the Ontario labour market, and their employment experiences during and after PSE. This report provides statistically reliable Ontario data to supplement the findings of national studies such as the Youth in Transition Survey (YITS). It offers insights into the factors that contribute to postsecondary education participation and persistence, the barriers that impede access to higher learning, and the relationship between educational attainment and labour market outcomes. In particular, the analysis considers the experiences of four groups who are traditionally under-represented in PSE: Aboriginal peoples, persons with disabilities, students whose parents did not complete PSE, and students who delayed their entry into PSE after secondary school.
The results are based on a sample of 45,000 Ontario applicants to college and university who had participated in Academica Group‟s University and College Applicant Survey™ (UCAS™) between 2005 and 2009, and had agreed to participate in future research. The 4,029 respondents to the PSE Outcomes survey (including 214 French language respondents) yield an overall survey response rate of 9% and a margin of error of +/- 1.55 at the 95% confidence level. Survey respondents were organized into five mutually exclusive postsecondary education pathways, based on the outcome of their initial PSE application:
“Not offered†respondents did not receive offers of admission following their application to PSE (n=273 or 7% of respondents). “Offered/declined†respondents were offered admission to PSE but declined the offer (n=317 or 8% or respondents). “Still attending†respondents (also referred to as “current PSE studentsâ€) were offered admission to PSE and were attending the institution to which they had initially applied when they responded to the PSE Outcomes Survey (n=2,297 or 58% of respondents). “Attended/left†respondents (also referred to as “early leaversâ€) were offered admission to PSE but left their postsecondary program prior to completion (n=279 or 7% of respondents). “Attended/complete†respondents (also referred to as “PSE graduatesâ€) were offered admission to PSE and had completed the postsecondary program to which they applied (n=766 or 19% of respondents).
Overall, 85% of all respondents who received offers of admission accepted the offer, and about three-quarters had a specific occupation or career goal in mind at the time they applied.
PSE participation rates1 were highest among applicants who were younger than 20 when they applied to PSE, never married, with high household incomes, high grade averages, and interested in full-time study. Participation was lower among applicants who were older, from 4 – From the Postsecondary Application to the Labour Market: The Pathways of Under-represented Groups lower household incomes, married or divorced, interested in part-time study, and with lower grade averages. University applicants were more likely than college applicants to accept offers of admission, while college applicants were twice as likely to decline. The overall rate of PSE participation for under-represented applicants (83%) was lower than the participation rate of applicants who did not fall into one of the four groups (88%).
Executive Summary
The disappearance and murder of Saint Mary’s University student Loretta Saunders in February 2014 captured national media attention. Ms. Saunders’ murder highlighted the tragedy of missing and murdered Aboriginal women in Canada. As a student, Ms. Saunders’ experience also highlighted significant gaps in the programs and services available to Aboriginal students at Saint Mary’s University. The murder of Loretta Saunders served as a catalyst for students, staff, faculty and administration to begin the process of building a better university experience for Aboriginal students.
At the Loretta Saunders Memorial Service, the President of Saint Mary’s, Dr. J. Colin Dodds, committed to establishing a Task Force to provide guidance on how the Saint Mary’s university community could enhance learning opportunities and the education experience for Aboriginal students. The Task Force completed its work during the Spring and Summer of 2014.
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.
One of the many lessons learned from the early years of distance education is the fact that you cannot simply pluck an instructor out of the classroom, plug him into an online course, and expect him to be effective in this new and challenging medium. Some learned this lesson the hard way, while others took a proactive approach to faculty training. All of us continue to refine our approach and discover our own best practices.
Today, it’s possible to learn much from the mistakes and successes of those who blazed the trail before us. Faculty development for distance educators is a critical component of all successful distance education programs. Well thought-out faculty development weaves together needed training, available resources, and ongoing support, and carries with it the same expectations for quality teaching that institutions of higher education have for their face-to-face classes.
