All Posts Tagged With: "funding"
Funding cut and tuition to rise in Nova Scotia
Presidents and student groups complain
Nova Scotia flag by Makaristos/Wikimedia
University presidents and student groups in Nova Scotia are angry about a new three-year funding agreement that includes a three per cent funding cut and a three per cent tuition rise, which is roughly equivalent to annual inflation.
After a four per cent cut last year, plus inflation, there is now a $75-million hole in budgets system-wide, John Harker, chairman of the Council of Nova Scotia University Presidents and president of Cape Breton University told the Chronicle Herald.
The Nova Scotia chapter of the Canadian Federation of Students called the agreement “disappointing.” In a release, chair Maxime Audet said this: “tuition fee increases coupled with reductions in government funding means students in Nova Scotia will be paying more and getting less.”
Continue reading Funding cut and tuition to rise in Nova Scotia
How parental income can kill your student loans
Parents are expected to pay. But what if they can’t or won’t?
Photo by kenteegardin on Flickr
University of New Brunswick student Ben Whitney has a $5,000 hole in his budget this year thanks to the re-introduction of the parental contribution requirement for student loan funding in that province. He was loaned $8,000 last year, before the change. This year, the third-year student got just $3,000 because of what his parents—a middle manager and a secretary—took home last year from work. The 20-year-old’s parents are expected to make-up the difference. It’s money that Whitney says his parents don’t have this year.
But the issue of parental contributions, which he’s taken up with verve, means a lot more to him than sudden penury. “It’s also a matter of principle,” says Whitney. “As an adult, I shouldn’t have to depend on my parents until I’m 22,” he says. “It’s also a matter of pride to have to call my parents and ask, can you send me $20 so I can buy a bottle of shampoo?” he says. But he can’t afford such luxuries otherwise, even with a part-time job.
Continue reading How parental income can kill your student loans
Talks end between Confucius Institutes and U Manitoba
Academics debate whether to accept Chinese cash
Photo courtesy of IvanWalsh.com on Flickr
When he first heard from a university administrator about a new Confucius Institute (CI) proposed at the University of Manitoba, Asian Studies professor Terry Russell asked for a meeting with the dean in charge. At that meeting, he asked her to carefully consider who was offering to pay for it. The money would come from the Hanban, an arm of the Chinese government that’s chaired by the minister of education. That’s the same government, as Russell put it, that jailed Nobel-prize winner Liu Xiaobo for 11 years, the same government who took the University of Calgary to task after it gave the Dalai Lama an honourary degree, and the same government that employs 50,000 citizens to scour the Internet in search of dissent. Russell says that Canadian universities shouldn’t take money from an education ministry that does such things.
Less than six months later, the university has announced that it will join a short-but-growing list of institutions that have decided against taking Chinese government money to set up CIs on campus. The university’s spokesman, John Danakas, says that “overtures were made” by Confucius Institutes earlier this year, but that “conversations have ended… for logistical reasons.” Pennsylvania State University, the University of British Columbia and the Republic of India, have also decided against CIs on campus.
But in the same month that Manitoba declined funding from China, the University of Regina and Brock University both inaugurated their new Confucius Institutes, bringing the total number at Canadian post-secondary schools to eight. More than 320 exist worldwide. China says that the funding of CIs—$150,000 initially and up to $200,000 per year after that— is meant to promote cultural understanding. But along with the money, schools, including Brock, have signed constitutions that says that “institute activities must … respect cultural customs, and shall not contravene concerning laws and regulations in Canada and China.”
Quite what that means is open to interpretation.
Russell says that means employees will feel dissuaded from mentioning Taiwan, Tibet independence, Falun Gong, or the Tiananmen Square massacre. If that’s true, the result could be an unrealistically positive view of China among the students who pass through the free language and history courses that they offer on Canadian campuses. He goes even further than that. “They’re nothing more than a propaganda and public relations exercise within the legitimizing framework of a university,” he says.
Sheila Young, Director of Brock International, takes the opposite view of their new CI. There isn’t any propaganda, she argues, but instead a fantastic opportunity for academic exchange with the world’s next superpower. “We’re in complete control of the curriculum and always have been, always will be,” says Young. The Chinese government offered to provide textbooks to them during at the Confucius Institutes Conference that she and other administrators attended in Beijing in December, but Brock has not decided which materials it will use. “Nothing has been shipped to us, where they said, ‘here these are prescribed texts,’” says Young.
