Wednesday, 29 June 2011

Different Strokes for Different Universities

Differentiation. An interesting concept. For many colleagues at Trent the word recalls back in the day when Trent was awarded a "differentiation grant" by the Ontario government to support its unique interdisciplinary mission and a pedagogy centred on small classrooms and intimate tutorials. There were trade-offs, of course, and in many ways our current graduate programs are a legacy of the commitment to offer interdisciplinary programs unavailable elsewhere. In fact, we still receive the grant which forms part of our overall operating budget.

But today the concept of differentiation constitutes one of our major (controversial) challenges as we develop the academic plan. The brainchild of the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO), "differentiation" refers to the idea that each of Ontario's 20 universities should differentiate itself from all the others by dedicating its resources to "what it does best". As Harvey Weingarten argues in "The Benefits of Greater Differentiation of Ontario's University Sector," differentiation will allow each University to develop its own mandate with the government; for some universities it may mean a greater emphasis on teaching, for others on research intensiveness, for others a hybrid of the two, etc.

For someone as old as me this idea recalls two distinct events of both the distant and recent past: one is the Thatcherite division of the post-secondary system in the U.K. into teaching contra research institutions; the other is the paradigm shift at NSERC which now focuses most heavily on the production of "highly qualified personnel" or HQPs. Read one way, the big are getting bigger and the small are faced with just fading away. Read another (more cheerful) way, now is the chance to set our course and get budgetary support for it.

Which means that if we at Trent do not differentiate ourselves in our mandate meeting with the government in the Fall 2011 we will inadvertently position ourselves to have differentiation thrust upon us. Not a good thing. I would rather we define ourselves rather than be defined by an external body.

I would encourage all colleagues to read the HEQCO report, especially given that it is a formal recommendation to the government of Ontario. You can access the document at: http://www.heqco.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/DifferentiationENG.pdf. After reading it please do not burn, but rather give careful thought to the development of our academic plan which will be not only an academic "recovery" document, but also a survival manual.

1 comment:

  1. In thinking about academic planning, I had an interesting conversation this morning while I was getting my haircut. I talked to a woman who is trying to get a part-time degree in dietary sciences. I guess U of T offers the degree. The woman said that between Trent and Fleming she can get most of the courses required for the degree. What struck me from the conversation was that Trent probably offers a lot of courses that could be packaged into one degree or another although we don't formally grant degrees in those areas.

    That got me thinking about degrees built on modules.

    What if we offered modules of courses that students could take within a BSc or BA degree? We could create any number of modules as long as we offered the courses to support the module. The modular design makes them very fluid and modules could be created or removed very quickly based on student demand. Since the packaging is modular, some modules could be partnered with Fleming. This would be trickier (but we do offer joint degrees with Fleming now), but with a modular design it could be possible and could make Trent a unique educational experience.

    The cost to the university would be minimal as the courses already exist and are being given as part of our current degree offering.

    Let's say a module is built on between 4 to 6 half courses. Modules could be either a specialized group of courses within a degree or perhaps a multi-disciplinary collection of courses.

    For example, an interdisciplinary module on astrobiology could be created. Courses might include: Biol2600H-Evolution, Biol3250H-Microbiology, Biol4080H-Developmental Biology, Chem-Biol 2300H-Biochemical Concepts, Phys1510 – Introductory astronomy 1, Phys 2510H – Life in the universe.

    Students could use electives to complete certain modules or just do it as part of their regular degree. When the required courses are complete, a notation would appear on their transcript that they completed a certificate in for example, astrobiology. This would allow students to create a “custom degree”, as long as they follow the existing rules for getting a BSc or BA. A student might graduate with a BSc in Chemistry with certificates in astrobiology, human health, and legal studies.

    I see a number of interesting benefits.
    1. Students can tailor degrees to suit their particular interests (or potential career objectives), giving students ultimate flexibility in their degrees.
    2. Part-time students who take longer to complete their degree would benefit. Rather than taking 8 years to get a BSc or BA, a part-time student might start with the astrobiology module (as outlined above), get the 6 courses for that, get a certificate (which could be put on a resume immediately so there is a real and tangible benefit for part-time students where they can very quickly start improving their resume) and then perhaps go to another module. Part-time students could continue incrementally accumulating certificates while they complete their degree.
    3. Students might come to Trent just to do a single module, get a certificate, perhaps upgrading their training. For example, a nurse might upgrade their training by doing a module in Biochemistry. That might help them for promotion in their field.
    4. Departments with low enrolments could benefit. Perhaps a program with low student enrolment would find a resurgence if students didn't have to go for a full degree in it, but could get a "module" by taking 4-6 half courses. With the right mix of modules a department that doesn't grant a lot of degrees might have a significant pool of students that they teach. Based on interesting themes/modules that they can generate.

    At the end of the day, we would still only be granting BSc or a BA in the areas laid out in the course calendar. But students could accumulate certificates as part of that degree. So it wouldn't take away from joint majors or minors that are officially part of the degree.

    ReplyDelete