This special report, Faculty Development in Distance Education: Issues, Trends and Tips, features 12 articles pulled from the pages of Distance Education Report, including:
• Faculty Development: Best Practices from World Campus
• Developing Faculty Competency in Online Pedagogy
• A Learner-Centered, Emotionally Engaging Approach to Online Learning
• How to Get the Best Out of Online Adjuncts
• Workload, Promotion, and Tenure Implications of Teaching Online
• Four Steps to Just-in-Time Faculty Training
This report is loaded with practical strategies that can help you build a comprehensive
faculty development program, helping ensure that instructors stay current in both online
pedagogy and practical technical know-how. No matter what the particular character of
your program is, I think you’ll find many ideas you can use in here.
Christopher Hill
Editor
Distance Education Report
[email protected]
The main objective of this report is to learn about the state of knowledge regarding the role of financial literacy as a complex barrier to postsecondary attendance. To achieve this goal, the report contains a literature review of existing studies in the area, as well as an environmental scan of existing programs and initiatives.
When possible, the focus of the report is on low-income high school students in the context of making decisions regarding postsecondary education. In this ideal setting, financial literacy will be defined as knowledge of all the costs, benefits, and available aid associated with postsecondary education. In reality, there are few studies and existing programs that fit this ideal profile. However, we have identified several studies that share these characteristics to a large extent. Specifically, we describe and discuss 21 related studies and 34 related programs. Although most studies and programs are Canadian, we also broaden the scope somewhat to include countries with similar postsecondary systems as Canada (e.g. the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand).
Our literature review focuses on Canadian and American evidence, and has uncovered several important findings. First, the cost of a postsecondary education is vastly overestimated by the public at large and by low-income youth in particular. In contrast, the economic benefits to attending university are generally underestimated (equally for low- and high-income households). Whether knowing about the costs and benefits matters for pursuing a postsecondary education is less clear given the lack of convincing evidence in this area.
While awareness of student financial aid is not necessarily an issue, it appears that knowledge of aid is limited. This may be related to the complexity of student financial aid, which is not only costly, but may also represent a barrier to some students.
A non-negligible portion of students are loan averse, which means that they will avoid grant opportunities when they are coupled with an optional student loan. This is the case even though the loans can be refused or invested at zero repayable interest.
Research also demonstrates that helping students complete their financial aid and postsecondary application forms has a large impact on application and admission rates. In contrast, offering information to students (without application assistance) is generally not sufficient to affect behaviour.
Finally, once in university, the majority of undergraduates follow a budget and regularly pay off their credit card balance each month. This suggests a certain degree of awareness and control regarding their finances, which may help them repay their loans on time and avoid defaulting.
Why Join the Mobile Learning Movement? Mobile learning has clearly become a major new direction
for improving student education at all levels: in K-12 schools as well as in colleges and universities. Mobile learning
allows a working adult who is also a part-time college student to use a smartphone to view a video lecture on a lunch break. K-12 students can learn at home, on a trip or in school. A mobile device that is part of students’ lifestyles combines many technologies to engage them and help them learn effectively. In these and many more ways, the power and flexibility of mobile technology are transforming both instruction and learning.
Definition of Mobile Learning
The term “mobile learning†has different meanings for different communities. Although related to e-learning and distance education, it is distinct in its focus on learning across contexts, learning collaboratively and learning with mobile devices.
A new direction in mobile learning, or m-learning, enables mobility for the instructor, including creating learning materials on the spot and in the field using mobile devices with layered software such as as Mobl21, Go-Know or Blackboard Mobile Learn. Using web 2.0 and mobile tools become an important part of student engagement and higher achievement.
The Case for Mobile Learning
Why is it important for educational institutions to join the mobile learning movement? Consider these factors:
. Mobile devices are now fundamental to the way students communicate and engage in all aspects of their lives. The
Pew Internet Project found that 49 percent of Americans ages 18-24 own a smartphone, and that the majority of these young adults also own a laptop computer.
. Student expectations are changing, especially in higher education. Today’s students juggle a complex life of school, work, family and social time.
The purpose of this qualitative grounded theory study was to assess multilingual models of education by investing how and when to incorporate second and third languages into the curriculum to improve language acquisition.
