Ontario’s 20 publicly assisted universities offer graduate and undergraduate degree programs in a wide variety of fields. In 2010/11, these universities enrolled the equivalent of about 390,000 full-time students, excluding about 44,000 foreign and other students taking courses not eligible for provincial assistance. These universities employed approximately 15,000 full-time faculty members. Faculty include tenure-stream staff, who have both teach- ing and research responsibilities; teaching staff, who
generally have no research responsibilities; and part-time sessional instructors, who are under contract to teach one or more courses.
Most Ontario universities were established or continued by acts of the provincial legislature that set up their governing structures. University governance is often a shared responsibility between the Board and the Senate. The Board is generally responsible for the university’s corporate side, including management of property, revenues, expenditures and other business affairs. The Sen- ate is responsible for academic matters such as determining the courses of study, setting admission
standards, and awarding diplomas and degrees.
One of the important questions to consider in a review of policy for postsecondary education is what kind of system do we need. To provide a reasonably complete answer to that question would require addressing many different dimensions of postsecondary
education including structures, processes, and relationships. In this paper, I will concentrate on two important and closely related subsidiary questions within the broader question of what kind of system we need. Those subsidiary questions are what is the most appropriate mix of different types of postsecondary institutions, and what should be their relationships with one another?1 As those are pretty large questions, within them my principal focus will be even narrower, on the balance and relationship between universities and community colleges.
Inside Higher Ed’s eighth annual survey of college and university presidents seeks to understand how these leaders view the opportunities and challenges facing higher education institutions in the U.S.
This study addresses the following questions:
• What effects do presidents perceive the election of Donald Trump had on their campus and on higher education more generally?
• What are presidents’ views of some of the federal policies that affect higher education?
• Are presidents confident in the sustainability of their institution’s financial model over the next 5 and 10 years?
• Do presidents believe the business models used in various sectors of higher education are sustainable?
• Do presidents anticipate that additional colleges will close or merge in the coming year?
• What are presidents’ opinions about tuition resets or tuition freezes?
• What are presidents’ biggest concerns about the size and composition of their student body?
• How do presidents assess race relations at their institution and at colleges nationwide?
• Do college presidents believe that Americans have an accurate view of the purposes of higher education?
• What factors do presidents see as causing declines in public support for higher education?
• How vocal have presidents been about political matters?
• How well prepared do presidents think they were for the various tasks of a college presidency when they first became a president?
AAUP sessions center on faculty members' role and responsibilities regarding classroom conversations about race.
This paper seeks to offer a comprehensive vision of a strategy to address the multiple barriers that face groups of people who are currently underrepresented in Ontario’s post-secondary education system. This paper seeks to give an over- view of the groups that are currently underrepresented, and to explore the barriers they face, including but not limited to: financial, informational/ motivational and academic barriers. We seek to acknowledge that the complex and multi-faceted nature of barriers that effect access require a holistic package of interventions, that address the unique needs of individuals and communities.
On the one hand, a growing amount of research discusses support for improving online collaborative learning quality, and many indicators are focused to assess its success. On the other hand, thinkLets for designing reputable and valuable collaborative processes have been developed for more than ten years. However, few studies try to apply thinkLets to online collaborative learning. This paper introduces thinkLets to online collaborative learning and experimentally tests its ffectiveness with participants' responses on their satisfaction. Yield Shift Theory (YST), a causal theory explaining inner satisfaction, is adopted. In the experiment, 113 students from Universities in Beijing, China are chosen as a sample. They were divided into two groups, collaborating online in a simulated class. Then, YST in student groups under online collaborative learning is validated, a comparison study of online collaborative learning with and without thinkLets is implemented, and the satisfaction response of participants are analyzed. As a result of this comparison, YST is proved applicable in this context, and satisfaction is higher in
online collaborative learning with thinkLets.
