Archive for March, 2009

Feds aren’t tracking $300 million per year in aboriginal funding, says report

The Harper government flunks accountability, says a new audit that blasts lax controls over almost $300 million meant to help native students get to college or university.The bruising report calls for tighter tracking of that cash and says funding has not kept pace with tuition hikes.

Ottawa does not trace how many native kids beat staggering odds to make it through high school only to be denied help to go on.

It spent $292 million last year to help 23,000 students — that’s down from a high of 27,000 funding recipients a decade ago.

“No analysis has been conducted by program management at headquarters on the impact these factors are having” on the Post-secondary Education Program, the audit says.

Instead, it has been left to the national Assembly of First Nations to estimate that more than 10,000 qualified students are on waiting lists.

“It is important that clear and appropriate performance measures, results indicators and targets be developed,” the internal Indian Affairs audit concludes.

“Sound performance measures allow management to track progress, measure results and make ongoing program adjustments to improve results and achieve objectives.”

Conservatives hail higher education as a top priority in their efforts to ultimately raise native living standards.

But auditors found the post-secondary program is hobbled by lax reporting, growing education costs and haphazard disbursement. The result is glaring gaps across the country.

In 2007-2008, the audit says, per capita amounts disbursed to First Nations ranged from $1,609 for each individual aged 18 to 34 in Ontario compared with $941 in the Atlantic region.

“No rationale was found to support the different allocation methods used in the different regions,” it says.

Moreover, the per capita amounts do not reflect fluctuating needs on reserves and are considered “flexible.” Auditors found surplus post-secondary funds in some communities are then spent on other needs — while students in other parts of the country go without.

- The Canadian Press

From The Saskatoon StarPhoenix: Wednesday’s provincial budget axed the tuition freeze at post-secondary institutions introduced by the former NDP government in the 2004-05 budget. The province has set a guideline for universities to increase tuition by no more than three per cent, although institutions can exceed this number. Based on average undergraduate tuition at the [...]

From The Saskatoon StarPhoenix:

Wednesday’s provincial budget axed the tuition freeze at post-secondary institutions introduced by the former NDP government in the 2004-05 budget. The province has set a guideline for universities to increase tuition by no more than three per cent, although institutions can exceed this number. Based on average undergraduate tuition at the U of S, a three per cent increase means students will pay anywhere from $131.40 to $205.20 more per year.

He wants higher standards, tougher tests, merit pay for teachers — excellent ideas all. And in Canada, they would get him labeled as a right wing nut.

The US President gave a speech last week that reminds us why it can sometimes be a good idea to put highly educated people into positions of political responsibility. Obama unveiled his plans for American education, laying out a framework for improving educational performance by means of steps that are logical, sensible, evidence-based—and, oh yes, unacceptable to large parts of his own party.

The first clue that the Obama plan makes sense? It’s written in plain English. He did not invoke weasel words or marketing-speak or the “vague, cloudy euphemisms” that Orwell warned against in Politics and the English Language. You may disagree with what Obama said, but you can at least understand it. It is clearly worded because it is based on clear thinking.

And the reason many in his party will disagree with it? Because Obama wants to improve America’s disappointing educational results by raising standards; imposing new and better tests to measure where education is improving and where it is not; rewarding teachers who succeed in improving educational outcomes; and transforming the public school monopoly by allowing the creation of more charter schools, which are basically private-ish magnet schools funded by public money. The whole focus of the plan is on outcomes, namely more students getting more/better educations, with those outcomes objectively measured by tests.

The President also wants to spend more on education—okay, so at least there’s something in there to antagonize Republicans—but the goal is about “ensuring not only that teachers and principals get the funding that they need, but that the money is tied to results.”
“... we will end what has become a race to the bottom in our schools and instead spur a race to the top by encouraging better standards and assessments. Now, this is an area where we are being outpaced by other nations. It’s not that their kids are any smarter than ours — it’s that they are being smarter about how to educate their children. They’re spending less time teaching things that don’t matter, and more time teaching things that do. They’re preparing their students not only for high school or college, but for a career. We are not. Our curriculum for 8th graders is two full years behind top performing countries. That’s a prescription for economic decline. And I refuse to accept that America’s children cannot rise to this challenge. They can, and they must, and they will meet higher standards in our time.