ABSTRACT
This paper focuses on the gendered nature of elite academic careers. Of interest is how similar or diff erent the experiences are of women and men who have been appointed to Canada Research Chairs (CRCs). In particular, we examine the impacts of holding a CRC position and consider the factors that shape that experience for women and men. Based on interviews with 60 CRCs, we find that when women and men are given similar opportunities, their experiences are more alike than diff erent. Where diff erences arise, these are often related to the experience of status/prestige associated with the CRC, and to family care responsibilities. Using expectation states theory, we demonstrate that when women are equal to men, the significance of gender as a determinant of the academic experience is diminished.
RÉSUMÉ
Cette étude se concentre sur l’influence du genre dans l’élite des carrières académiques. L’intérêt porte surtout sur le degré de similarité ou de diff érence entre les expériences des femmes et des hommes nommés à des postes de chaires de recherche du Canada (CRC). Nous examinons en particulier les répercussions sur les femmes et les hommes titulaires de CRC en tenant compte des facteurs qui forment l’expérience de ces individus. Nos entrevues avec 60 titulaires de CRC, nous mènent à conclure que les femmes et les hommes obtiennent des occasions similaires et que leurs expériences sont plus semblables que différentes. Lorsque des différences se présentent, elles sont plus souvent liées à l’expérience du statut et du prestige associés à la position de titulaire de CRC et à ses responsabilités familiales. En utilisant la théorie des états d’anticipation, nous démontrons que, lorsque les femmes sont égales aux hommes, la signification du genre en tant que déterminant de l’expérience académique est diminuée.
ABSTRACT
Do students know the level of education required to achieve their career objectives? Is this information related to their education pathways? To address these questions, I compare high school students' perceptions of the level of education they will require for the job they intend to hold at age 30, with the level required according to professional job analysts. About three out of four students intending to work in a job requiring a university degree know the level of education that is required to obtain the job. Moreover, students who know that a university degree is required are more likely to attend university. Finally, higher university attendance rates are observed when students learn earlier (rather than later), that a university degree is required for their intended job.
RÉSUMÉ
Les élèves savent-ils quelles études leur permettront d’atteindre leurs objectifs de carrière? Ces renseignements sont-ils associés à leur parcours scolaire? Afi n de répondre à ces questions, je compare, d’une part, la perception qu’ont les élèves du secondaire quant au niveau d’instruction qui leur est requis pour travailler dans la profession qu’ils souhaitent exercer à l’âge de 30 ans avec, d’autre part, le niveau réellement requis selon les analystes du marché professionnel. Ainsi, environ trois étudiants sur quatre ayant l’intention d’exercer une profession qui nécessite un grade universitaire sont conscients du niveau d’instruction requis. Par ailleurs, les élèves qui sont conscients de la nécessité d’un grade universitaire ont plus de chances de fréquenter l’université. Enfi n, on observe un taux de fréquentation universitaire plus élevé chez les élèves qui ont pris conscience, plus tôt dans leur parcours, de la nécessité d’un grade universitaire pour réaliser leur aspiration professionnelle.
The Council of Europe (since the mid-1960s), the European Commission (since the late 1980s) and many European states and civil society organisations (in the aftermath of the Second World War) have long fostered programmes and strategies to enhance the mobility of young people.
The prevailing notion of such programmes is that the process of economic and political integration in Europe will indeed remain fragmentary and unstable without accompanying social and educational measures. Instead of a Europe with non-transparent
bureaucratic institutions, a “Europe of Citizens” was meant to develop wherein people would get to know each other,
appreciate their mutual cultural differences and, at the same time, form a European identity by saying “yes” to core European values. As such, mobility is considered important for the personal development of young people, contributing as it does to their employability and thus their social inclusion.
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.
Canada is in the midst of unprecedented growth in the postsecondary education (PSE) sector. More students are availing themselves of college and university educational opportunities than at any other time in the nation's history. The students now enrolling bring a diverse set of characteristics rarely seen within the sector previously. They are immigrants, children of immigrants, first in their family to enrol in postsecondary, Aboriginal, visible minorities, and students with disabilities to name just a few.
College and university programs and services have grown to meet the needs of these increasingly diverse learners, and are largely referred to as student affairs and services, (SAS). One of the aims of this study was to develop a greater understanding of the scope of student affairs and services and describe the formal organizational structures of these divisions
within Ontario’s postsecondary sector.
