This report represents the second annual survey on Twitter usage and trends among college faculty. This year's survey, like that conducted in 2009, sought answers to some of the fundamental questions regarding faculty members' familiarity, perception, and experience with the micro-blogging technology, as well as whether they expect their Twitter use to increase or decrease in the future. We also examined year-to-year comparisons to see how the Twitter landscape has changed during the past 12 months. The 2010 Faculty Focus survey of nearly 1,400 higher education professionals found that more than a third (35.2 percent) of the 1,372 respondents who completed the survey in July-August 2010 use Twitter in some capacity. That's up from 30.7 percent in 2009. Meanwhile, the percentage of educators who never used Twitter decreased from 56.4 percent in 2009 to 47.9 percent in 2010. The remaining 16.9 percentage consists of those who tried Twitter, but stopped using it —an increase from 12.9 percent in 2009.
Of those who currently use Twitter, the most common activities include “to share information with peers†and “as a real-time news source.†Instructional uses, such as “to communicate with students†and “as a learning tool in the classroom†are less popular, although both activities saw increases over the previous year. Meanwhile, a number of non-users expressed concerns that Twitter creates poor writing skills and could be yet another classroom distraction. Many also noted that very few of their students use Twitter. Finally, a new trend that emerged this year centred on the belief that many feel they already have too many places to post messages or check for student questions/comments. As one professor put it, “I have no interest in adding yet another communication tool to my overloaded life. In terms of future use, just over half (56.8 percent) of current Twitter users say they expect to increase their use during the coming academic year. Only 2.5 percent say their Twitter use will likely decrease, and 40.7 percent say it will stay about the same.
This 22-page report gives a breakdown of each survey question, including a sampling of the comments provided by the respondents. The comments allowed faculty to further explain how they are using Twitter, why they stopped, or why they have no interest in using it at all.
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.
The CGS/GRE Survey of Graduate Enrollment and Degrees is jointly sponsored by the Council of Graduate Schools (CGS) and the Graduate Record Examinations (GRE) Board. Conducted annually since 1986, the survey provides information about applications for admission to graduate school, first-time and total graduate student enrollment, and graduate degrees and certificates conferred. The 2013 survey was sent to 793 colleges and universities, and useable responses were received from 655 institutions, for an 83% response rate.
SYNTHESIS: WHAT THIS REPORT TELLS US
The 2009–2010 State of Learning in Canada provides the most current information on the Canadian learning landscape, contributing to a comprehensive understanding of how Canadians are faring as lifelong learners. As in previous State of Learning reports, this update reflects CCL’s vision of learning as a lifelong process. Our research affirms time and again that the skills and knowledge that citizens bring to their families, their workplaces and their communities help determine a country’s economic success and overall quality of life. It is this core value that continues to guide our research and our commitment to fostering a learning society, in which all members can develop their full potential as active, engaged learners and contributing members of their community.
This update takes a life course approach, beginning with learning in the early childhood learning and school-based education through to the formal and informal learning of adults. Highlights from the recently released report on the State of Aboriginal Learning in Canada: A Holistic Approach to Measuring Success (2009), which introduced the first application of a comprehensive approach to measuring Aboriginal Learning in Canada, are also included.
When viewed holistically, Canada lacks a clear and common understanding of the future directions and top priorities of its post-secondary education (PSE) sector. Perhaps as a result, Canada has not yet comprehensively addressed a fundamental question: How do we demonstrate quality in PSE? To answer this question requires clarification of many issues, including the roles that various institutions and sectors play. It also requires the development of a shared vision of PSE, of what can and should be achieved. Despite much discussion among leaders of various education sectors in Canada, an agreement on a plan of action has yet to be reached. Indeed, a national dialogue on this critical issue is needed.
As a starting point for a national dialogue, the Canadian Council on Learning (CCL) has published three annual reports on the state of post-secondary education in Canada over the last four years. These reports provided an overview of the Canadian PSE landscape while highlighting various issues common among education jurisdictions and institutions. For instance, CCL’s 2006 report, Canadian Post-secondary Education: A Positive Record―– An Uncertain Future, identified eight goals common among the post-secondary strategies of provinces and territories. One of these common goals was addressing the issue of quality in PSE.
