A SUBMISSION TO THE POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION REVIEW



A SUBMISSION TO

THE POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION REVIEW

FROM THE

COORDINATING COMMITTEE ON STUDENT SERVICES

A COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGES OF APPLIED ARTS AND TECHNOLOGY OF ONTARIO

NOVEMBER 26, 2004

Introduction

In the Ontario College system the College Coordinating Committee on Student Services is comprised of the senior Student Services Officers who, as a provincial coordinating body, concern themselves with the work and issues of the following service areas:

Financial Aid Services

Counselling Services

Health Services

Admissions

Secondary School Liaison

Registration Services

Services for Students with Disabilities

Athletics, Fitness and Recreation

Learning Resource Centre Services

Career and Employment Services

Student Government Liaison and Orientation

Student Life (Orientation, Student Affairs, Student Rights, Student Retention and Success Initiatives, Residence Liaison, Off-Campus Housing, Women’s Safety, etc.)

The College Coordinating Committee (known as CCSS) sincerely applauds the Ontario Government’s comprehensive review of postsecondary education and appreciates and welcomes the invitation to participate.

CCSS recognizes both the enormity of the task at hand as well as the volume of written submissions and contributions through face to face consultations. CCSS has, therefore, chosen to focus its submission on two of the Review’s Guiding Principles, namely Accessibility and Quality.

It hopes that this submission will complement and reinforce the submissions of ACAATO, CCSS’s operating groups and liaison groups such as the College Committee on Disability Issues and the College Student Alliance, amongst many others.

ACCESSIBILITY

Secondary School Liaison

While beyond the immediate purview of this review, one of the most significant barriers to access to postsecondary is the high percentage of young people entering high school failing to graduate. Successful initiatives to decrease dramatically this number would afford immense rewards for Ontario. Not the least of which would be more young people able to qualify for postsecondary study as well as the concomitant reduction in social costs and personal economic deprivations which can result from failure to complete high school in society today.

Student Services staff in the colleges would like to reach out to more young Ontarians (as well as their teachers and parents) in both the early years of secondary school, and to some degree, the final years of elementary schools when early ideas are being developed about future career options. College staff members are well-positioned to acquaint young people with the benefits of post-secondary education. As has been all to evident throughout the history of the colleges, there remains a systemic bias in the secondary schools towards preparing students for university with insufficient emphasis on those many other options which are necessary for a well-balanced economy. Part of this is related to the fact that a university education is required to teach or work as a guidance counsellor in our secondary school system. One of the many restrictions arising from underfunding is that colleges are able to provide only limited liaison with students in their final years of high school, which for many, particularly with the new curriculum, may well be too late in terms of appropriate course selections and preparation. Further, for many colleges, resources for high school liaison pale in comparison to the resources available to their local universities.

In several early leaver surveys college staff learn that “incorrect academic fit” is often the top reason given for a student to drop out. In some studies it is cited even more often than financial difficulties. For that reason alone, more effort in front-end guidance and career counselling is warranted in the college system and would be money very well spent. As well, research indicates the critically important role of Counselling Services both in student retention and improving academic performance.

Transferability between colleges and universities as well as between colleges themselves is another type of accessibility issue. Looked at from a larger socio-economic perspective it is an issue of waste of human and financial resources if not addressed in a comprehensive manner.

1. YES! A province as prosperous and progressive as Ontario should have goals for the percentage of young Ontarians who enter and graduate from a postsecondary institution! If Sweden and England think 50% is appropriate by the year 2010 then Ontario should consider a goal of 60%.

2. In order to increase young Ontarians’ knowledge of the importance of postsecondary education and the vast array of college options and preparation for college, it is recommended that college staff be funded to promote college options to Ontario students (and their teachers) from grade 8 upwards.

3. It is recommended that support be provided and/or continued for college transition programs for the underprepared student and programs for those needing various types of upgrading in order to qualify for postsecondary studies.

4. It is recommended that all stakeholders establish a more standardized system of course and program evaluation in order to maximize transferability amongst all Ontario post-secondary institutions.

