Science, technology and innovation (ST&I) drive economic prosperity and fuel advances that improve societal well-being. A sustainable competitive advantage in ST&I is the path to success in the global knowledge-based economy.
Despite ongoing efforts to improve Canada’s lagging business innovation performance, it has continued to deteriorate. Canada has fallen further behind its global competitors on key performance indicators, reflected most tellingly in private-sector investment in research and development (R&D). Canada’s business enterprise expenditures on R&D (BERD) intensity (i.e., BERD as a share of gross domestic product) dropped further between 2006 and 2013, to the point where Canada ranked 26th among international competitors and sat at 36 percent of the threshold of the top five performing countries. Canada’s most profound and urgent ST&I challenge lies in increasing the number of firms that embrace and effectively manage innovation as a competitiveness and growth strategy.
The article examines the changing characteristics of international students in Canada from 1990 to 2013, and their
rate of transition into permanent resident status.
As I write this, the 42nd Parliament has not yet begun sitting and yet the impacts of the new government continue to reverberate.The steady string of announcements since the election appears almost designed specifically to please the university community. Academics – and researchers more generally – seem particularly heartened by the change in tone from the, let’s just say, churlishness of the previous regime.
The new cabinet, sworn in on Nov. 4, includes not just a Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development, but also a Minister of Science, full stop. The day after the swearing in, the new Minister of Science, Kirsty Duncan, tweeted: “Looking forward to restoring science to its rightful place in government!”
On March 12, 2015, the government announced that Ontario would be moving forward with the transformation of its
postsecondary education sector by launching consultations on modernizing the university funding model. The purpose of this
consultation paper is to outline an engagement process and position the review within the context of the government’s overall
plan for postsecondary education. Funding universities in a more quality-driven, sustainable and transparent way is part of the
government’s economic plan for Ontario.
Do you know what the most common electronic device that college student’s possess? According to Joshua Bolkan, a
multimedia editor for Campus Technology and The Journal, “85% of college students own laptops while smartphones
come in second at 65%”. If technology is becoming a common practice among our students, what are we doing as
professors to incorporate it into our classrooms? How can students use technology to reflect on their work? How can
instructors use technology as a supplement in reading and writing courses? How can technology be used to deepen our
student’s critical thinking skills? These are questions we should be asking ourselves in a world where technology is
paving the way to learning.
Le projet Comprendre le concept de force en sciences est né de l’initiative des ministères de l’Éducation de l’Ontario et du Québec dans le cadre d’une entente de collaboration signée par les deux Premiers Ministres de ces provinces concernant le
secteur de l’éducation ainsi que d’autres secteurs d’activité. C’est une étude comparative, de nature collaborative et de type exploratoire, qui s’est déroulée de mai 2007 à mai 2008. Elle pourrait être suivie d’une étude plus approfondie et de plus d’envergure selon l’intérêt des résultats présentés ci-dessous de même que la disponibilité des ressources disponibles.
This report focuses on data comparability of scale scores in the Teaching and Learning nternational Survey (TALIS).
Valid cross-cultural comparisons of TALIS data are vital in providing input for evidence-based policy making and in promoting the equity and effectiveness of teacher policies. For this purpose, an investigation of data comparability is a prerequisite for any meaningful cross-cultural comparison.
TALIS involves a large number of countries and economies, and has used rather strict conventional statistical methods to test comparability. Thus, many scales in TALIS do not reach the level of comparability that allows direct comparisons of scale scores. To facilitate the effective data analysis of TALIS and maximise its policy implications, this project: (1) uses a more flexible statistical method to testcomparability, and (2) investigates the level and sources of scale data incomparability.
In 2008-09, Lakehead University undertook a study to examine the effectiveness of its Gateway program, an academic intervention program offered to a select population of incoming students. The Gateway program at Lakehead is designed for students who exhibit academic potential but who do not meet the traditional entrance requirements of the university at the time of application. The program not only provides access to a university education but also provides support for success. The intentional and holistic programming provided to students admitted through the Gateway program includes special academic support programming and mandatory academic advising.
With the rise in online and hybrid courses at the post-secondary level, many institutions are offering various online learning readiness assessments to students who are considering these instructional formats. Following a discussion of the characteristics often attributed to successful online learners, as well as a review of a sample of the publicly available online readiness surveys, an application of one representative tool is described. Specifically, the Distance Education Aptitude and Readiness Scale was administered in both hybrid and face-to-face sections of beginning post-secondary French across a two-year span. Differences in scores between groups, as well as the relationship between scores and grades are examined.
Elementary and high schools spend so much time on the content-laden curriculum that students are unprepared for the analytic and conceptual thinking they'll need at university
Has Ontario’s educational system taught a decade of students not to think? There is growing evidence that the combination of standardized testing with a content-intensive curriculum that’s too advanced – both introduced by the Conservative government between 1997 and 1999 – has done exactly that.
A dramatic indication that there could be a serious problem was the performance of my introductory physics class on their November test last year. It was identical to one given in 1996, but the class average over this 10-year period had plummeted from 66 to 50 percent. There is about a five-percent fluctuation in this test grade from year to year due to variation in student ability
and the difficulty of the questions but, when I looked at the class average over the many times I have taught the course since 1981, I found that four of the five lowest grades have occurred in the last four years, with the lowest this year. When I enquired elsewhere at Trent University, I found the same pattern in the mathematics department, where the first test in linear algebra was down some 15 percent from its historic mean, and the calculus average had dropped nine percent from the year before.