CCL’s new monograph series, Challenges in Canadian Post-secondary
Phil L. Davison
St. Francis Xavier University
ABSTRACT
This study explores the perspectives and understandings of post-secondary leaders and their contexts as described through the qualitative experiences of 12 Maritime Canadian leaders (presidents and vice-presidents) who work in contemporary, publicly funded, post-secondary institutions. Four themes emerge: balancing daily dissonance, learning experientially to lead,
creating learning spaces, and needing moments of grace. The research reveals that leaders seek deeper understandings of their work and their characterization.
Project Background
In 2008, the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO) issued an open Request for Proposals (RFP) to Ontario colleges and universities that would allow them to evaluate interventions that already existed at those institutions and that were designed to promote student success in various ways. Brock University was involved in a total of four research projects that were approved for funding at that time, including this project. This research project also has the distinction of being the only one in the RFP which involved a re-examination of institutional financial aid policies.
Project Purpose
Institutional financial aid applications ask a wide range of questions dealing with both the personal and financial history of the student and his/her family. This process can take a significant amount of the student’s time, and may even intimidate some. Moreover, the level of financial detail required in the application may be a deterrent to students who might be either embarrassed to disclose family details, or uncomfortable asking their parents about the financial situation of their family.
It is believed that the complex and potentially discouraging application process that exists at many postsecondary institutions (and many government financial aid programs) can be simplified by including fewer fields in the application for funding. This would benefit both student applicants and institutional administrators, and could likely be done without significantly altering
the output that would have been generated using the original full application.
The purpose of this project is to compare two approaches to calculating student financial assessed need for the purposes of determining eligibility for the Brock University Entering Student Bursary. The research question being addressed in this project is whether a simplified approach to calculating assessed need would lead to similar outcomes in terms of identifying
eligibility for the Entering Student Bursary as the original application process that had been in place for years at Brock University.
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.
Education is undergoing a dramatic transformation. Technology plays a powerful role in the life of today’s students and institutions can no longer meet their needs through classroom-based instruction alone.
Blended learning is one way institutions can prepare themselves for the next era in education. It combines face-to-face and online instruction by integrating technology into their curriculum.
Many educators agree that the blended approach is benefi cial. It delivers a fl exible experience and supports learning by allowing students to learn at their own pace. Meanwhile, use of this model helps maximize instructor efficiency, increasing engagement inside the classroom while simultaneously enabling them to reach more students. Institutions see the benefi ts as well. Retention rates increase, recruitment efforts improve and early evidence suggests that use of this approach can improve grades. The ME2U research project, conducted at the University of Sussex1, found that students using blended learning technology to view recorded content prior to assessment often produced higher scores.
With these advantages, it’s no surprise that blended learning is experiencing a dramatic upsurge
in popularity. Today, student demand for blended learning courses continues to outpace most institutions’ ability to meet the growing need. Eighty-four percent of surveyed students would like blended learning technology offered in more of their courses.
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 2009–2010 State of Learning in Canada provides the most current information on the Canadian learning
landscape, contributing to a comprehensive understanding of how Canadians are faring as lifelong learners.
As in previous State of Learning reports, this update reflects CCL’s vision of learning as a lifelong process. Our research affirms time and again that the skills and knowledge that citizens bring to their families, their workplaces and their communities help determine a country’s economic success and overall quality of life.
It is this core value that continues to guide our research and our commitment to fostering a learning society, in which all members can develop their full potential as active, engaged learners and contributing members of their community.
This update takes a life course approach, beginning with learning in the early childhood learning and school-based education through to the formal and informal learning of adults. Highlights from the recently released report on the State of Aboriginal Learning in Canada: A Holistic Approach to Measuring Success (2009), which introduced the first application of a comprehensive approach to measuring Aboriginal Learning in Canada, are also included.