Financial Assistance

The Postsecondary Review Discussion paper clearly recognizes many of the limitations of the financial assistance schemes as obstacles to accessibility. A most interesting and intriguing research paper found on the Postsecondary Review’s own web site authored by Alex Usher entitled “Are the Poor Needy? Are the Needy Poor? The Distribution of Student Loans and Grants by Family Income Quartile – 2004” delves far deeper into the inherent inequities in existing student financial aid schemes than most other papers on this topic. It is recommended reading for all interested in this most critical issue.

Many of us have been so conditioned over the years to think of the process of “calculated need assessment” through the existing formulae as equating to a student’s actual need that we have not really taken the time to do the research and examine just who really has been benefiting from loans and the non-repayable forms of assistance (the terms change over time). Nor have we closely examined which sector of society tends to end up with the greatest percentage of loans to repay and whether or not it makes sense to give financial assistance to all young people who, by virtue of meeting any one of the basic eligibility criteria, automatically become one day “independent”. On the day that any two students become “independent” they could still become equally eligible for government funded (taxpayer funded) financial assistance whether or not their parents were paupers or multi-millionaires. Our system does not currently gather information on all aspects of access to wealth and entitlement. The Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation has found that families who have incomes such that they can afford to do so, continue to fund their children after they have magically reached this administrative category (a contrived construct) of “independent”. The amounts of funds dispersed are so vast that this fundamental issue must be reviewed by some very clear heads. As is noted in the Postsecondary Review Discussion Paper, many other countries now have targeted financial aid schemes in order to direct funds where they are truly needed and refrain from handing out scarce resources to wealthier families who do not require such assistance.

It is postulated that many millions of dollars could be made available for redeployment to vastly increase accessibility and promote student retention if this one criterion were to be reviewed and adjusted. This would ultimately move the financial assistance system to one that would be “real needs based”. This examination is clearly overdue.

If tuition fees rise and if some form of income contingent loan repayment scheme were to be adopted, it is strongly recommended that graduates with lower incomes not be penalized by compound interest schemes whereby they end up paying far more for their educations. This would be inherently unfair and not a just solution to the current underfunding. (Unfortunately, many of the most important jobs in our society such as early childhood education continue to be poorly remunerated.) Compound interest schemes are detrimental to those who have difficulty in gaining good-paying positions such as persons with disabilities and many other disadvantaged groups.

Based on the Ministry’s annual graduate placement report which shows that women graduates continue to earn less than their male peers it follows that women would be disproportionately affected by such a repayment plan.

One of the hallmarks of a progressive society is access to education and the chance for individuals to improve their socio-economic status through dedication and hard work. Any system which places a disproportionate burden of loans and interest on the least advantaged works against the individual’s ability to improve his or her socio-economic position.

Over the years there has been a growing number of restrictions on financial aid in Ontario (reductions affecting those on social assistance, reductions for the part-time student, policies which have detrimental effects on single parents, restrictive interpretations of the policy on Bursaries for Students with Disabilities, dismantling of Child Care Bursaries as well as the addition of user fees for applications). These have been further and unnecessary barriers to accessibility.

Today’s students experience the incredible costs of textbooks which for so many programs go far beyond the OSAP cost table limits. Some students avail themselves of the set-aside funds by working on campus but some of these end up putting their academic studies in jeopardy because they work too many hours. Others realize they can’t succeed academically if they take part-time jobs and end up dropping out for financial reasons. It can be a bit of a “Catch 22” for many.

One of the most disturbing facts is that of the growing credit card debt of young students. Credit cards should never be the way for a low income student to get an education. Companies are extremely anxious to get onto campuses to promote card schemes to young inexperienced students who have no idea how long it will take them to clear off their initial purchases and what the ultimate cost for any item will be when faced with deceptive marketing tactics, initial 0% interest offers, low minimum payment options and tempting giveaways. This is even more dangerous to the young, vulnerable, poor and naïve now that groceries can be bought with credit cards.

5. It is recommended that a thorough review of the entire financial assistance program be made with an in-depth examination of who gets assistance and how to assess actual need in a more equitable manner based on a targeted system related to socio-economic status, and that this review involve significant numbers of students from different backgrounds and needs groups and Financial Aid Administrators.