So let’s challenge our states — let’s challenge our states to adopt world-class standards that will bring our curriculums to the 21st century. Today’s system of 50 different sets of benchmarks for academic success means 4th grade readers in Mississippi are scoring nearly 70 points lower than students in Wyoming — and they’re getting the same grade. Eight of our states are setting their standards so low that their students may end up on par with roughly the bottom 40 percent of the world.
That’s inexcusable. That’s why I’m calling on states that are setting their standards far below where they ought to be to stop low-balling expectations for our kids. The solution to low test scores is not lowering standards — it’s tougher, clearer standards.

Living as I do in a province that has no standardized high school leaving exams; where we have no idea what our public education system’s real “outcomes” are or whether they are improving; where an 80% grade at one school is not comparable to an 80% at another; where students enrolled at a public school and receiving unsatisfactory marks can go to private degree mill for a course or two, and pay to get the mark they need; AND have those marks appear on their regular high school transcript; AND apply to university or college using those marks… well, let’s just say that the Obama speech gave me a little frisson of…. hey, what was that? Ah yes: the man calls it “hope.”

Yes, he does believe in evolution. So what was that Globe story about, exactly?

There was something more than a bit weird about today’s front-page Globe and Mail story, in which the reporter for some reason asked Gary Goodyear, the federal minister of science, whether he believes in evolution.

I don’t know the context of the question, but let’s give the Globe the benefit of the doubt: maybe this was something worth asking. In any case, Goodyear gave a non-committal answer (albeit not a particularly politically astute one, since he for some reason chose to raise the fact that he’s a Christian). Now, remember that most answers given by most politicians most of the time are non-committal, precisely because they have become justifiably paranoid about falling prey to a gotcha moment. Anyhow, the Globe took Mr. Goodyear’s response and decided to run with the following headline: “Minister won’t confirm belief in evolution.”

In the first sentence of the story, the reporter suggests a link between federal cuts to science funding and the minister’s alleged uneasiness with evolution/science. The two are connected? Really? Based on what evidence? Has anyone ever credibly alleged that any of the various increases and decreases in research and post-secondary funding under the Tories have been caused by a minister’s or the Cabinet’s religiously-motivated antipathy to science? The lead of the story reads, “Canada’s science minister, the man at the centre of the controversy over federal funding cuts to researchers, won’t say if he believes in evolution.” And the story continues trying to mine the tories-cut-research-funding-because-they-are-religious-troglodytes vein: “A funding crunch, exacerbated by cuts in the January budget, has left many senior researchers across the county scrambling to find the money to continue their experiments. Some have expressed concern that Mr. Goodyear, a chiropractor from Cambridge, Ont., is suspicious of science, perhaps because he is a creationist.”

Later in the story, two members of the academy go on to express their concerns about Goodyear’s alleged creationism. But unless I’m missing something, the “concern” that has been “expressed ” about Mr. Goodyear being “suspicious” of science was not expressed until yesterday, when the Globe speed dialed two people, told them the minister might not believe in evolution—and asked them if this discovery raised any “concern” that they might like to “express.” It’s like the old joke about journalism: reporter calls up subject, says “would you say this is an outrage?” Subject begins answering question. Reporter interrupts, says, “no, I mean, would you please say, ‘this is an outrage.’”

And what are we to make of this phrase from the Globe: “… Mr. Goodyear, a chiropractor from Cambridge, Ont., is suspicious of science, perhaps because he is a creationist.” I’m not sure if the phrasing is sloppy or deliberate; read as written, The Globe is saying that Goodyear is a creationist. (Whatever exactly that means.) The “perhaps” is not hedging the possibility that he might not be a creationist, but is rather equivocating on the source of his alleged suspicion of science. Is he suspicious of science because he is a creationist—or could there be some other source of this man’s antipathy to the modern world, which incidentally is connected to his government’s cuts to science funding? Inquiring minds want to know.