To write well, college students need to read to deepen their understanding of language. And they need to write. The 24 essays in this collection will prompt teachers to help their students grasp changes in what is acceptable language, explore the mysteries
of word usage, and learn strategies to improve their writing. The essays are drawn from Lingua Franca, The Chronicle’s free blog about language in academe. Students can read these posts and new ones at chronicle.com/blogs/linguafranca.
Over the past decade or so, the bachelor’s degree has undergone major changes in much of the world. The most important set of changes was brought on by the adoption, across Europe,
of the Bologna Process. This led not only to the introduction of bachelor’s degrees in countries where no such qualification had previously existed, but also to a pan-continental harmonization (more or less) of the length of the degree, at three years. More recently, a number of universities in the United States – where a four-year degree has been sacrosanct for decades – have started experimenting with shorter degrees. At the same time that systems have been altering the length of degrees, there has also been a trend for systems in Europe and elsewhere – including Ontario and other parts of Canada – to open up degree provision to non-university Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). This has broken the centuries-long monopoly of
universities over the provision of granting degrees. These two major experiments in changing times and changing places are the subject of this report, which was undertaken by Higher Education Strategy Associates for the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO).
Our approach to this project is not simply to look at global trends in the development of the bachelor’s degree and to collect the views of key Ontario stakeholders regarding these developments. For purposes of organizing material on a very complicated topic, we have chosen to look at the material within two main categories. In Chapter 1, entitled “Changing Times,” we look at how the lengths of bachelor’s degrees have been changing, while in Chapter 2, entitled “Changing Places,” we deal with the provision of higher education in non-university settings. Each chapter begins with an in-depth description of global trends in the area (with a particular focus on recent developments within Canada). These global discussions are then augmented by adding data about the views of two key sets of Ontario stakeholders. In order to understand the views of students, we conducted a survey of over 850 Ontario students in university bachelor’s degree programs (who were members of our student research panel1)about degree lengths and loci. Relevant results from this survey are included in both chapters, and the methodology behind the survey is included as Appendix A. We also solicited the views of key stakeholders concerning the lessons Ontario can learn from global changes – via a multistakeholder seminar held in Toronto on March 21, 2011. A list of attendees is included in this report as Appendix C, and a summary of their discussion can be found in each of the two chapters in this report.
89% of colleges and universities in the United States offer online courses and of those institutions 58% offer degree programs that are completely online (Parker, Lenhart & Moore, 2011). Providing online student services is an important component of these distance programs and is often required by accrediting bodies. Health and wellness services for online students are especially essential, as college students are accessing mental health services for severe problems at increasing rates on college campuses (Gallagher, Sysko, & Zhang, 2001). This paper outlines how institutions of higher learning can prepare faculty to identify mental health needs of online students and suggests effective administrative policies and programs to address these student needs.Online enrollments were less than 10% of all students in 2002 when the Sloan Foundation began their annual surveys on the topic.By 2011, 32%of all enrolled post-secondary students were taking at least one online course and the numbers have been increasing steadily (Allen & Seaman, 2013). The rising percentage of online students has led to awareness by college administrations that these students have the same needs as students in a traditional classroom setting. Students who want to learn online also want to access their student services online. For learners enrolled in online programs, and living in geographically distant locations, internet access to student services is essential. These students' needs have resulted in revision of college and university policies and the creation of extensive web-based services for technical support in online courses, enrollment services, financial aid, and library resources.
Purpose
This guide is designed as a resource to support the creation of campus communities that are deeply conducive to transformative learning and mental well-being through a systemic approach to student mental health in colleges and universities in Canada. It provides a framework to support campus self-assessment, strategic goal setting, and the identification of options for change that can be used to inform planning and evaluation.
It is recognized that each post-secondary institution has unique strengths, circumstances, and needs. Therefore, while the broad areas for strategy development identified in this guide are relevant for all institutions, more specific strategies within each category need to be developed by each individual institution. This enables each institution to develop strategies that consider its own uniqueness and context. Even though the approach outlined in this guide is targeted at whole institutions, these ideas can also be used by students, staff, and faculty for individual units or departments within institutions.