PowerPoint Presentation
I wrote about how usually, when it’s argued there is an “overproduction” of PhDs, “demand” for doctoral graduates is being implicitly defined by the number of tenure-stream jobs available while “overproduction” usually points to “not enough academic jobs for doctoral graduates.” So how do you define the demand for doctorates when we’re not just talking about faculty jobs anymore? I’d been thinking about this when I saw two recent articles from Brenda Brouwer, President of the Canadian Association for Graduate Studies (CAGS): one in University Affairs titled, “Canada needs more PhDs”—and a similar piece in the Globe and Mail, “Let’s end the myth that PhDs are only suited for the ivory tower”.
Graduate students are assumed to develop skills in oral and written communication and collegial relationships that are complementary to formal graduate programs. However, it appears only a small number of universities provide such professional development opportunities alongside academic programs, and even fewer do so online. There appears to be an assumption in higher education that students develop professional skills by virtue of learning through required academic tasks and having proximity to other students and faculty. Skeptics of online study raise questions about whether graduate students studying online can participate fully in such graduate communities and access these informal professional skill-building opportunities. It is possible that such activities may have to be designed and delivered for online graduate students.
Probing the question of the effectiveness and applicability of outcomes-based funding policy for higher education in Ontario requires an approach that (1) reviews current research and policy literatures on this topic and (2) differentiates and contextualizes the knowledge available. In order to evaluate successful and unsuccessful policy features and institutional practices, it is important to take stock of current policies across varied provincial, state, regional and national contexts, as well as over time. The topic of outcomes-based funding has received considerable and continuing attention in the research and policy literatures, and syntheses of these are currently available (e.g., Dougherty & Reddy, 2011, 2013; Frøhlich, Schmidt & Rosa, 2010; National Conference of State Legislatures, 2013). However, a comprehensive policy-relevant perspective can only be a product of extended study that considers policy contexts internationally and provides an actionable, differentiated view on the research and policy in this area. This study will examine policy and research literature to address the following research questions:
Even if the adjunct movement for better working conditions succeeds, most adjuncts will lose. That’s one bold claim
of a recent paper on the costs associated with a number of the movement’s goals, such as better pay and benefits.
While activists and scholars have been quick to criticize what they call the paper’s inherently flawed logic, the
study’s authors say it is a first step in a more critical dialogue on the adjunct “dilemma.”
Given the ongoing alarm regarding uncontrollable costs of higher education, it would be reasonable to expect not only concern about the impact of MOOCs on educational outcomes, but also systematic efforts to document the resources expended on their development and delivery. However, there is little publicly available information on MOOC costs that is based on rigorous analysis. In this article, we first address what institutional resources are required for the development and delivery of MOOCs, based on interviews conducted with 83 administrators, faculty members, researchers, and other actors in the MOOC space. Subsequently, we use the ingredients method to present cost analyses of MOOC production and delivery at four institutions. We find costs ranging from $38,980 to $325,330 per MOOC, and costs per completer of $74-$272, substantially lower than costs per completer of regular online courses, by merit of scalability. Based on this metric, MOOCs appear more cost-effective than online courses, but we recommend judging MOOCs by impact on learning and caution that they may only be cost-effective for the most self-motivated learners. By demonstrating the methods of cost analysis as applied to MOOCs, we hope that future assessments of the value of MOOCs will combine both cost information and effectiveness data to yield cost-effectiveness ratios that can be compared with the cost-effectiveness of alternative modes of education delivery. Such information will help decision-makers in higher education make rational decisions regarding the most productive use of limited educational resources, to the benefit of both learners and taxpayers.
Here’s a question to ponder in the wee hours of the morning – or right now. How can a government respond to the following societal dynamic?
1. A persistent and growing demand for more availability of public postsecondary education.
2. Fewer public dollars to sustain or grow public postsecondary education, especially in Canada
with the insatiable financial appetite of the health care system.
3. A political imperative to minimize tuition increases.
4. Greater scrutiny and accountability around everything governments and public institutions do.
The Survey of First-Year University Students was co-ordinated by the Department of Housing and Student Life at the University of Manitoba and represents the fourth co-operative study of undergraduate education completed by The Canadian Undergraduate Survey Consortium. The nineteen universities participating in this year’s survey were Acadia University, Brandon University, Carleton University, Concordia University, Dalhousie University, Laurentian University, McMaster
University, Memorial University, Nipissing University, Queens University, Ryerson Polytechnic University, Simon Fraser University, St. Francis Xavier University, University of British Columbia, University of Lethbridge, University of Manitoba, University of Ottawa, University of Waterloo, and Wilfrid Laurier University.
As the global marketplace becomes increasingly competitive and knowledge driven the potential social and economic benefits of education have increased. As a result, the past few decades have witnessed an unprecedented expansion in the demand for post-secondary education (PSE) worldwide.
The Canadian Council on Learning monograph series, Challenges in Canadian Post-secondary Education, was launched in November 2009 as a means of examining the impact of this expansion on the PSE sector.
On June 11, 2008, Prime Minister Stephen Harper issued an apology to the for-mer students of Canada’s Indian residential school system, calling it a “sad chapter in our history.” That chapter is part of a broader story: one in which the Canadian government gained control over Aboriginal land and peoples, disrupted Aboriginal governments and economies, and sought to repress Aboriginal cultures and spiritual practices. The government, often in partnership with the country’s major reli-gious bodies, sought to ‘civilize’ and Christianize, and, ultimately, assimilate Aboriginal people into Canadian society. The deputy minister of Indian Affairs predicted in 1920 that in a century, thanks to the work of these schools, Aboriginal people would cease to exist as an identifiable cultural group in Canada.