Anyhow, today the minister told CTV that “of course” he believes in evolution.

And so the news cycle turns. Moving on.

Carleton continues dynasty

Stuart Turnbull scored 22 points as the top-ranked Carleton Ravens defeated the No. 3 UBC Thunderbirds 87-77 Sunday to capture the 2009 Canadian interuniversity sport men’s basketball title.

Turnbull earned tournament MVP honours while Chris Dyck topped UBC with 21 points.

Dyck was named game MVP for UBC, while Rob Saunders collected the award for Carleton, largely for his play in defending Dyck.

“I just tried to be there every time he caught it, and when I wasn’t, my teammates were,” said Saunders. “They stepped in, took charges, made him pass to his other teammates and just made it tough for him.”

For his part, Dyck was disappointed in the loss but proud that the Thunderbirds had done better than most expected.

“No one expected us to be here. Everyone expected us to exit in the first round,” said Dyck. “We’re proud of what we were able to do this weekend. It’s an honour to be able to play in the national finals in your fifth year, and I’m just proud of my teammates.”

The Ravens, making their sixth appearance in the final in the past seven years, captured their sixth national championship in front of a sea of red and black at Scotiabank Place.

For Ravens’ coach Dave Smart, there was some satisfaction in showing that the Ravens could win with the players they had.

“It’s a great bunch of guys,” said Smart. “I mean they’ve lost two games in two years and last year we lost a double-overtime game. Everybody seemed to question if we could win it without Os (Osvaldo Jeanty). I’m thrilled for Rob (Saunders), Aaron (Doornekamp) and Stu (Turnbull) because they got it done.”

Dyck scored 17 first-half points for the second straight day. He was 6-of-10 from the floor, including 4-of-5 from beyond the arc in the opening 20 minutes, and scored the T-Birds’ last 12 points of the half as UBC held off the Ravens’ comeback.

Dyck’s fourth three-pointer of the half sent UBC ahead 37-32 with 90 seconds left on the clock but Carleton made it a one-point affair at the intermission thanks to a bucket and a free throw by Thompson and Kyle Smendziuk’s 1-for-2 effort from the foul-line.

Saunders was the Ravens’ leading scorer at the break with 12 points.

McCleery gave the locals their first lead of the afternoon on the Ravens’ first possession of the second half, part of an 8-0 Carleton run to open the third quarter.

The Ravens, who held Dyck scoreless in the third, remained ahead the entire quarter and took a 55-48 lead into the final frame thanks to a Turnbull three-pointer with five seconds left.

Thompson hit a three-pointer of his own to start the fourth, opening a 10-point cushion for the hosts. He struck again from beyond the arc one minute later and all of a sudden Carleton enjoyed a 13-point advantage, at 63-50, with eight minutes remaining in regulation.

Whyte brought UBC back to within seven with a basket and a foul shot with 3:08 left, at 73-66, but the ‘Birds wouldn’t get any closer.

The Ravens almost didn’t make it into the final, needing a shot at the buzzer to edge Western Ontario Mustangs 66-65 in a thrilling semifinal Saturday.

The Thunderbirds advanced to the final after defeating No. 2-ranked University of Calgary 79-74.

UBC was making its 17th appearance in the final. Their last title was in 1972.

Coach Kevin Hanson said following the game that getting an early lead on Carleton seems to be virtually “the kiss of death.”

“These games always come down to the fourth quarter and being mentally tough,” said Hanson. “Their defence picked up and we just couldn’t match their intensity, they got loose balls.

“It’s a great game for us to play. You wish you could play more of these along the way to make you better to see what it takes to play at this level, to win the national title.”

