This paper explores general issues relating to globalization and higher education; the internationalization of higher education, and particularly the recruitment of international students. This subject is examined through a range of topics around the global development of the market approach to the recruitment of international students and a focus on the current situation regarding the recruitment of international students in the Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology in Ontario (CAATs). As the number of international students seeking educational opportunities grows to 7 million over the next 20 years, the ability of the CAATs, the
Canadian educational system, and the governments of Ontario and Canada to market the welcoming and safe multicultural Canadian experience, and the excellence of the educational offerings and opportunities in CAATs to potential international students will, in great measure, determine their success and their survival in an increasingly globalized world.
New research at the University of Warwick demonstrates two shortcomings with the current benchmarking of internationalisation: they are based purely on structural measures and they use a simple bi-polar distinction between home and international students. There are several dangers in relying on these measures:
Structural internationalisation ≠ Student satisfaction: Latest research shows that in the UK, the
lower the proportion of UK students, the less satisfied students of all backgrounds are. This does
not mean that structural internationalisation should be avoided; on the contrary, students
appreciate the value of an 'internationalisation' experience, so what we need is an
agenda for integration.
PEQAB Handbook for Ontario Colleges, 2014 – Capacity to Deliver Standard │ Benchmarks 7 – 11
Faculty credentials required for degree program
Even as the economy has at last begun to expand at a more rapid pace, growth in wages and benefits for most American workers has continued its decades-long stagnation. Real hourly wages of the median American worker were just 5 percent higher in 2013 than they were
in 1979, while the wages of the bottom decile of earners were 5 percent lower in 2013 than
in 1979.1 Trends since the early 2000s are even more pronounced. Inflation-adjusted wage growth from 2003 to 2013 was either flat or negative for the entire bottom 70 percent of the wage distribution.2 Compounding the problem of stagnating wages is the decline in employer-provided health insurance, with the share of non-elderly Americans receiving insurance from an employer falling from 67 percent in 2003 to 58.4 percent in 2013.
Background: Low community college completion rates are an area of concern for policymakers and practitioners. Although many students require developmental education upon entry, research suggests that even students who are deemed “college-ready” by virtue of their placement test scores or completion of developmental coursework may not earn a credential, suggesting that college readiness encompasses more than academic skill.
The increases in tuition and fee prices in 2015-16 were, like the increases in the two preceding years, relatively small by historical standards. However, the very low rate of general inflation makes this year’s increases in college prices larger in real terms than those of 2014-15 and 2013-14. Significantly, and perhaps counter to public impressions, price increases are not accelerating over time. However, the average published tuition and fee price of a full-time year at a public four-year institution is 40% higher, after adjusting for inflation, in 2015-16 than it was in 2005-06.The average published price is 29%
higher in the public two-year sector and 26% higher in the private nonprofit four-year sector than a decade ago.
Universities will have to prepare students for multiple career changes and a longer working life if they are to contribute to reducing the global inequality that is a major focus of this week’s discussion at the World Economic Forum in Davos, says the principal of McGill University.
In the span of a week, the future of three Alberta colleges was set. On February 22, Minister of Advanced Education Marlin Schmidt announced that Grande Prairie Regional College (GPRC) had been approved for degree-granting status, with a view to becoming a university. On March
1, Premier Rachel Notley appeared at an event to announce that Red Deer College (RDC)
also had been approved to grant its own degrees. That same day, the education minister again
went before the cameras to confirm that the Alberta College of Art + Design (ACAD) had
achieved university status.
Background: In the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, in 2012, state legislatures considered a flurry of legislation that would allow school districts to arm their teachers. In at least 15 states such legislation has been signed into law. Parallel to these developments, a lively and at times strident public debate on the
appropriateness of arming public school teachers has emerged in the media, especially as a result of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in February 2018. Although the two sides of the debate offer illuminating insights into the pitfalls and promises of arming teachers, both tend to focus almost exclusively on the empirical issue of student safety. As a
result, the public debate fails to address several central ethical issues associated with arming public school teachers. This article is an effort to pay these issues their due attention.
Purpose: Barriers to simulation-based education in postgraduate and continuing education for anesthesiologists have not
been well studied. We hypothesized that the level of training may influence attitudes towards simulation-based education
and impact on the use of simulation. This study investigated this issue at the University of Toronto which possesses two sites
equipped with high-fidelity patient simulators.
Scrutiny: students’ attention to performance measures ‘plays to the UK’s strengths’
Chinese students have an increasingly “open attitude” when applying to university, with many now focusing on institutions’ teaching quality and student satisfaction scores, according to the director of the British Council in China.
Carma Elliot said that there had “traditionally been a strong preference among Chinese students for ‘elite’institutions, but there was now a more open attitude to the widest range of options available”.