Young stresses that the CI will allow them to offer many more Mandarin courses than they would be able to otherwise, plus teacher-training certification and possibly Chinese history and political science courses in the future. “There are a lot of cutbacks in the economy we’re in now,” says Young. “So the idea of getting some funding to teach in an area that hasn’t been taught [in] before is appealing.”
Think your tuition bill is too high? Check out the government’s
Most university funding doesn’t come from students
Photo courtesy of Duckie Monster on Flickr
In South Korea, post-secondary students are demanding that the government pay a bigger share of the bill for higher education. Their government spends around $7,000 per student per year, while students pay an average of $8,000 in tuition fees. The protesters think the government should bring funding in line with the OECD-average spending — $10,000 per pupil in 2006-07.
That’s a modest request, considering how much Canadian governments spend. On average, it was over $20,000 per student in 2007, making our universities the second-most publicly-funded in the 31-member OECD. Funding per student was just behind Switzerland (the highest in the world), a third ahead of the U.S. and more than double the rich-country average. (For more, see page 237 of this OECD report.)
The debate about how costs should be split isn’t new to Canadians. There have always people who believe post-secondary education is a public good, so the state should foot the entire tab for everyone. On the other extreme, there have always been people who argue that a degree primarily benefits the person who takes it, so that person should cover most of the costs.
But do students realize how little of universities’ total budgets are funded by tuition?
Statistics Canada data show that nationwide tuition fees make up roughly 20 per cent of universities’ revenue, while federal and provincial transfers make up 55 per cent.
So the next time you pay that $5,000 tuition bill, consider that the taxpayers likely kicked in around $20,000 toward the school’s budget. Then ask yourself: Is this really such a bad deal?
Here are the numbers from 2009.
| Source: Statistics Canada | Canada | N.L. | P.E.I. | N.S. | N.B. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total revenue | 37,441,581,000 | 613,274,000 | 171,382,000 | 1,189,594,000 | 624,295,000 |
| Own source revenue | 44.8 | 31.9 | 47.2 | 57.1 | 47.0 |
| Sales of goods and services | 34.4 | 26.7 | 41.1 | 47.4 | 36.1 |
| Tuition fees | 20.5 | 13.9 | 23.2 | 29.9 | 27.2 |
| Other sales of goods and services | 13.9 | 12.8 | 17.9 | 17.5 | 9.0 |
| Investment income | 2.9 | 0.7 | 1.4 | 3.1 | 3.5 |
| Other own-source revenue | 7.4 | 4.5 | 4.7 | 6.6 | 7.3 |
| Government transfers | 55.2 | 68.1 | 52.8 | 42.9 | 53.0 |
| Federal | 9.0 | 11.8 | 11.7 | 9.2 | 7.9 |
| Provincial | 46.1 | 56.1 | 41.0 | 33.7 | 45.1 |
| Local | 0.1 | 0.1 | .. | 0.0 | 0.0 |
N.B. universities to get 4-year funding deal
Province says plan will make paying tuition more predictable
New Brunswick’s public universities will move to a four-year funding model, the province announced on Friday. Although the plan is still in development, Post-Secondary Education, Training and Labour Minister Martine Coloumbe says the plan will allow universities to communicate a long term tuition schedule. “This commitment to develop a four-year funding model will provide public universities with a predictable funding base to plan their activities over a longer period of time,” he said. Dennis Cochrane, president of St Thomas University, says he wants to see a broader arrangement reached with the government that goes beyond funding models. “I think everyone recognizes there are so many things in the post-secondary education area that are changing,” he told CBC. Details for the plan will be released with the budget in March.
McMaster’s secret sponsor
Team of researchers convert skin cells into blood cells
Save Grade 2! Fire cops!
Not everything can be a priority. By definition.
Nova Scotia teachers have a clever new campaign (sorry, “movement”) called Save Grade 2 which aims to convince the provincial government — cash-strapped due to naughty previous government, they say — from cutting funding for public education.
The clever part is where they say that expected cuts will result in choices that any right-minded citizen could not endure — like cutting a whole grade level from the system. Not that Grade 2 is actually in jeopardy, but the point is that educators should not have to face these “impossible choices.”
