As Canada’s youth consider their increasingly broad and complex array of post-secondary education (PSE) options, they are faced with potentially costly decisions. Moreover, they often do not have the information they need to make appropriate choices, which can negatively impact their participation and persistence in PSE. For many students, it is a challenge to choose, design and follow a post-secondary pathway to its conclusion without deviating from their original plan. Students are increasingly taking non-linear pathways through PSE. Some may need to relocate and attend a different institution. Many students may decide to change the focus of their study, while others may wish to change their program entirely. Some may shift their goals from academic to applied forms of study, or vice versa. However, the structures of post-secondary systems in our provinces, and the various mechanisms that bind them, do not always provide clearly apparent and unobstructed pathways for students, particularly for mobile students. These problems are exacerbated by shifting mandates, roles, and labels of institutions across the Canadian PSE sector.
Canada does not have a clear framework for understanding the many changes that have occurred within its PSE sector over the past 15 years. This monograph sets out to explain these changes, with a view to clarifying their potential effects on students’ comprehension of, and mobility through, the structures that comprise our current PSE landscape. In the past, Canadian post-secondary education has been described as binary, a term that indicates the presence of two separate institutional sectors: public universities offering academic and professional programming at the degree-level; and public colleges providing diplomas and certificates in programs of a more technical or vocational nature. However, this conceptualization overlooks private post-secondary institutions and, as Marshall (2006) notes, “significant growth in the number and types of degrees offered by a wider variety of Canadian post-secondary institutions” over recent decades.1 As a result, the distinction between the university and college sectors has become increasingly blurred, and the nature of some Canadian post-secondary institutions is no longer made clear by their names. Canada’s PSE sector is now characterized by a broad and complex mix of institutions for which a clear and comprehensive taxonomy has yet to be developed.
Evolutionary and legislative changes in many Canadian jurisdictions challenge the transparency of current Canadian post-secondary education vocabulary. Students’ ideas about which institutions offer which programs, and which programs lead to which opportunities, may not be aligned with these changes. It is arguable that Canadian PSE has become less transparent in recent years, exacerbating the potential that students make PSE decisions inappropriate to their aspirations. Issues of program choice and fit might be better addressed through the provision of a classification framework aimed at making Canadian PSE more transparent to its users.
Within the context of my Ph.D. dissertation, I am interested in (1) the impact of superiors’ management skills and subordinates’ working skills on the building of their (hierarchical) relationship and (2) the impact this hierarchical relationship has upon the mental health of workers (i.e. both superiors and subordinates). Research to date has revealed the potentially negative consequences that hierarchical relationships can have on mental health; thus, for example, Brun, Biron, Martel & Ivers (2003) found that poor relations with the supervisor constitutes a significant risk factor for mental health. Leiter and Maslach (2004) report similar findings, that is to say, that the quality of social interactions at work is a major risk factor for mental health.
INTRODUCTION
Policy-makers have invested in a range of strategies over the last several decades to reduce disparities in college entry and completion by family income. Historically, many of these interventions have focused on improving students’ academic readiness and increasing college affordability for low-income students and their families. i More recently, however, policy-makers and researchers have devoted increasing attention to how the accessibility and presentation of college information impacts whether students apply to college or for financial aid, and the college choices students make. A number of studies have documented, for instance, that students and families from disadvantaged backgrounds either do not know or tend to
substantially overestimate the actual cost of college tuition. Other research has documented how complexities in the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) may deter many students who would qualify for substantial grant and loan assistance from even applying for financial aid A separate line of research suggests that a surprisingly large share of students who have sufficient high school achievement to attend academically-rigorous institutions often only apply to and enroll at essentially open-enrollment colleges and universities.
With a population of 13 million people, the province of Ontario covers a significant geographic distribution of 917,741 square kilometres (Statistics Canada, 2005). Fourteen per cent of the population is categorized as living in a rural, remote or northern area (Statistics Canada, 2011). Within this land mass is a rich diversity of people, systems and institutions that are privileged to call it home - including Francophone persons and First Nations, Inuit and Métis people. There are unique challenges that exist within these communities that affect access to health services: geographic distance, socioeconomic status, availability of health human resources and infrastructure. These factors have an impact on health status, wellness and the ability to offer person-centred health care.
The talent market is rapidly evolving: Never has current and future talent been more important to business success than it is today. Today, organizations discuss having a “people advantage” and work with “talent optimization.” There are also new titles and positions like “Chief Talent Officer.” It is clear that attracting and retaining the right talent is becoming a key organizational capability: The industry is quickly moving away from a short- term recruitment focus to a long-term employer branding focus.
Companies will gain a competitive advantage by taking a long-term approach to investing in employer branding and developing their brands to align with long-term business needs.
Responding to trends in research, National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) institutional data and curriculum renewal processes, several recent initiatives at the University of Toronto focus on the complementary role of the teaching assistant (TA) as part of a teaching team. Particularly, these initiatives focus on the establishment of learner-centred environments, support for deep student learning, and the development of core skills and competencies for both undergraduate and graduate students.