Earlier Sunday, Dax Dessureault had 22 points and 13 rebounds in his final university game as No. 5-seeded Ottawa beat No. 7 Concordia 83-76 in the consolation final. Damian Buckley had 17 points and three assists for the Stingers.

Attendance for the three-day tournament was announced as 73,126. This was the second of three consecutive years in which Carleton University will be hosting the tournament.

- The Canadian Press

A controversial scheme that’s more common than universities admit

At first glance, Denis Rancourt is a self-proclaimed anarchist with a history of causing trouble. Over the past five years, the University of Ottawa professor has unsuccessfully sued his employer for millions of dollars over a cancelled course, claimed that the school’s president is part of a continental Zionist conspiracy, taught a controversial activism course, and denied the existence of climate change. But that’s not why the university says it’s firing him.

In a move that’s becoming increasingly popular in post-secondary education, Rancourt decided last year not to grade his students—something that has fuelled a wide-ranging debate not only about his methods but also over academic freedom. And the outcome of his dismissal, which is pending, could change the balance of power between professors and university administrations across the country.

A native of North Bay, Ont., Rancourt has taught at the University of Ottawa for more than 20 years. Colleagues consider him a highly regarded physicist; Rancourt has published more than 100 scientific journal articles. But like a growing number of Canadian university professors, he also believes students learn better when they’re not being graded. In 2008, he was denied permission to make his two fourth-year physics classes “pass-fail,” in which students either get through or they don’t. So he announced that everyone in the classroom was going to get an A+.

According to Rancourt, grades are only a means of exercising power in the classroom. “It’s not about optimizing education,” he says, “it’s about obedience.”

The school promptly suspended him, locked him out of his laboratory, and told his graduate students to find new supervisors. (Three of those students are now suing the university for taking away the professor who they say is the only person qualified to oversee their studies.) The university administration also banned him from campus and, in a rare move toward a tenured professor, recommended his dismissal. Two weeks later, while hosting his monthly radical documentary series at the school, Rancourt was arrested by police and charged with trespassing.

The university’s treatment of Rancourt shocked David Noble, a York University professor who says he hasn’t given grades for more than 35 years. For most of his teaching career he gave out straight As—until, in 2006, the university prevailed on him to switch to pass-fail. For decades, he got letters from the university remarking on his “anomalous” grades. “I would usually just throw the letters away,” Noble says. “Nothing ever happened.” Based on decades of educational research, including some of his own as a graduate student, he says there’s no doubt that grades are counterproductive.

In fact, the practice of not marking students is becoming increasingly popular, says Carl Leggo, an education professor at the University of British Columbia. In recent years there has been some “compelling research” proving that students are more creative and more productive when grades are removed. Leggo says courses for UBC’s bachelor of education degree, in addition to many other courses at the university, are pass-fail for the simple reason that students learn better. “Evaluation keeps people feeling quite conservative, and they want to do things in formulaic, traditional ways,” he says. “When the competition for grades and the tension around grades is removed, students actually start studying, researching and writing in more creative ways.” (According to a 2006 study of medical students at the Mayo Medical School, pass-fail systems reduce stress levels and increase group cohesion when compared with students who were given grades on a five-point scale.)

Not only are undergraduate pass-fail courses becoming more common in the face of extensive educational research, but the Stanford, Yale and Berkeley law schools have all recently moved to pass-fail grading systems. Alverno College, a Catholic women’s school in Milwaukee, Wis., hasn’t used grades since 1973. Kathleen O’Brien, the school’s senior vice-president for academic affairs, says the system has been infinitely better for students’ education, self-esteem and long-term prospects. The school will produce grades for graduate school or scholarship applications, but they are then promptly destroyed.

It’s a trend that others, though, find appalling. The idea that a student in a science faculty could earn an A+ without demonstrating knowledge is shocking to John Jones, associate dean of Simon Fraser University’s faculty of applied science. “Our graduates are going to be going out and doing things that human lives depend on. It’s very important that our grading reflects their abilities,” says Jones. Plus, he adds, it wouldn’t just be unconventional, it would be a danger to the public. Marks are not necessarily the best way to judge the skills and talents of each student, he says, “but we can’t build a system on wishful grading.”

