Students voice their opinions on recommendations of Ontario government
Rameeza Ahmed
Contributor
Students criticized a recent government report listing recommendations for post-secondary institutions to follow, raising multiple flaws in the report.
The concerns were brought up at a York Federation of Students town hall meeting held on September 27, 2012, which addressed a report released June 27, 2012 by the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities, entitled Strengthening Ontario’s Centres of Creativity, Innovation and Knowledge. The report outlines several proposals to revamp Ontario’s post-secondary education system.
“I am concerned that [the government is] trying to mask cheap and easy cost-cutting as modern and innovative,” says Alastair Woods, YFS vp campaigns and advocacy. He says the report uses the word “innovation” as more of a buzzword than an actual goal.
Through a series of eight consultations, of which one had student input, the report was compiled in an attempt to increase innovation and improve quality within Ontario universities and colleges.
The Ontario government gave post-secondary institutions a deadline of September 30 to submit a document outlining how “its activities, current and planned, contribute to the directions identified in the discussion paper and the consultation process.”
Many students at the meeting considered the time frame insufficient for the university to gather input from both students and faculty members.
Woods says the issues of rising tuition fees and increasing class sizes are largely ignored in the ministry’s report.
The report proposes condensing four-year degree programs into three years, having classes offered year-round on campus, and giving students the option to earn more than half of their credits online.
Additionally, the report suggests using standardized tests, similar to the Grade 10 Literacy Test, to determine the amount of funding each individual university or college is to receive from the government.
Woods asked a series of key questions to stimulate discussion among the audience at the meeting, including how tuition fees have impacted questions about their post-secondary school experience, how they would like to be involved in making decisions about post-secondary institutions, and how technology has enhanced their experiences.
Attendees who spoke out at the town hall meeting said the most disappointing thing about the report, aside from its title, Strengthening Ontario’s Centers of Creativity, Innovation and Knowledge, which some called “verbose” and “ambiguous,” is that it does not address students’ needs.
Many students voiced concerns about the government’s proposed three-year degrees, and online courses, calling it a “Band-Aid solution” for a serious problem.
“If a big part of education is online, there is no inclusiveness. Education is best conducted face-to-face, where ideas bounce off each other, and everyone shares their thoughts—that’s the beauty of academia,” says Andy Xia, a final-year history and concurrent education major.
“It’s okay to focus on strengthening the economy, but if that involves cutting back on basic social needs, then it’s completely unjustified,” says Xia.
Some other issues brought up by students included the lack of transparency in administrative spending, the accumulation of student debt, absence of student representation in university decisions, and fewer opportunities for those in liberal arts programs.
“If we are truly concerned about driving innovation at Ontario colleges and universities, then in my mind, there is only one good spark—an injection of public funding to hire more teachers and researchers, reduce class sizes, and decrease tuition fees,” said Woods.