This study examined the influence of two teaching assistant (TA) models – the Advanced University Teaching Preparation Certificate (AUTP), offered by the University of Toronto’s Teaching Assistants’ Training Program (TATP), Centre for Teaching Support & Innovation, and the Writing Instruction for TAs (WIT) Program, offered in the Faculty of Arts & Science. Both of these TA models aim to improve undergraduate student learning by ensuring that TAs are integral members of the teaching team and that they receive sufficient training and guidance in order to effectively support deep student learning. Both of these TA models utilize peer training as a core dimension.
I am a Research Assistant on a project entitled Writing Instruction Using an Online Assignment Planner. I am here to invite you to participate in this study. This study is designed to assess how teachers and students use the Assignment Planner in large classes
Nearly every college and university in America has refocused its attention on “student success.” Like many institutions, Cleveland State University, where I work, has erected an entire enterprise devoted to this endeavor. We have reorganized ourselves administratively, invested in new staff, updated technology and taken a deep dive into institutional data to ensure we are best positioned to make sure all our students have a high potential to graduate. We have improved as a result.
ABSTRACT. I argue in this article that responsible leadership (Maak and Pless, 2006) contributes to build- ing social capital and ultimately to both a sustainable business and the common good. I show, first, that responsible leadership in a global
stakeholder society is a relational and inherently moral phenomenon that cannot be captured in traditional dyadic leader–follower relationships (e.g., to subordinates) or by simply focusing on questions of leadership effectiveness. Business leaders have to deal with moral complexity resulting from a multitude of stakeholder claims and have to build enduring and mutually beneficial
relationships with all relevant stakeholders. I contend, second, that in doing so leaders bundle the energy of different constituencies and enable social capital building. Social capital can be understood as actual or potential resources inherent to more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual recognition (Bourdieu 1980). By drawing on network analysis I suggest,
third, that responsible leaders weave durable relational structures and ultimately networks of relationships which are rich in ties to otherwise unconnected individuals or groups.
In Canada, 1,172,785 persons identify as Aboriginal, and 698,025 identify as First Nations.
• Aboriginal youth are the fastest growing demographic. The First Nations population grew 3.5 times faster than the on-Aboriginal population in 2006.
• Approximately 30% of the First Nations adult population is less than 30 years of age while 13% are 60 years of age and older.
In Canadian universities and colleges, the registrar role appears to be evolving. It absolutely remains a position focused on the diligent care and oversight of student academic records and related student services. However, those holding these roles are more often being called upon to create interesting and unique partnerships; actively support or steer enrolment management; oversee significant pan-institutional responsibilities and related accountabilities; and develop policies, procedures, and integrated systems that serve as the backbone for the institution and support overall student success. Registrars are exercising their duties in an increasingly virtual world where institutional boundaries are becoming less rigid and new approaches are becoming the norm. Examples include different course delivery models, online course and program offerings, new forms of inter-institutional collaboration, cross-boundary sharing of data, targeted access programs, increasingly mobile students, etc. The evolving role of the Canadian registrar suggests a close examination of current reporting line practices and responsibilities is timely.
When building an online program, there are certain big questions that need to be answered. Among them are: What kind of program you want it to be – high tech or low tech? Professor intensive or adjunct driven? Blended learning or fully online? What kind of technology will be used to deliver course content? What about opportunities for collaboration? Indeed, even though distance learning is no longer in its infancy, and there are a whole discipline-full of best practices learned by those who blazed the trail before you, it’s easy to get overwhelmed by the questions and the possibilities of what you want your program to look like today and five years from now. We created this special report to suggest some responses to the big questions about distance education: About pedagogy, technology, philosophy and administration of distance learning programs. In this report, you will find concise, informative articles on distance education administration and policy that have appeared in Distance Education Report. Titles include:
• Seeing Where the Distance Education Opportunities Lie
• Dumb is Smart: Learning from Our Worst Practices
• Building a Distance Education Program: Key Questions to Answer
• Eight Steps to On-Campus/Online Parity
• Creating a Business Continuity Plan for Your Distance Education Program
• Integrating Distance Education Programs into the Institution
• Solving the Problems of Faculty Ownership with Online Courses
The mass of program and policy issues confronting distance education administrators grows every day. We hope this special report will help you conceptualize, manage and grow the distance education program at your school.
Results are based on telephone interviews with –1,025– national adults, aged 18+, conducted October 5-6, 2013. For results based on the total sample of National Adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the margin of error is ±4 percentage points.
Interviews are conducted with respondents on landline telephones and cellular phones, with interviews conducted in Spanish for respondents who are primarily Spanish-speaking. Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 50% cell phone respondents and 50% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by region. Landline and cell phones numbers are selected using random digit dial methods. Landline respondents are chosen at random within each household on the basis of which member had the most recent birthday.
The 2015 Campus Freedom Index is the fifth annual report released by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) to measure the state of free speech at Canada’s universities.
Starting with a survey of only 18 universities in 2011, this year’s edition has grown to include 55 publicly funded Canadian universities—the largest and most expansive Index released so far, with information relevant to the more than 750,000 students who attend these institutions. The 2015 Campus Freedom Index includes an individual report about each university and student
union.