We found no consistent title for the senior student affairs and services officer (SSASO) across the sample; titles ranged from Vice President, Student Services to Associate Vice Principal and Dean of Student Affairs. Despite the inconsistency of title, the reporting line was fairly consistent, with SSASOs reporting to the Provost and Vice President, Academic or directly to the President. In only a few cases, dotted line reporting structures existed between the SSASO and these senior administrators.
The portfolios for SSASOs tended to include new student orientation, student leadership programs and liaison with student government, campus involvement (clubs and organization recognition), community development (service learning and civic engagement initiatives), counselling services, health services, accessibility services (also called services for students
with disabilities), career and employment services (and in some cases, cooperative education), academic skills or learning services, and services for diverse students (such as Aboriginal student services, international student services, women centres, and mature student centres). Portfolios differed in terms of whether the registrar’s office and related enrolment management functions, residence, and athletics were included within the SSASO's portfolio. In general, we found the college SSASO’s portfolios to be more expansive than the portfolios of the university SSASOs.
The second aim of this study was to share the voices of the staff who work in student affairs and services divisions across Ontario. Staff shared their perspectives regarding the organizational structure of their institution and how they perceived these organizational structures as helping or hindering their ability to support student success. Staff depicted and described two types of images that correspond with how they perceived the organizational structure of their institution. Spider webs tended to represent institutions where the staff perceived the organizational culture as one where supporting student success was a shared commitment between staff and faculty; where the SSASO's leadership style was directed toward finding the synergy between divisional areas, open to ideas from all areas within the division, and advocated for the division in senior administrative meetings; and where staff understood the vision and mission of the division as it supported and contributed to the institutional mission. Silos tended to represent institutions 4 – Supporting Student Success: The Role of Student Services within Ontarios Postsecondary Institutions where the staff perceived the organizational culture as one in which people worked in their discrete units and were less committed to a shared focus on supporting student success; where the SSASO's leadership style managed departments within the division more as discrete units, less open to ideas from across the division, and with greater hesitation in advocating for the division in senior administrative meetings; and where staff were less clear about how the vision and mission of the division supported and contributed to the institutional mission.
This imagery was powerful in that it spoke to two different approaches to organizational structure: one was student-focused and the other was institution-focused. Student-focused structures were those that aligned organizational structures (proximal location of departments, sub-unit reporting portfolios, policies and protocols) with the student in mind. Institution-focused
structures were those that focused on the organization of the institution’s business first, and appeared to value it over how students would encounter the institution as they worked through successful completion of their program of study. The spider web and silo imagery and their relation to the student-focused and institutional focused approaches to structure appeared irrespective of the actual organizational structure of the institution. Institutions were typically centralized, decentralized, or federated (a combination of the two former models). A centralized structure tended to have the various units within the division (health and counselling, residence, registrar, and athletics, for example) headed by a director or manager reporting to the SSASO, and providing programs and services for the institution as a whole. Conversely, a decentralized structure was one in which programs and services were managed and provided for within multiple institutional units, typically within the faculties. Finally, the federated structure (or hub and spoke model) was found at institutions in which programs and services existed with some level of centralization, and customized versions of these central services also existed at typically the individual faculty level. A critical finding from this study was that student-focused or institution-focused approaches to organizational
structure could be illustrated by any of the three actual structures (centralized, decentralized, or federated). It is as possible to have a student-focused approach with a federated SAS structure as it is to have an institution-focused approach with a centralized SAS structure.
High Enrollment Demands, Stretched Resources Higher education institutions are increasingly caught in a bind: Trying to serve growing enrollment demand with budgets based on the lower student counts of previous years. According to the Campus Computing Project’s 2011 Community Colleges and the Economy Survey, “More than two-thirds (69 percent) of the 448 campus presidents and district chancellors participating in the 2011 survey report increased headcount enrollment in winter 2011; concurrently,
three-fifths of the presidents participating in the survey report a reduction in the overall operating budget at their institution; two-fifths (41 percent) report that the budget cut was five percent or more.” This situation can lead to issues such as:
• over enrollments, especially in core courses, which creates a less-than-optimal and frustrating learning
experience for faculty and students;
• delayed graduation for students because of enrollment delays; and
• reduced retention rates as students seek other schools that can offer smaller class sizes and faster
degree completion.