Fair enough. But couldn’t just about every government-funded program and service say something similar? Education, an earnest fellow in the video there tells us, should be a “top priority,” but on top of what? Health care? The Court System? Fire departments? Couldn’t those groups put up similar sites saying that they too are too important to mess with? Save the Emergency Room! Save Justice! Save Your House! Aren’t these all impossible choices?
I have no problem when people with vested interests argue that what they do is important and shouldn’t be cut. But when they do, they should have the guts to say what should be cut. If you don’t want to see public education cut, what do you want? Higher taxes? On what? Cuts somewhere else? Where? Or do you think we have the money after all? Explain.
Roger Martin over at The Walrus (which, interestingly enough has its own Save the Walrus campaign) recently argued that education had been neglected because, in effect, we have been spending too much on health care. Good for him. I hope the folks at Save Grade 2 can muster the same level of courage.
Who asked students?
The ‘Big 5′ debate in review
When the presidents of what have been named the “Big 5” schools — the University of Toronto, University of British Columbia, McGill University, University of Alberta and Université de Montréal — met via video conference with Maclean’s Paul Wells this summer, what they had to say was sure to ignite some buzz in the academic sphere.
Though some smaller schools are up in arms about the thought of losing their place in competitive Canadian research, as the ‘Big 5′ presidents propose, perhaps by creating these research-intensive graduate schools, a new focus on undergraduate learning that would directly benefit students is a worthwhile flipside.
Most recently, a book funded by the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario, Academic Transformation: The Forces Reshaping Higher Education argues that undergraduate education is in need of an overhaul. The authors argue several points, the concept of focusing on teaching and not research for undergraduate faculty needs to become the new norm ties into the ‘Big 5’ proposal.
Despite the fact no one has actually asked the students what their take is, it’s fairly easy to say students would not be opposed to smaller class sizes, where professors are accessible and solely focused on their learning. After all, it’s their tuition dollars that go towards funding these research-based programs and whose enrollment these schools set up in booths in high school gymnasiums to obtain.
Already boasting a combined 40 per cent of the country’s research funding, the presidents of the ‘Big 5′ schools spelled out their dissatisfaction with the current state of universities in Canada.
Having to spread funding and resources to educate the masses — a disproportionate number of undergraduate students to graduate researchers — these presidents argued for a change of focus at these ‘top’ schools, enrolling fewer undergraduates and transforming these institutions into primarily graduate research-based schools.
Their reasoning being that in order to “attract the world’s best scholars” and pump out graduates who can match or best their world colleagues, a greater focus needs to be paid to these programs and leave the undergraduate population to the smaller schools.
“If you strongly support the very highest forms of international peer review,” said Indira Samarasekera president of the University of Alberta, in the article, “and you drive toward excellence, and you create pools of funding where people can compete at an international standard, you will then encourage and enable certain institutions to differentially excel.”
Now almost five months later and the merits of the proposal for higher education institutions as set out by the schools’ presidents is still being debated.
In August, the smaller schools retorted in a second Maclean’s article, including the University of Waterloo, Lakehead University, Laurentian and the University of Guelph, who collectively argued their graduate research programs, many producing high-caliber researchers, should not be designated to instruct solely undergraduates.
While the ‘Big 5’ argue that Canadian research is not measuring up, the smaller schools have said that’s a reflection of the large programs and they’ve had their chance to prove their worth. “They had their opportunities to clearly demonstrate that they can make a difference,” said Frederick Filbert, president of Lakehead University.
Other schools responded through other media outlets. Roseann Runte, president of Carleton University wrote an opinion piece in the Globe and Mail, arguing that differentiating schools as proposed squanders competition and collaboration.
“Canada needs to create an environment in our universities, our cities, our provinces that will support and generate such innovation. This will not happen by closing the door to potential players or instituting an intellectual caste system,” she wrote.
Since then provincial governments, bloggers and other media outlets have chimed in on what is to become of higher education. When Katie Engelhart talked to Canada’s provincial education ministers many expressed the fact that differentiated schools already exist, as it is not the intention for all universities to be “top researchers.” But none are eager to openly support the ‘Big 5’ proposal.
It seems imperative that all these voices, both larger and smaller schools along with governments and the students attending Canadian universities each have role to play in the decision. Regardless, as with most politics, a change won’t happen overnight.
- photo by dcJohn
The UC way
Could California be a model for Canadian research policy?
For all the erudition and scholarship that goes on at Canadian campuses, ambition is what really drives most colleges and universities. Colleges want to be small universities. Small universities want to be big universities. And big universities want to be Harvard.