Professor Gary Schajer agrees. He’s been an undergraduate adviser for aspiring mechanical engineers at the University of British Columbia for six years, and says the controversy around marks is an old one. In many cases, grades do impede learning, says Schajer. However, they are also the fastest and most effective way to evaluate students’ skills and knowledge, he says. “This is a tightrope all professors have to walk, but that is the unfortunate reality of the world.”

Rancourt and his supporters have opened up another front in the debate, saying that the University of Ottawa’s actions are as much an attack on academic freedom as teaching methods. That argument was dismissed in the New York Times on Feb. 8 by American education expert and law professor Stanley Fish. Rancourt, Fish wrote, was trying “to turn serial irresponsibility into a form of heroism under the banner of academic freedom.” But the Canadian Association of University Teachers has nevertheless struck a committee of inquiry to investigate the case. “Here’s a tenured, full professor, one of the most respected physicists and active researchers at his university, who’s being told he’s not allowed to teach,” says Jim Turk, executive director of the association. “This is an extraordinary situation. The complexity of the issues are so great that we felt we had to set up an independent committee of inquiry to untangle this mess.”

Results from the group, which includes Jeffrey Halpern, one of the leading authorities on academic freedom in North America, are not expected before the end of 2009. But Noble says the real issues behind Rancourt’s dismissal are clear: not just academic freedom but tenure, which is earned after decades of teaching and assessment and provides relatively ironclad job security, are under direct threat. “This has nothing to do with grades,” says Noble. “That’s not why the university is firing Denis Rancourt. They want to see if they can get away with firing tenured professors without cause. For them to send security to escort Rancourt off the campus, as if he were a menace who was running around giving everyone A’s, it’s surreal.”

The University of Ottawa has kept relatively quiet about the case, issuing a press release only after it made headlines. The school’s administration expressed concern that the credibility of marks at the entire institution was being thrown into doubt, which would affect scholarships, admission to graduate programs and ultimately the reputations of both students and the school. The university also said a “significant number of faculty colleagues had voiced concerns” regarding Rancourt’s conduct.

Citing confidentiality and legal obligations, the university has declined further comment. But nearly one-third of Rancourt’s colleagues at the school have signed a petition of complaint against him. For many other professors, including Patrick Deneen, associate professor of government at Washington’s Georgetown University, Rancourt’s actions are nothing more than a blatant abuse of academic freedom. After reading Fish’s article, he was outraged a professor would try to corral students into a movement to undermine the institution and then claim it as an academic right. “It seems to me that what he is doing is actually, ultimately, undermining academic freedom,” says Deneen, adding that he can’t think of any other professions where Rancourt’s actions would be tolerated. “It seems fine to me if you want to denounce the institution, but doing that while taking advantage of all of its rewards seems to me to be a bit of a callous and ungrateful thing.”

The final decision on Rancourt is expected from an executive committee of the university’s board of governors later this month, after one final off-the-record mediation session with the administration on March 17. If he is fired, Leggo says the decision will definitely have a chilling effect on professors who want to try cutting-edge approaches in the classroom. “We have a sense of fear that we can’t actually do what many of us feel we have been called and employed to do, which is to be contemporary professors.” If Rancourt manages to keep his post, radical anarchist professors can breathe a sigh of relief.

I’m trapped in Midterm Limbo. Two weeks ago it was physics. Last week was health. Yesterday I had a chemistry midterm, and next week is religious studies. I’m surrounded by tests. I’m stuck in that special kind of inertia where reading another chapter of my textbook is the last thing I want to do, but [...]

I’m trapped in Midterm Limbo.

Two weeks ago it was physics. Last week was health. Yesterday I had a chemistry midterm, and next week is religious studies.

I’m surrounded by tests.