Institutions typically can’t solve this problem by adding more sections to a class. They don’t have the budget to hire new faculty or support staff, and increased tuition revenues from higher enrollments may not cover the funding gap. Larger or overflow classroom space also may not be available, especially in an urban campus. From these factors, the core challenge emerges: How do campuses educate and graduate more students — with the same staff and classroom resources — while maintaining high learning levels and teaching standards?
Using Technology to Scale Classroom Instruction An emerging solution to this challenge is the use of blended learning curriculum design and lecture capture technology. This solution delivers courses through a mix of online and in-class content and participation.
Online lectures serve as the foundation of the blended learning model. The instructor can associate the lecture
video with online content and collaboration tools in order to deliver a complete learning experience to both on-campus and distance students. Availability of a recorded lecture can enable teaching and learning in multiple ways. For example, an inverted
teaching model is possible. Students watch a video lecture before the class, then arrive ready to discuss the lecture’s topic or work on a related activity.
By reviewing statistics on content access, instructors can identify where additional explanation is needed and
improve the content of the lecture or study materials.
Technology also helps instructors better serve students with special learning needs, using tools to create closed captioning of a video lecture and for compatibility with screen readers and other accessibility tools.
For students, the blended model delivers learning that is convenient and fits within their work schedules and
personal lives. They can access the lecture video and other content from a PC, tablet or smartphone, and from anywhere they can connect to the Internet.
How Blended Learning Helps Higher Education Technologies for delivering online access to classroom instruction offers several advantages for students, faculty,and their colleges and universities.
• Students can access the courses they need at the right time, increasing the likelihood they will graduate on
schedule. A clear, certain education path also increases student satisfaction and retention.
This handbook is intended to serve as a resource for faculty, staff, academic leaders and educational developers engaged in program and course design/review, and the assessment of program-level learning outcomes for program improvement. The assessment of learning outcomes at the program-level can assist in making improvements to curricula, teaching and assessment plans.
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 extracurricular activities, and living on campus have all been shown to make a difference. Not surprisingly, faculty play a critical role in student engagement … from the obvious: facilitating discussions in the classroom; to the often overlooked: maximizing those brief encounters we have with students outside of class. This special report features 15 articles that provide perspectives and advice for keeping students actively engaged in learning activities while fostering more meaningful interactions between students and faculty members, and among the students themselves.
For example, in “Student Engagement: Trade-offs and Payoffs” author E Shelley Reid, associate professor at George Mason University, talks about how to craft engagement-focused questions rather than knowledge questions, and explains her willingness to take chances in ceding some control over students’ learning.
In “The Truly Participatory Seminar” authors Sarah M. Leupen and Edward H. Burtt, Jr., of Ohio Wesleyan University, outline their solution for ensuring all students in their upper division seminar course participate in discussion at some level.
In “Reminders for Improving Classroom Discussion” Roben Torosyan, associate director of the Center for Academic Excellence at Fairfield University, offers very specific advice on balancing student voices, reframing discussions, and probing below the surface of group discussions.
And finally, in “Living for the Light Bulb” authors Aaron J. Nurick and David H. Carhart of Bentley College provide tips on setting the stage for that delightful time in class “when the student’s entire body says ‘Aha! Now I see it!’” Who wouldn’t like to see more light bulbs going on more often? One of the most challenging tasks instructors face is keeping students engaged. Building Student Engagement: 15 Strategies for the College Classroom will help you meet that challenge while ensuring your classroom is a positive and productive learning environment.
In the past, the term “persistence†was used somewhat interchangeably with “retention†to describe the fact of students remaining in a course of studies from one year to the next, typically at a single institution and sometimes within a particular program. Over the last few years, however, persistence has shifted in meaning to refer to the ability of students to continue their PSE studies and ultimately graduate, regardless of switches between programs or institutions or even temporary absences from PSE altogether. There is a growing recognition in Ontario and across Canada that this system-wide perspective on persistence will help government and institutions manage a highly functional, well-integrated PSE system, one in which students can avail themselves of numerous alternative educational opportunities and pathways to success.