Evidence of this aspiration is everywhere. In Alberta, a pair of community colleges just became universities. The same thing happened last year in British Columbia. In Ontario, Brock University in St. Catharines has embarked on an aggressive marketing campaign to rebrand itself from small regional university to higher-status research centre. And then there’s the recent furor created by the aspirations of five of Canada’s biggest universities.
In an exclusive interview with Maclean’s in August, the presidents of the University of British Columbia, University of Alberta, University of Toronto, McGill University and Université de Montréal outlined a controversial proposal to realign national post-secondary funding. Under the Big Five plan, a few schools would emphasize high-level research while the remaining schools would focus primarily on undergraduate education. That would allow a more efficient distribution of scarce research funding, vault the Big Five closer to their international peers, and tackle the issue of Canada’s underperformance in producing world-class university research.
It’s clearly an ambitious plan, as far as the Big Five are concerned. But is limiting the ambition of every other college and university the best plan for Canada? And what would such a plan look like?
You have to look elsewhere for an example. In the U.S., many states set out explicit expectations for all public post-secondary institutions, and California’s Master Plan for Higher Education, created in 1960, is one of the best known.
At the top of the state hierarchy is the University of California, which boasts many of the world’s most famous campuses, including Berkeley and UCLA. Its nine institutions receive the bulk of research funding, focus heavily on graduate students, and are the only public universities in California allowed to grant Ph.D.s. UC accepts the top 12 per cent of all state high school graduates. Next come 23 California State campuses. Cal States are primarily undergraduate institutions. Professors teach twice as many classes as their peers at UC and do much less research. The top third of California high school graduates are guaranteed a place in the Cal State system. Finally, more than 100 state community colleges act as feeders for Cal State. They are required to offer a spot for every high school graduate in California. “The two key aspects of the master plan are a clear differentiation of which students go where, as well as which schools do what,” says Todd Greenspan, director of academic planning at the University of California office of the president. “Everyone knows their place.”
First Nations University says it’s being “picked on”
Both province and feds are withholding funding from beleaguered university
Officials from the First Nations University of Canada are accusing the federal and provincial governments of being uncooperative and unnecessarily negative in their attempts to address alleged governance problems at the Saskatoon school, according to The StarPhoenix.
“The government should just get off its pot and start doing something more positive,” said faculty member Sharon Acoose in a speech to a gathered crowd of about 100 at Thursday’s open house. “Work with us. We have a beautiful university. Open your eyes and see that.”
In 2005, Morley Watson, chair of the university’s board of governors, suspended several senior administrators and allegedly seized the university’s central computers, copied the hard drive with all faculty and student records, and ordered administrative staff out of their offices.
Since that time, two different studies by both the provincial government and the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations have recommended changes to the university’s board structure in an effort to improve transparency and good governance. Enrolment at the school has plunged, and many of the faculty and administrative staff have left.
In November 2008, the Canadian Association of University teachers imposed censure on the university, which meant that most of the Canada’s university teachers have been told to refuse appointments at the university, decline invitations to speak or participate in academic conferences hosted by the university, and turn down any distinctions.
Last March, the province suspended $200,000 of funding to the school, saying that “fundamental changes” needed to be made, and the federal department of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada is withholding more than $2 million for the same reason.
Those reactions are not sitting well with many of Thursday’s speakers, reports The StarPhoenix.
According to Acoose, the university is being “picked on.” She praised the work of university president Charles Pratt and vice-president of finance Al Ducharme. “Let us do our jobs. Quit holding the purse strings above our heads. We are not puppets.”
The university’s vice-president of academics Herman Michell said he agrees with Acoose.
“Sharon Acoose mentioned the struggles our university has gone through in the past four or five years. She’s right. As far as I’m concerned, we should have 50 of these First Nations universities across Canada. A lot of institutions across Canada are facing the same challenges we are,” he said.
“I call on the federal and provincial government to step up to the plate and help us do our work.”
A spokesman for Indian and Northern Affairs Canada says his department is “not going to address the comments made at the open house.” He said the funding conditions will remain, along with their late-November deadline.
Gov’t withholds funds from First Nations University
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada imposes deadlines, demands “action plan”
According to the Saskatoon StarPhoenix, the federal government will be withholding more than $2 million from the First Nations University of Canada until the school agrees to make fundamental governance changes.