6. It is recommended that if any form of income-contingent loan repayment system is introduced that it not include compound interest.

7. It is strongly recommended that colleges work collectively to turn back the tide of credit card recruiters on campus and work to educate students to the very real dangers of financing their education and day-to-day lives on credit cards.

Students with Disabilities

College doors have been opening more and more to students with disabilities since the inception of the forward-thinking Accessibility Grant. This is a good thing. However, colleges are now challenged both by trying to meet the needs of a vastly increased number of clients and also by students who have more severe disabilities, who have multiple disabilities and by more students who have psychiatric and medical disabilities, frequently in combination with other disabilities (learning, sensory or physical). While there was a welcome infusion of funds into the Accessibility Grant last year, it, in no way, went far enough. The College Committee on Disabilities Issues (CCDI) has submitted a comprehensive paper to the Review on Postsecondary Education. CCSS has reviewed, supports and recommends their 10 Point Strategy listed here for your consideration:

1. A review should be undertaken to examine the funding and policies around the provision of equitable, appropriate and timely services to students who are Deaf or hard of hearing.

2. A review should be undertaken to examine the provision of Alternate Print Format materials for students who are blind or partially sighted or otherwise ‘print blind’.

3. The Bursary for Students With Disabilities should be granted based on the individual disabling condition, not tied to the requirement for OSAP. A mechanism to liaise with the Canada Student Grant should be implemented.

4. Funding for the Accessibility fund should remain as a specifically targeted program.

5. Colleges should have funding sources for dedicated personnel to liaise with secondary schools in order to provide students with disabilities with the transitional activities they require for success, both during the transition to post secondary studies and during the transition to the workplace.

6. Disability Offices should be provided with the resources and commitment to engage in the type of applied research related to disabilities and education and the workforce.

7. MTCU should develop specific methods to liaise in a coordinated manner with the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Education and Apprenticeship, WSIB, etc. to provide a continuum of services to students with disabilities in a manner that is respectful and professional and that makes use of the funds and documents utilized by all ministries.

8. A review should be conducted to determine if the additional cost to a student with a disability to complete a program over a longer period, as a direct result of the disability constitutes a discriminatory practice.

9. In view of the requirements of Bill 118, a policy should be considered that would mandate that all renovations and new construction should meet or exceed barrier-free standards as a requirement of MTCU financial support. Further, funding should be made available to colleges to directly assist in implementing barrier removal initiatives in college Accessibility Plans.

10. There should be a plan to renew the technology resources that students with disabilities require during school attendance with a view to update and replace them regularly.

It is recommended that the Accessibility Grant and the Interpreter Fund be adjusted to reflect the actual costs to provide essential service to students with disabilities.

It is recommended that any funding to address the growing liability of deferred maintenance include dedicated funding to make college facilities fully accessible.

It is recommended that the government take whatever action is necessary to adjust the Ontario Building Code to ensure that “basic code regulations” result in fully accessible buildings.

Underepresented Groups

Native Students

While special funds to help support native students attend college have been of considerable assistance, these funds have not kept up with inflation such that they now provide less assistance to this population. For example, funding that once provided a Native Counsellor and some programming funds now does not even cover the basic salary for the Counsellor. Assistance is required in the college system for initiatives to promote college attendance, assist with the transition to postsecondary studies, upgrade the underprepared student, and support students in culturally appropriate ways to improve graduation rates for this community.

Rural and Northern Students

There has been a clear move in the Ontario system towards a rationalization of campuses and the creation of larger campuses in urban areas, representing a decided move away from the original intention to create community campuses in every corner of the province. This has occurred due to the financial challenge of keeping up multiple campuses with aging facilities and the costs of duplicating a range of services in many centres. As a result, it is more difficult for students in rural, northern and isolated areas to access a wide variety of programs without undue hardship and the need to move away from home. Since colleges traditionally offered many upgrading programs to those who had not completed high school, this created a further disadvantage to these communities.

