There are two major forces driving education today. The first is the economic reality that forces schools to
make the most effective use of dollars to improve student outcomes. The second is the exponential growth in digital tools — and subsequently digital content — that provides the foundation to transform and improve how instructors teach and how students learn. Let's address the economic driver first. For far too long the education sector has lagged behind the private
sector in adopting efficiencies and capabilities derived from technology. Virtually every other sector in the economy has been computerized, modularized and transformed over the past 30 years. Although there have been leaders for change, as witnessed by the efforts we applaud in this Yearbook, change has been difficult and delayed. The recent recession has only forced this issue to the forefront.
The second driver is technological. Digital content, more sophisticated assessment tools and myriad personal and mobile computing devices are emerging and taking center stage — all aimed at improving student achievement and preparing students to thrive in the careers of a digital economy. These emerging technologies, led by a cadre of educational technologists, are leading us down the right path. This Yearbook aims to help the education community continue on the right path. The first part of the Yearbook takes a look at IT spend, funding opportunities and top trends of the 2010-2011 school year to shed some light on what technologies are top of mind and how to fund them. The second part highlights 50 education innovators that have led the way and provided best-practice models to imitate. This look at what was done, who is doing it and where we are going is intended to provide inspiration and guidance to education leaders on their own innovative quests in education.
There is currently a powerful push-pull factor in schooling. The push factor is that school is increasingly boring for students and alienating for teachers. The pull fac-tor is that the exploding and alluring digital world is irresistible, but not necessarily productive in its raw form. The push-pull dynamic makes it inevitable that disruptive changes will occur. I have been part of a group that has been developing innova-tive responses to the current challenges. This response consists of integrating three components: deep learning goals, new pedagogies, and technology. The result will be more radical change in the next five years than has occurred in the past 50 years.
In a longitudinal, randomized field experiment, we tested the impact of transformational leadership, enhanced by training, on follower development and performance. Experimental group leaders received transformational leadership training, and control group leaders, eclectic leadership training. The sample included 54 military leaders, their 90 direct followers, and 724 indirect followers. Results indicated the leaders in the experimental group had a more positive impact on direct followers' development and on indirect followers' performance than did the leaders in the control group.
The first phase of the NSSE National Data Project indicated the importance of student characteristics and academic discipline mix in explaining institution-level benchmark engagement variation. The institution-level benchmark regression results demonstrated, but did not formally measure, the existence of distinct “engagement dynamics” at the general discipline level. The question raised was whether sub-institutional engagement dynamics (i.e. engagement variation by student subgroup across specific programs, and engagement variation by specific program across student subgroups) were sufficiently different to warrant programand student subgroup-specific engagement strategies.
The approach in this second phase was to move from institution-level benchmark models to a series of program-level engagement item models. Nine academic programs met specified criteria and their senior-year students were selected for the analysis. Explanatory models were constructed for each of the nine programs and within each program, for the 42 individual engagement items comprising the five benchmarks. In addition, the engagement profiles for selected student subgroups were examined across programs.
The analysis revealed substantial differences in item-based senior-year student engagement patterns across specific academic programs. In one academic program, for example, first generation students showed consistently lower SFI (student-faculty interaction) item scores relative to non-first generation students while in another program, it was their ACL (active and collaborative learning) item scores that are lower. In one program, student composition explained a very high proportion of the variation in numerous engagement items while in another, student composition explained very little. Several dimensions of these contrasting engagement profiles are discussed in detail in the report.
Since the focus for many engagement improvement strategies lies within academic programs, the findings indicate the appropriateness of a program- and student subgroup-tailored approach to engagement improvement. The figures containing the detailed model results are summarized and reorganized to provide a template for a program- and student subgroup-specific implementation focus.
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.
As more students choose online or hybrid models of learning, challenges are rising as well. Too many
instructors remain untrained in the use of online pedagogy. Administrators similarly lack training in the unique complexities of managing online
courses, programs and institutions.
Public policy sometimes works against successful online learning, such as government seat-time restrictions that limit reimbursement to the hours a student sits in a classroom rather than what a student learns. Entrenched bureaucracies, regulations and attitudes all stand in the way of needed reform.
This Special Report examines the
new blended and virtual learning
frontier, taking an in-depth look at
its challenges and its promise.
This paper examines whether intermediary bodies are useful in advancing government goals for quality and sustainability in higher education systems. It explores the evidence about intermediary bodies through case studies of England, Israel, New Zealand and the United States. It also treats the case of Ontario, whose best- known intermediary bodies have been the Ontario Council on University Affairs and the colleges’ Council of Regents.