This report, representing the views of Ontario’s 24 colleges, highlights a systemic dearth of applied research and innovation funding opportunities for colleges at the federal level. Applied research and innovation at Ontario colleges are undertaken in collaboration with private and public sector partners. College applied research and innovation regularly lead to innovations and the commercialization of knowledge that result in new products and services benefiting the Canadian economy.
This study examines online and offline political engagement and pays special attention to the role of social networking sites in people's political activities.
The Ontario government recognizes the importance of ensuring equality of access to postsecondary education (PSE). One group that has been and continues to be underrepresented in PSE is students with disabilities. As a response, the Ontario government has made improvements to the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005, with the end goal of making Ontario a more accessible province for people with disabilities by 2025. In addition to making changes to legislation, there has been increased funding for students with disabilities, with more than $47 million allocated in 2010-2011 to help these students achieve
success in PSE. The Ontario government now also provides targeted funding for students with learning disabilities (Tsagris and Muirhead, 2012).
The 2005 Postsecondary Review, “Ontario: a Leader in Learning,” authored by Bob Rae, addressed issues facing students with disabilities. Key recommendations1 included:
Require institutions to reach out to students with disabilities at their schools and in their communities to ease the transition to postsecondary education. Provide funding for enhanced academic and career counselling on campus. Allow for the evolution of centres of research and service excellence and distribute funding to institutions for supports and services on the basis of the size of a given institution’s population of students with disabilities (Rae, 2005: 32).
As a key component of a comprehensive research program on learning outcomes, HEQCO initiated a Tuning project to identify and measure learning outcomes in specific “sectors” of postsecondary education (i.e., life and health science, physical science and social science) in Ontario colleges and universities. The term “Tuning” refers to a process of bringing together individuals from across institutions to articulate common student learning outcomes. Quite simply, it is a bottom-up process by those who are “on the ground” to articulate learning outcomes that are relevant, appropriate and useable.
In an ideal world, we wouldn’t need to call on students to get them to participate. They would be fully invested in our courses, and would come to class eager to play an active role in the day’s activities. They would understand that more participation equals more learning. We wouldn’t be sergeants at the front of the room, putting our conscripts through their paces. Rather, we’d be facilitators — helping our students when we can, asking guiding questions, suggesting new paths of inquiry.
A quintessential Canadian success story Canada’s post-secondary institutions made major contributions to our country’s social progress and economic success in the last half of the 20th century. In the span of several decades, Canada evolved from a
country where an advanced education was reserved for the society’s elite to one that produces one of the world’s best-educated populations. By the turn of the century, Canada boasted the second-highest number of postsecondary
educated citizens per capita of any country —a comparative advantage in a global knowledge economy. Since knowledge is now the currency of the economy, improved post-secondary outcomes increase a country’s ability to develop the skilled human resources and conduct the innovative research it needs to remain productive and competitive.
Canada’s past performance is a remarkable achievement, considering that in the 19th century, just two percent of Canadian 20- to 24-year-olds went to university—usually to join the clergy, or become a doctor or lawyer. Even by the early 1940s, that number had only doubled to four percent. It wasn’t until the post-war period, when the federal government provided educational opportunities to returning servicemen after World War II and began investing heavily in post-secondary education to accommodate the Baby Boom population that enrolment rates swelled. There are now close to 100 public universities and roughly 200 public community colleges, degree-granting and other institutions all across the country. Today, 44% of Canadians possess postsecondary credentials. Much of Canada’s success is attributable to governments’ extensive investments in post-secondary education. Over the past 10 years, Canada has ranked in the top three internationally for public investment in post-secondary education institutions (PSIs). Collectively, the provincial,territorial and federal governments invested roughly $29 billion in 2004. A number of provinces have recently increased their expenditures on post-secondary education to ensure that PSIs are better able to respond to growing public demand. The creation of innovative research bodies and the infusion of new federal funds in national granting councils over the past decade have also enabled Canada’s universities and colleges to pursue an ambitious research agenda—the very heart of academic life.
Shortcomings
In spite of this solid foundation and the impressive track record of Canada’s post-secondary institutions, we cannot
be complacent. The PSE sector’s capacity to sustain its present progress is strained at the very time the world is placing a premium on higher education. Unprecedented demand for post-secondary graduates in the job market, coupled with an aging PSE workforce and deteriorating infrastructure, limit post-secondary institutions’ abilities to meet Canadian economic needs and social expectations. At the moment, there are few means to gauge just how well our PSIs are responding to Canada’s shifting social and economic needs or how post-secondary education in Canada compares with higher education systems in other countries facing similar challenges. Nor are there sufficient data to assess whether Canadians are fully benefitting from the money they and their governments spend on post-secondary education. There is a critical shortage of reliable research on the state of PSE in this country, making it difficult to determine whether PSE effectively prepares Canadians for the challenges and opportunities posed by the knowledge economy, if PSE provides value for money, or how Canada’s PSE system measures up against others elsewhere in the world. Compounding these issues is the fact that, despite widespread agreement that PSE
makes a vital contribution to economic growth and social cohesion, unlike most developed countries, Canada does not have a harmonized set of national objectives and targets for post-secondary education.