In 2005, Morley Watson, chair of the university’s board of governors, suspended several senior administrators and allegedly seized the university’s central computers, copied the hard drive with all faculty and student records, and ordered administrative staff out of their offices.
Since that time, two different studies by both the provincial government and the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations have recommended changes to the university’s board structure in an effort to improve transparency and good governance. Enrolment at the school has plunged, and many of the faculty and administrative staff have left.
In November 2008, the Canadian Association of University teachers imposed censure on the university, which meant that most of the Canada’s university teachers have been told to refuse appointments at the university, decline invitations to speak or participate in academic conferences hosted by the university, and turn down any distinctions.
Last March, the province suspended $200,000 of funding to the school, saying that “fundamental changes” needed to be made.
According to The StarPhoenix, the $2.4-million that is being held back represents one-third of all Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) funding to the university.
An INAC spokesperson says university officials must meet various deadlines in the coming months and submit a final “action plan” by Jan. 1, 2010 to trigger a release of the funds. This is the first time the federal department has placed these kinds of conditions on an institution.
Ontario adds to post-secondary spending spree
Universities and colleges that didn’t get any provincial-federal funding will get $95 from the province
A $1.5-billion, weeklong series of federal-provincial funding announcements for Ontario colleges and universities has been topped up with another $95 million from the province.
Ontario is creating a $55-million capital program over two years to help the seven post-secondary institutions that did not get any of the joint federal-provincial funding.
The province will also give colleges and universities another $40 million to upgrade student facilities.
The $1.5 billion in federal-provincial money will fund 49 projects at the province’s 56 university and college campuses.
- The Canadian Press
Feds announce more infrastructure funding for universities
Ontario will get nearly $1.5 billion to build “long-term capacity for research and innovation”
The federal and Ontario governments will spend nearly $1.5 billion over the next two years on infrastructure projects at Ontario’s universities and colleges.
Industry Minister Tony Clement said Monday the $1.476 billion will give short-term economic stimulus to communities in the province and help strengthen research and innovation.
“Our government’s investment provides significant short-term economic stimulus in local communities throughout Ontario, while at the same time strengthening Canada’s long-term capacity for research and innovation,” Clement said in a statement.
“The renewal of college and university facilities will encourage more world-class researchers to work in Canada and give them the tools they need to make further discoveries that will benefit Canadians and people around the world.”
The spending will include $587 million in federal funding, $641.2 million in provincial funding and $248.1 million from other sources including the private sector and the universities and colleges themselves.
The monies will come from the federal Knowledge Infrastructure Program announced in the 2009 budget, a two-year, $2-billion economic stimulus measure to support infrastructure enhancement at Canadian post-secondary schools. They will be used to support deferred maintenance, repair and expansion projects at the colleges and universities.
A total of 28 projects at post-secondary institutions throughout the province will be beneficiaries of the first round of funding with another round of qualifying projects to be announced Friday.
Funding released to the schools included:
- $137 million for the University of Guelph and Conestoga College
- $31.23 million for Sheridan Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning
- $50 million to the Centre for International Governance Innovation, a centre established by Research in Motion (TSX:RIM) co-CEO Jim Balsillie
- $70 million for the University of Toronto’s campus in the eastern suburb of Scarborough
- $80 million for the University of Ottawa
N.L., feds to spend $55m on post-secondary infrastructure
College of the North Atlantic will get a new campus in Labrador City
Government funding of more than $55 million was announced today for infrastructure projects at post-secondary institutions in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Several projects involving the College of the North Atlantic include construction of a new campus in Labrador City.
Work is also slated for a Memorial University location in Corner Brook.
The provincial government is spending $31 million while Ottawa will contribute $24 million.
The money will be spent over two years.
- The Canadian Press
Aussie universities big winners in Rudd budget
Gov’t promises extra $5.3 billion, hopes to increase undergrad enrolment by 50,000
Australian universities were big winners earlier this week when the Australian Labour Party (the left of centre party in what is effectively a two party system) tabled its latest budget.
The university sector will be receiving an additional $5.3 billion over six years. The government hopes to increase enrolment by 50,000 undergraduate students by 2015.
The budget includes a significant overall of student financial aid policies, according to the Australian Broadcasting Company.
Ontario pledges $100M for genomics research
Minister says funds will support “globally significant, collaborative research projects” in province
From the CBC:
The Ontario government has announced $100 million in new funding for genomics research, an effort to attract top researchers from around the world and keep them in the province.