This paper presents an overview of gender differences in education outcomes in OECD countries. A rich set of indicators describes the improvement of educational attainment among women over the past decades, and various dimensions of male under-performance in education. Possible explanatory factors include incentives provided by changing employment opportunities for women, demographic trends, as well as the higher sensitivity of boys to disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds. Gender differences in field of study and in performance by subject are found to be related to attitudes and self-perceptions towards academic subjects, which are in turn influenced by social norms. A number of policy options to
address gender gaps are presented in the final section of the paper.
It is often the case that research questions in education involve units of analysis that can be naturally grouped or placed within hierarchical or multilevel configurations. This type of grouping is referred to as nesting. It results in the exposure of the lowest-level units of analysis to common environments that are likely to impact their behaviors, outcomes, or levels of performance. These lowest-level units are commonly referred to as level-1 units. Typical examples of these units are students nested within classrooms. Classrooms are the nesting structure, constituting a second-level unit or level-2 unit. Following this rationale, researchers could further model level-3 units consisting of classrooms (comprised of students) nested within schools. Notably, this logic can be further expanded to higher order levels. The successful identification of units situated at different levels prompted the development of techniques designed to model this phenomenon. These techniques are known as multilevel modeling.
In 2008, the OECD launched the AHELO feasibility study, an initiative with the objective to assess whether it is possible to develop international measures of learning outcomes in higher education.
Learning outcomes are indeed key to a meaningful education, and focusing on learning outcomes is essential to inform diagnosis and improve teaching processes and student learning. While there is a long tradition of learning outcomes’ assessment within institutions’ courses and programmes, emphasis on learning outcomes has become more important in
recent years. Interest in developing comparative measures of learning outcomes has increased in response to a range of higher education trends, challenges and paradigm shifts.
At institutions of higher learning, there is an increased demand and need for online courses. However, the number of faculty developing and teaching these courses does not match the growth in online education. The purpose of this study was to determine the perceived barriers to online teaching experienced by various faculty groups at a public institution located in the southeastern United States using a new survey instrument, which was developed from recent research findings. This study sought to identify the most prevalent barriers to online instruction for the faculty group surveyed. In addition, these findings may identify prevalent barriers for faculty groups in an effort to inform administrative decisions concerning policy, training, and compensation as well as to facilitate involvement for specific types of online instruction for faculty development. A number of novel and important differences were found in the perceived barriers that exist between faculty groups on four constructs identified through an exploratory factor analysis. The factors found were: (1) interpersonal barriers; (2) institutional barriers; (3) training and technology barriers; and (4) cost/benefit analysis barriers. The results of this study may be of use to other institutions as they develop online instruction training programs.
Keywords: online ed cation, instructional technology, perceived barriers, survey research, online faculty
The connection between classroom learning and practical experience in the workplace has been recognized as a significant aspect of student development in postsecondary institutions (Kuh, 2008). Internships have been associated with many benefits for each party involved, including the student, postsecondary institution and industry professional. Internships provide opportunities for students to transfer theoretical knowledge to a practical setting; they serve as recruitment avenues for postsecondary institutions and provide industry professionals with access to high-quality students with current academic knowledge. Despite the perceived importance of internships for student development, researchers and practitioners have a limited understanding of what constitutes an “internship” and of how to deliver these experiences effectively. Therefore, the purpose of this research was to examine the internship opportunities currently offered by direct-entry programmes (e.g., undergraduate degree or diploma) in Ontario postsecondary institutions.
ALGONQUIN COLLEGE KEY AREAS OF DIFFERENTIATION
Algonquin College delivers a comprehensive range of applied education and training experiences to
serve the diverse learner choices and the breadth of employer labour demands across Eastern Ontario
and the province.
Algonquin College works with industry partners to:
• Develop labour-market informed programs and services;
• Provide opportunities for work-integrated learning, and experience inside and outside the
classroom; and
• Engage in applied research and commercialization activities that support student success,
employee growth, and social and economic development in the region and beyond.
Algonquin College employees are engaged in the strategic direction of the College to:
• Lead the transformation of Ontario’s postsecondary system;
• Deliver high-quality teaching methods and modalities that leverage technology to enhance the
educational experience; and
• Improve student learning outcomes for career and life success.
Algonquin College broadens learner access to applied postsecondary education and training in
Ontario, demonstrating leadership through:
• Alternative learning modalities and options to suit multiple learning styles and learner
preferences;
• New, targeted approaches to programs and services that improve pathways for learners of diverse
demographic characteristics; and
• Smart investments in technology that enhance the Algonquin learner experience.
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.