According to the most recent Statistics Canada census data (2006), there are 242,000 Aboriginal people living in Ontario, primarily comprising three distinct groups: First Nation (158,000), Métis (74,000) and Inuit (2,000). The remaining 8,000 Aboriginal people classified themselves as “other.” Aboriginal peoples in Ontario have diverse languages, cultures and traditions. The census also identified that approximately 47,000 First Nations people live on reserves in Ontario; these are lands set aside for the use and benefit of a specific band or First Nation. There are a total of 133 First Nation communities in Ontario, each of which has its own government or tribal council. The delivery of education through schools on reserve is the responsibility of the First Nation and the federal government. The federal government is financially responsible for the education of First Nation students living on reserve, whether these students attend First Nation or provincially operated schools.
Studying and working abroad transforms Canadian students into global citizens, helping them develop intercultural
awareness, adaptability and problem-solving skills. It also gives them a hiring edge with today’s employers. Leaving one’s home province to study can also be a transformative experience, increasing students’ understanding of the diverse cultures, histories and values that make up our country.
Will community colleges be prepared to accept the changes ahead, from economic difficulties and fast-changing technology, to the public’s distrust and disenchantment with academic credentials?
ABSTRACT
This working paper seeks to explore the reasons why educational attainment in the immigrant population varies between North America and Europe. Specifically, the examples of Canada and Switzerland are used as Canada has an immigrant population with a typically higher rate of post-secondary education than that of the domestic population, while in Switzerland the opposite is true. Analysis shows that while differences in immigration policy play a significant role, there are many other variables which affect educational attainment in immigrants, such as the education level of the parents, source region and home language.
RÉSUMÉ
Le présent document de travail tente d‟explorer les raisons pour lesquelles le niveau de formation de la population immigrée varie entre l‟Amérique du Nord et l‟Europe. Il s‟attache plus particulièrement aux exemples du Canada et de la Suisse, les diplômés de l‟enseignement post-secondaire étant typiquement plus nombreux dans la population immigrée que dans la population autochtone au Canada, tandis qu‟en Suisse, c‟est l‟inverse qui s‟observe. L‟analyse montre que si les différences en termes de politiques d‟immigration jouent un rôle important, il existe également de nombreuses autres variables qui influent sur le niveau de formation de la population immigrée, telles que le niveau de formation des parents, la région d‟origine et la langue parlée à la maison.
Background
According to a report by the Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities (2005) , 30 to 40% of all students enrolled in four-year degree programs drop out, and 78-80% of those who do drop out will do so in their first year. Similar levels have been reported in other provinces, such as Québec (25-35%, Montmarquette, Mahseredjian, & Houle, 2001). In a paper for the Commission of Inquiry on Canadian University Education, Gilbert (1991) estimated that after five years the non-completion rate for university undergraduates is approximately 42% across Canada. Of particular concern, research on student retention has demonstrated that some disciplines have higher drop-out rates than others; science, mathematics, and engineering students are more likely to drop out than students in other disciplines (Daempfle, 2004). Moreover, each year approximately 35% of undergraduates fail introductory mathematics and science classes (Useem, 1992). Because of these growing concerns, research is needed that focuses on increasing retention and achievement in undergraduate science. This research addresses these
concerns by implementing a different approach to providing feedback to students that may result in higher achievement and increased retention at the undergraduate level of education.
The Ontario university sector is already somewhat differentiated. A policy decision to increase the differentiation of the postsecondary system brings the following benefits:
• Higher quality teaching and research programs
• More student choice with easier inter‐institution transfer and mobility
• Greater institutional accountability
• A more globally competitive system
• A more financially sustainable system
The relationship between academia and technology is notoriously complicated. Faculty often view IT staffers as gadget-mongers eager to roll out new tech regardless of its value to teaching and learning, while technology specialists are certain they could make life easier for those on the other side — if they'd only listen!
Canada’s universities are committed to working with all parliamentarians to build a more prosperous,
innovative and competitive nation. We do this through research that drives economic growth and addresses pressing social problems, and education that provides students with the advanced skills needed to thrive in a dynamic, global job market.
Budget 2014 included important investments in research and innovation, as well as support for internships. The Finance Committee is to be commended for its role in promoting them.