Big Data and Analytics1 are under pressure. Bold promises have been made: exceptional customer insights; better decision-making; improved productivity and performance; and product and service innovation. Positive public and social outcomes have been proposed: improved health care, social services, public safety, and infrastructure; and strengthened research and development, commercialization, and economic growth. Now, it’s time to deliver.
Dear Students: I think it’s time we had the talk. You know, the one couples who’ve been together for a while ometimes have to review boundaries and expectations? Your generation calls this "DTR" — short for "defining the elationship."
We definitely need to define our relationship because, first of all, it is a long-term relationship — maybe not between ou and me, specifically, but between people like you (students) and people like me (professors). And, second, it ppears to need some defining, or redefining. I used to think the boundaries and expectations were clear on both sides, but that no longer seems to be the case.
The primary objectives of the Pan-Canadian Education Indicators Program (PCEIP) are to develop and maintain a set of statistics that provide information about education and learning in Canada and to support evidence-based policy making. PCEIP has been doing this since publishing its first set of education indicators for Canada and its jurisdictions in 1996. In September 2009, a set of international indicators was introduced in the first edition of Education Indicators in Canada: An International Perspective. Each year, this PCEIP series presents indicators for Canada and its provinces/territories, placing them in a broader international context. The report has been designed to complement and expand upon the information for Canada that is provided annually to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) for publication in its Education at a Glance (EAG) report. The international context provided by the report supports the mission of the Canadian Education Statistics Council (CESC) to “create and commit to comprehensive and long-term strategies, plans, and programs to collect, analyze, and disseminate nationally and internationally policy-relevant and comparable statistical information.”
Why does the federal government subsidize postsecondary education?
There are numerous positive externalities associated with high-quality postsecondary education. As a result, markets will likely produce less than is socially optimal. Consider that an important goal of postsecondary institutions is to train students and thus create a high-quality workforce. Much of the benefit of this training will be captured by the students themselves through higher earnings over their lifetime. Some of this benefit, however, will spill over to the larger society through improved long-term economic growth, lower unemployment and increased productivity, as well as greater equity and economic mobility.
Each year the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance releases its Habitats project: a series of case studies on municipal-level issues affecingundergraduate students. These case studies are written by OUSA campus researcher from our member institutions.
While we want to instil discipline and responsibility in our students, there is also pedagogical value in compassion.
It’s that time of year again, when panicked students start asking for extensions. They will send desperate emails and come knocking with trepidation on our office doors. They will arrive with excuses and cite extenuating circumstances, and faculty far and wide will have to make tough decisions about whether or not to accept late work.
Building on an earlier 2008 summary prepared for OECD by Marlene Scardamalia and Carl Bereiter, this paper by Gesa S. E. van den Broek provides a more extensive discussion of approaches described as “research based innovation.” Fostering Communities of Learning is a constructivist approach in which teachers help students discover important curricular concepts. Learning by Design is an inquiry-based science learning programme based on case-based reasoning models. Central Conceptual Structures (CCS) theory describes developmental changes in children’s thinking and what is needed to progress through stages in specific cognitive domains. Web-based Inquiry Science Environment (WISE) is an internet-based adaptive learning environment building on the principles of knowledge integration. Cognitive Tutors and ACT-R theory are intelligent adaptive software programmes that provide students with scaffolded instruction and feedback. Direct Instruction aims to accelerate learning through clear scripted direct instruction by the teacher and scaffolded practice aimed at student involvement and error reduction. Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) is for disadvantaged students especially to engage in Socratic dialogues about ideas and strategies to solve computer game-based problems. Knowledge Building is a constructivist teaching approach centred on building knowledge and creating knowledge communities.
RÉSUMÉ
Ontario’s colleges are eager to partner with the Government of Ontario to expand college capacity by at least 10 percent and double the number of apprentices over the next five years. Assuming that Government will continue to fund enrolment growth, colleges are fully prepared to improve access to applied education and increase enrolment levels. Ontario’s colleges are also committed to working with the Government of Ontario to improve the quality of applied education and to make postsecondary
education more affordable.
According to Beghetto, there are three major perspectives for including creativity in the classroom. The first is the “radical change” view that requires entirely rethinking the goals of the K–12 curriculum and the ways in which teachers teach. The second approach, the “additive change,” incorporates “extra” or “new” creativity activities to the current curriculum. Finally,
the third perspective, which the author argues for and illustrates in this book, is the “slight change” one. More specifically, the goal of the book is to show that teachers do not have to make radical changes in their present academic responsibilities to incorporate creativity in their classrooms; instead, “teachers [can] develop an understanding of the role of creativity in the
classroom, common challenges that get in the way of including creativity in one’s classroom, and practical insights for addressing those challenges in the context of one’s everyday teaching” (p. xii).