It would be a mistake, however, to assume that these system-wide concerns are the primary arena in which PSE outcomes ought to be managed. Indeed, the concept of persistence as a process whereby students overcome obstacles is of note only in the context of the presence of initial decisions to leave and not return to a particular institution. The central aim of any university ought to be to improve its own retention of students. Indeed, a sustained focus on improving in situ retention outcomes is a vital component of an overall strategy for achieving high system-wide persistence rates. It is in the best interests of government and universities to develop the means by which retention practice efficacy can be reliably assessed, compared amongst institutions and used within institutions to actively improve retention rates.
Unfortunately, two common approaches used to calculate retention rates – the raw rate approach and the natural rate approach – are seriously flawed and cannot be recommended for use by Ontario PSE institutions as tools for managing retention practices.
The raw rate approach is transparently inadequate. The crux of the problem with raw rates is that they are essentially outcome measures unadjusted for variation in inputs. An institution that is in a position to admit students who are highly prepared academically, financially and culturally for university life at that particular institution can expect to be rewarded with relatively high outcome rates, and this without having to innovate or invest much in retention practices. Evaluating retention practice efficacy on the basis of raw rates favours institutions that are able to offload potential retention risks during the admissions process.
Another common approach used to calculate retention rates is to calculate the differences between raw rates and “expected†or “natural†rates and then to base evaluations and comparisons on these differences. Natural institutional rates are averages of the estimated probabilities of an event occurring (e.g., being retained after one year, graduating within four years) for each member of a cohort of students at an institution. One key feature of the statistical models upon which the probability estimates are based is the fact that they are system-wide models, pooling data across all institutions in the study and delivering a single set of model coefficients that is applied to all institutions. Another key feature is the fact that probability estimates are based on predictor variables that usually include only pre-entry characteristics of students and sometimes include environmental characteristics such as institution size, the field of study and whether the school primarily serves urban commuters. An institution with a raw rate that exceeds its natural rate is deemed to be performing well at
2 –Shifting from Retention Rates to Retention Risk: An Alternative Approach for Managing Institutional Student Retention Performance retaining students, whereas an institution with a raw rate that is lower than its natural rate is evaluated as performing poorly. This approach has been implemented in the United States but not in Canada.
Three interpretation problems are ingrained in the natural rate approach that impede its meaningful application: normative interpretations given to natural rates are unwarranted; attributions of causation – to students in the case of natural rates and to institutions in the case of differences between natural and raw rates – are also unwarranted and potentially misleading; and a single set of system-wide coefficients is not likely to provide useful characterizations of the realities in play at individual institutions. A large and growing body of research embeds retention processes within the local context of individual institutions and indeed individual students. As research findings accumulate, there is a deeper and growing appreciation of the fact that the PSE system is not homogeneous in terms of the magnitude or direction of relationships between factors influencing retention event occurrence and the actual occurrence of those events. Rather, processes generating retention events operate locally and with considerable variation in form and intensity amongst locales, so system-wide characterizations do not give meaningful summaries of local conditions. The natural rate approach looks like a more sophisticated, finely tuned analysis, but its looks are deceiving.
An alternative to the raw and natural rate approaches is to move away from retrospective analyses of retention rates in favour of prospective analyses of retention risks. According to this approach, institutions use historical data to develop statistical models of retention risk at the individual student level. These models are then employed to estimate for each student in a currently enrolled cohort the “risk†(expressed as a probability) of continuing with their studies beyond a certain length of time.
The members of the Principal’s Commission on Mental Health are pleased to submit their final report to Principal Daniel Woolf.
This report is the result of a year-long process embedded in comprehensive input from the Queen’s and broader communities. Commissioners Lynann Clapham, Roy Jahchan, Jennifer Medves, Ann Tierney and David Walker (Chair) heard from students, faculty, staff, parents, alumni, mental health professionals and community members, all of whom generously gave their time to provide valuable insight and expertise.
Following the release of a discussion paper in June 2012 extensive feedback was received, for which commission members were most grateful. This input has been integrated into this final report.
Over the next several years, more than 500 Aboriginal communities across Canada will find themselves living right in the heart of some of the biggest oil, gas, forestry and mining projects Canada has seen in decades. Debates over pipelines, accelerated foreign investment, and the push for a national energy strategy have turned a spotlight on the central role that Aboriginal communities can play in resource development.