The university community’s recommendations for Budget 2015 focus in three areas: enhanced funding for research and innovation; an opportunities strategy for young Canadians; and initiatives to attract more Aboriginal Canadians to postsecondary education. Together, these recommendations contribute to three themes outlined in the Committee’s request for submissions
Media and policy commentary have focused lately on Canadian employers’ apparent inability to find employees with the desired labour market skills. To explore this issue further, HEQCO reviewed and summarized the current discourse surrounding a “skills gap” in The Great Skills Divide: A Review of the Literature and conducted an analysis of Canadian job advertisements geared toward recent postsecondary graduates in Bridging the Divide, Part I: What Canadian Job Ads Said. In the latter publication, 316 job advertisements for entry-level positions requiring postsecondary education were examined to ascertain the education credentials, work experience and essential skills employers were seeking. To follow-up on Bridging the Divide, Part I, the current report analyzes survey responses from 103 employers that posted job advertisements included in the preceding study.
In particular, employers were asked if they had filled the advertised position or, if not, the reasons for being unable to find someone to hire. Those employers that had filled the position were also asked about the successful candidates’ qualifications and performance on the job so far.
This commentary discusses the problem of bullying as it relates to Muslim students. The authors posit that teacher education programs can impact how Muslim students are treated in schools. In doing so, they provide practical avenues teacher educators can use to prepare pre-service teachers to address the problem.
This report presents the findings of a research project undertaken at OCAD University (OCAD U) from 2013 to 2014 examining the implementation of a cross-disciplinary collaborative course design process. While there is some research that investigates collaborative course design, especially in the development of courses for online and hybrid delivery, there is little research to date that investigates cross-disciplinary collaborative course design, in which faculty members from different disciplines come together to combine their expertise to create more robust resources for student learning. The research was undertaken in the development of professional practice courses offered in the Winter 2014 term to students enrolled in the Faculty of Design. Online learning modules were developed by faculty members from across multiple disciplines for delivery on the Canvas learning management system (LMS) in studio-based courses. Collaboration between faculty members was led and facilitated by an instructional support team with expertise in hybrid and fully online learning from OCAD U’s Faculty & Curriculum Development
Centre.
ABSTRACT
We describe a cheating strategy enabled by the features of massive open online courses (MOOCs) and detectable by virtue of the sophisticated data systems that MOOCs provide. The strategy, Copying Answers using Multiple Existences Online (CAMEO), involves a user who gathers solutions to assessment questions using a “harvester” account and then submits correct
answers using a separate “master” account. We use “clickstream” learner data to detect CAMEO use among 1.9 million course participants in 115 MOOCs from two universities. Using conservative thresholds, we estimate CAMEO prevalence at 1,237 certificates, accounting for 1.3% of the certificates in the 69 MOOCs with CAMEO users. Among earners of 20 or more
certificates, 25% have used the CAMEO strategy. CAMEO users are more likely to be young, male, and international than other MOOC certificate earners. We identify preventive strategies that can decrease CAMEO rates and show evidence of their effectiveness in science courses.
Keywords: Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), Cheating Detection, Educational
Certification, Educational Data Mining (EDM), Security.
Innovation cannot be taught like math, writing or even entrepreneurship, writes Deba Dutta. But it can be inculcated with the right skills, experiences and environments.
In this working paper, Earl and Timperley argue that evaluative thinking is a necessary component of successful innovation and involves more than measurement and quantification. Combining evaluation with innovation requires discipline in the innovation and flexibility in the evaluation. The knowledge bases for both innovation and evaluation have advanced dramatically in recent years in ways that have allowed synergies to develop between them; the different stakeholders can bring
evaluative thinking into innovation in ways that capitalise on these synergies. Evaluative thinking contributes to new learning by providing evidence to chronicle, map and monitor the progress, successes, failures and roadblocks in the innovation as it unfolds. It involves thinking about what evidence will be useful during the course of the innovation activities, establishing the range of objectives and targets that make sense to determine their progress, and building knowledge and developing practical uses for the new information, throughout the trajectory of the innovation. Having a continuous cycle of generating hypotheses, collecting evidence, and reflecting on progress, allows the stakeholders (e.g., innovation leaders, policymakers, funders, participants in innovation) an opportunity to try things, experiment, make mistakes and consider where they are, what went right and what went wrong, through a fresh and independent review of the course and the effects of the innovation. This paper describes issues and approaches to each phase of the cycle. It concludes by outlining the synergies to be made, building capacity for evaluative thinking, as well as possible tensions to be addressed.