I’m stuck in that special kind of inertia where reading another chapter of my textbook is the last thing I want to do, but I’d feel too guilty to play my Nintendo DS, or read anything even remotely interesting.

I keep telling myself that a month from now, classes will be over. There won’t be any more labs, assignments, tutorials, or quizzes. Midterms will be a thing of the past.

But a month is sooooooooooooooooooooo long.

Cites “financial constraint,” need to “deploy our teaching resources effectively”

Citing the economic downturn, the administration at the University of Waterloo is discouraging professors from teaching classes of 10 or fewer students:

A memo from provost Amit Chakma this week tells faculty members that UW is taking steps to discourage small classes — those with fewer than 10 students — at the undergraduate level.

Says the provost: “As always, but particularly in these times of financial constraint, it is important that we deploy our teaching resources efficiently and effectively. At the University of Waterloo, approximately 10 per cent of the undergraduate courses taught in any academic year have 10 or fewer students. While there may be unusual circumstances where small classes are unavoidable, it should not be a regular occurrence in an undergraduate program.

“To that end, on February 4, 2009 Deans’ Council endorsed the following: ‘Beginning fall 2009, undergraduate courses of 10 or fewer students will not be counted in the teaching load of any faculty member.’

“It is understood that there may be a short transition period where some small classes are offered while adjustments to programs, curricula and practices are implemented. However, the objective is that by the end of 2009 those adjustments will be made, and in 2010 and beyond offering undergraduate courses with 10 or fewer students will be unusual.”

PEI has largest full-time enrolment growth, New Brunswick has largest decline

Statistics Canada has released its 2006/07 university enrolment counts. The total enrolment at universities across Canada was 1,057,300 in 2006/07, up 0.9% from 1,047,705 in the previous year.

Full-time registrations declined in New Brunswick (-4.8%), Newfoundland and Labrador (-3.0%), British Columbia (-2.4%), Nova Scotia (-2.1%), and Alberta (-0.7%). The number of full-time registrations rose in four provinces: Prince Edward Island (+3.3%), Ontario (+2.7%), Manitoba (+1.2%), and Quebec (+0.8%). The trend for Saskatchewan is not provided because data from the University of Regina was unavailable.

The figures below plot university enrolment levels (full-time, part-time, and totals) in Canada and Newfoundland and Labrador over a 15-year period starting from 1992/93.

“Business-related” research gets priority over social work, health and education

The federal government is willingly abandoning social sciences and the humanities in favour of business-related research, which could have devastating effects on thousands of students and academics across the country, according the NDP’s post-secondary education critic.

“Scholarships granted by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) will be focused on business-related degrees,” reads one line in the Jan. 27 Conservative budget. That’s a statement that has Niki Ashton, the member of Parliament for Churchill, Manitoba, up in arms.

“This is not just an attack on future research, but an attack on research that is actually taking place,” says Ashton. “That the government is stipulating where money from a peer-reviewed, independent research council ought to be spent is wrong.”

When the budget was first released, Ashton says she initially overlooked the detail. However, since starting a petition on her constituency website, she says she has been approached by an “overwhelming” number of academics and students who are concerned what the move will mean for their research in fields including literacy, poverty reduction, education and health care.

So far the petition has gathered more than 17,000 signatures.

The NDP has attacked the decision to direct funds to business-related research as an “abdication” of the goals of the research council and the ideals of a “well-rounded society.”

“This recession will end,” says Ashton, who received a SSHRC grant while studying political economy at Carleton University. “We’re not saying that business doesn’t deserve support, but that this isn’t the way to go about doing it. There should be broad investment in all types of research.”

At a time when the new American administration is putting big money into research, she says it’s an embarrassing choice of words on the part of the feds, but is also setting a dangerous precedent that could give the government of the day an ability to direct funding to disciplines with more political clout.

“We don’t think this is the way to go for Canada,” says Ashton. “It’s only one sentence, but it’s one sentence that says so much.”