• As part of the Open Ontario Plan outlined in the 2010 Speech from the Throne and the 2010 Budget, the government announced the intention to establish an Ontario Online Institute (OOI).
• While Ontario has a strong foundation to build on including existing elearning initiatives such as Contact North/Contact Nord, elearnnetwork/ reseauelearning and OntarioLearn, it was recognized that these initiatives do not capture the full scope of elearning activity taking place at our institutions. As a result, a survey of colleges and universities was done in spring 2010.
As a result, a survey of colleges and universities was done in spring 2010.
A great deal of research has been conducted and published on the topic of hybrid or “blended” learning in university settings, but relatively little has been conducted within the college environment. The purpose of this multi-method study was to identify the impact of hybrid course delivery methods on student success and course withdrawal rates, and to evaluate faculty and student experience of hybrid instruction from within the Canadian college environment.
Quantitative findings suggest that students achieved slightly lower final marks in hybrid courses as compared to the face-to-face control courses offered in the previous year, though the magnitude of this effect was very small, in the order of -1%. Further analysis revealed that students with high academic standing were successful regardless of course mode, while students with low GPAs performed slightly worse in hybrid classes. Course mode did not have an effect on withdrawal from the course, suggesting that the format does not impact course completion.
Overall both students and faculty responded positively to the hybrid format. Students enjoyed learning and engaging online, but did express concerns about reduced access to instructors and/or a sense that lectures were rushed. Open-ended survey responses and focus group feedback made clear that it is essential to provide well-defined direction and orientation to web-based tools for a hybrid course to be successful. Suggestions for improvement include providing additional technical support for students and faculty, mandatory tutorials introducing students to online tools, and hybrid course development training for faculty.
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.
The professional development of new university instructors has received considerable investments of resources at Canadian universities, but the impact of these efforts has only rarely been evaluated or studied. Universities in Ontario have witnessed and participated in the formation of teaching and learning units responsible for professional development of academics since the mid-1980s (Landolfi, 2007). These units have been responsible for the development of programs to address the pedagogical needs of university instructors, with the goal of making them more effective (Ibid.).
In situations of decreased availability of funding, individual university support for central teaching and learning units has oscillated. This has often required that they operate with inadequate financial support and a minimal number of full-time employees. Currently, the four smallest units in Ontario universities operate with only one to three staff members.
While the formal training of postsecondary educators and the issue of enforcing mandatory training of academic teaching staff has been broadly accepted in colleges for years (see volume 2 of this report which will follow in 2012), the same issue has recently been discussed more frequently among universities as well at the level of teaching professionals and policy makers, with intense controversy on either side of the debate.
New Faculty Orientations (NFOs) – an induction program for newly hired faculty members at the beginning of their teaching careers – vary widely in the content delivered across different Ontario universities. While some simply provide a general introduction to a particular university’s settings, and/or a list of local resources for the new faculty members to choose and use as they see fit, others focus on specific teaching skills and organize a series of sessions, which explore a variety of teaching and learning issues and strategies.
Surprisingly, of the 20 institutions surveyed there are only two Ontario universities that still do not organize NFOs for new teaching staff even though they have established teaching and learning centres. In these instances, new faculty members receive a general orientation provided by the President’s Office and Faculty Recruitment departments, as well as their faculties. Other findings from this study include the following:
• The majority of Ontario universities (72 per cent) include both contract instructors and full-time faculty members in their orientation sessions.
• Only in two Ontario universities is orientation mandatory for all newly hired faculty members. In other institutions where NFO attendance is voluntary, participation varies from 40 per cent to 85 per cent.
• In terms of the cost of new faculty orientation, data differ from institution to institution, with a few
institutions spending a modest amount of $1,000 and others (the minority) spending about $35,000 on NFOs per annum.
The top five separate sessions that are typically included for NFOs at Ontario universities are, in this order:
a) greetings/conversation with VP Academic Provost,
b) academic policies and procedures,
c) classroom teaching management methods,
d) teaching with technology, and
e) a panel/discussion with experienced faculty members.
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.