Minister of Research and Innovation John Wilkinson announced the new $100 million Global Leadership Round in Genomics and Life Sciences will support “globally significant, collaborative research projects” headquartered in Ontario.
Scientists who work in either genomics, gene-related research, or research into stem cells or proteins will be eligible to compete for the new funds.
The announcement comes after the federal government angered researchers failing to provide a new round of funding for Genome Canada, the not-for-profit agency responsible for funding large-scale science and genetics projects.
In April, Genome Canada announced it was pulling its support for an international stem cell consortium because of the lack of funds.
The federal budget also called for $147.9 million in cuts over three years to the three agencies that grant research funds to universities.
Federal Liberals vs provincial Liberals on PSE
Will students believe the federal Liberals after McGuinty’s broken promises to them?
The Liberal Party of Canada is promising more funding for post-secondary education and by the sounds of things, they include increasing student support in that envelope.
Meanwhile, the Ontario Grits have decided their election platform wasn’t worth the paper it was printed on. On Friday, the McGuinty government announced over $100-million in cuts to student financial supports.
It will be interesting to see if students will believe the federal Liberals after McGuinty’s broken promises to them.
Mystery donor gives more than $74m to female-led colleges
At least 15 schools received anonymous donations ranging from $1 to $10 million
NEW YORK – A mystery donor has gifted millions to at least 14 colleges run by women.
New York’s Hunter College said Monday it received $5 million in the fall and realized only recently that more than a dozen other colleges nationwide had received similar donations. Hunter College President Jennifer Raab says the money “couldn’t have come at a better time.”
The City University of New York school says the donor earmarked $4 million for scholarships.
The school will use the rest to update its library and give students more group study space.
At least 13 other schools with women presidents have received anonymous donations ranging from $1 million to $10 million in the last two months.
The gifts total at least $74.5 million so far.
- The Canadian Press
Funding science and research: Harper vs Obama
Canadian gov’t cuts $148 million in research funds, U.S. spends multi-billions
The Globe and Mail’s John Ibbitson reviews the stark contrast between the Harper government’s cuts to basic research funding and the Obama administration’s multibillion-dollar commitments to scientific research and education:
The Obama administration’s multibillion-dollar investments coincide with the Canadian government’s decision to cut $148-million in funding to the three agencies that support basic research at Canadian universities.
The Conservatives point in response to $2.75-billion they have dedicated to university infrastructure and scientific equipment.
But the two countries are pursuing fundamentally different approaches to funding research in the midst of a recession and with manufacturing industries in chronic decline.
While Prime Minister Harper concentrates on targeted funding in certain specific areas, in hopes of generating marketable ideas that promote economic growth, President Obama is pursing a comprehensive approach aimed at fundamentally reorienting government, schools, universities and the private sector in favour of science and technology.
Profs worry quality of university in Ontario falling
Pressure government to increase funding in lead-up to Ontario budget
Students at Ontario’s universities are getting short-changed when it comes to their education as their schools struggle with larger class sizes, outdated facilities and less full-time hiring, according to a new report.
A survey of faculty and academic librarians to be released Monday finds a significant degree of concern that the quality of higher education in the province has fallen over the past three years.
In all, just under 40 per cent of those asked felt quality had declined, while only eight per cent saw an improvement.
“They’re struggling to deliver a meaningful education to increasingly large classes,” said Prof. Brian E. Brown, president of the Ontario Confederation of University Faculty Associations.
“We can’t just move our economy ahead if we leave our students behind.”
Almost 2,000 faculty members and academic librarians at 22 universities across the province responded to the association’s questionnaire between Feb. 16 and March 13.
More than 60 per cent said class sizes had increased over the past three years, while 22 per cent said full-time faculty who had left their posts were not replaced.
Brown blamed “chronic underfunding” for the situation, saying the results suggest the Ontario government’s “Reaching Higher” plan put in place in 2005 has failed to deliver quality improvements.
That plan, which the government called the “largest multi-year investment in 40 years” in higher education, promised an additional $6.2 billion over five years – a 39 per cent increase from 2004.
Currently the province spends about $6 billion a year on post-secondary education and training.
Nevertheless, the association, which speaks for about 15,000 faculty and academic librarians, is urging the Liberal government to spend another $1.5 billion in the coming year on higher education when it delivers its budget on Thursday.