During the last three decades of the twentieth century, it was the policy of many industrialized countries to shift the responsibility for a substantial portion of baccalaureate credit activity to colleges and other non-university postsecondary institutions. In most American states and some Canadian provinces, this was accomplished through assigning colleges the role of providing the first two years of baccalaureate courses, or expanding that role where it was already being performed. The
alternative approach, followed in several European countries, was to transform their college sectors into parallel degree granting sectors that offered complete baccalaureate – and in some countries, also postgraduate – programs of a more applied, career-focused nature than those offered by the universities. Although the predominant approach in North America for a long time was for colleges to provide only the first two years of baccalaureate programs, in the 1990s this started to change, as colleges in some states and provinces were given the authority to award baccalaureate degrees on their own. British Columbia and Alberta were among the first places in North America where colleges awarded baccalaureate degrees. Ontario colleges were given the authority to award baccalaureate degrees in 2000, and since then so also have colleges in Manitoba, Prince Edward
Island, and the Yukon. South of the border, colleges in 18 states have been authorized to award baccalaureate degrees.
This paper explores the impact of unionization on salary differentials among Ontario universities by comparing the trends in average salaries between those institutions which have certified bargaining units and those which do not. The principal time period considered is from 1975, when the first Ontario university became certified, to 1983, three years after the most recent faculty association to become certified did so. The age-adjusted average salary increase for the unionized institutions was found to be only about two per cent greater than for the nonunionized group. As well, other data presented led to the conclusion that unionization has not had a significant impact upon relative salary structures in Ontario universities. This conclusion is qualified by noting that certification may not be an effective indicator of unionization, that the presence of unions in some universities may have influenced the salary behaviour of the nonunionized institutions, and that the potential influence of faculty unions was constrained by wage controls and funding limits during the period under investigation.
Cet article explore l' impact de la syndicalisation sur Les differences salariales parmi Les universites ontariennes en comparant Les tendances dans Les salaires moyens entre Les institutions ou Les professeurs sont syndiques et celles ou ifs ne le sont pas. L'etude porte sur la periode de temps allant de 1975, annee ou la premiere universite ontarienne se syndicalisa, a 1983, soit trois ans apres que la derniere universite a se syndicaliser le fit. L' etude montre que la hausse salariale moyenne ( ajustee pour l' age) dans Les institutions syndicalisees n' est superieure que de deux pour cent a celle des groupes non-syndiques. Par ailleurs, d' autres donnees permettent de conclure que la syndicalisation n' a pas eu d' impact significatif sur Les structures salariales relatives dans Les universites ontariennes. On doit cependant nuancer cette conclusion en notant que la syndicalisation ne traduit pas forcement un syndicalisme revendicatif, que la presence de syndicats dans certaines universites a pu influencer le comportement salarial des institutions non-syndiquees, et que l' influence potentielle des syndicats professoraux a ete limitee par Les contra/es de salaire et Les contraintes budgetaires en vigueur pendant la periode a l' etude.
Survey fielded between August 16-28, 2013 among a nationally representative sample of American adults (N = 1,000) conducted via landline and cell phone. The margin of error for a sample of 1,000 is ±3.1%.
The national poll was supplemented by a survey of business hiring decision-makers (N = 263) fielded online during July 10-15, 2013. The business elite sample included hiring decision-makers and hiring executives from a cross-section of companies, ranging from small companies to larger businesses with a global presence.
This paper examines the relationship between individuals’ personal exposure to economic conditions and their investment choices in the context of human capital. Focusing on bachelor’s degree recipients, we find that birth cohorts exposed to higher unemployment rates during typical schooling years select majors that earn higher wages, that have better employment prospects, and that more often lead to work in a related field. Much of this switching behavior can be considered a rational response to differences in particular majors’ labor market prospects during a recession. However, higher unemployment leads to other meaningful changes in the distribution of majors. Conditional on changes in lifetime expected earnings, recessions encourage women to enter male-dominated fields, and students of both genders pursue more difficult majors, such as STEM
fields. These findings imply that the economic environment changes how students select majors, possibly by encouraging them to consider a broader range of possible degree fields. Finally, in the absence of this compensating behavior, we estimate that the average estimated costs of graduating in a recession would be roughly ten percent larger.
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.
Ontario’s universities know how important it is not only to train and equip students for career and life success, but also to reach beyond the walls of campus and lift up communities. Through partnerships that spark service learning, or community-based opportunities that enrich the learning experience and also improve lives, many thousands of students, faculty and staff are actively engaging with the 33 communities where Ontario universities are rooted. Some start their own initiatives, creating
non-profit organizations, outreach programs, or inventing innovative products that solve critical issues around the globe. Students have won hundreds of awards for their work, and often find or create jobs out of these experiences.