Francophone Students

Ontario is a bilingual province with a vibrant Francophone minority. Franco-Ontarians have a unique culture which is an integral part of our community fabric and which plays a vital role in our economy. This distinctive reality is hampered by the fact that the rich array of programs offered in English is simply not available to Francophones in their mother tongue. There are only two Francophone colleges that are able to offer a restricted number of programs in a limited number of locations. This situation has forced countless Francophone students to leave the province to pursue their education or to switch to an English program which for some, causes a hardship and promotes cultural assimilation. It is axiomatic that education in one’s own language is essential to the preservation of a culture. If Franco-Ontarian culture is to prosper, there must be expanded and sufficient quality postsecondary opportunities in French to meet the needs of this population.

QUALITY

Learning Resources

With the introduction of the applied degree programs and more college/university partnerships, the Learning Resource Centres, which have struggled for years with limited and aging resources, are now finding that their out-of-date collections are glaringly inadequate to meet the demands. Ontario college libraries operate on an average of $17 per student as compared with the Ontario university average of $453. This is clearly an issue which relates to program quality and one which has become more painfully obvious since the inception of the Key Performance Indicators. Print collections are becoming even more outdated due to increasing demands for the online resources also required.

11. It is recommended that Ontario college libraries be equipped with up-to-date collections appropriate to support quality academic programs.

Supporting the Whole Student –

A Key to Student Retention and Success

In Student Services the mandate is sometimes described as attending to the development needs of the whole student – from assisting the client prospect choose the correct program to assisting the graduate prepare for and land the perfect job. When students are polled about services or when various student services have been threatened due to financial challenges, it is clear that they value the human services that assist them to persist and succeed. In some colleges they have even agreed to modest levies to help retain a good service. They want, value and support these services (such as Health, Counselling, Employment Services, Orientation, Student Life, Athletics, Residence Programming, Retention Initiatives, Off-Campus Housing, Women’s Campus Safety, etc.) because they are client-oriented operations which meet real human needs – needs which are inescapable and which must be met. Most service areas have challenges meeting the growing needs of their clients in a timely fashion simply because they are not staffed adequately to keep up with the demands.

Students can succeed and prosper more easily when they can access personal and career counselling, preventative and emergency health services, knowledgeable assistance to find part-time, summer and full-time jobs upon graduation, peer services such as peer tutoring, and also, when they are thoroughly oriented at the beginning of their college experience.

Colleges have come a long way in recent years in terms of becoming more client-centred institutions. However, this does require effort, continuous staff training and an appropriate range of good support services which must be resourced adequately.

Students develop and prosper in a broad way when they have access to a vibrant campus with stimulating extra-curricular and co-curricular activities. Students need to keep their minds and bodies fit by involving themselves in learning activities outside of the classroom. This is achieved through a blend of: athletics, recreation and fitness programming; the opportunity for involvement in the student leadership experience; stimulating and healthy residence life programming; and participation on a wide array of college committees where there is opportunity for meaningful input into the operation of the institution.

Student Services exist to recruit, retain and help students succeed. It bears repeating that it is a more efficient use of human and financial resources to provide what is necessary to retain those students who have already demonstrated their interest in postsecondary education by registering, paying their fees and showing up. Everything that is done to help these students persevere and succeed makes good business sense. Student Services professionals know that they have an intrinsic and complementary partnership with academic staff to provide a well-rounded quality educational experience for a diverse student population.

There are specific populations that not only are underrepresented in college but that have special challenges in succeeding in college. Staff in the various Student Services departments work closely with students who face extra challenges making it through - be they single parents, students who are trying to get off of social assistance, new Canadians, students whose first language is neither English nor French, students who are still in their middle teens living away from their homes for the first time, or those students who are academically underprepared for college.

Student Services staff work hand-in-hand with the natural student leaders on campus who work in multicultural buddy networks, peer counselling centres, food banks, mentoring programs, student ambassador programs and countless other programs designed to assist other students with needs succeed. This work is of value and should continue. Yet, such programs are always placed in jeopardy when funds are tight. This has been an increasingly recurrent theme in the college system.

Another challenge for services is the fact that more and more programs are being offered on evenings and weekends (including full-time diploma programs) to increase accessibility. This is progress. However, these program areas are demanding a range of services for their students, something which the service areas want to assist with by cannot currently afford.

Most colleges now have residences with campuses operating 7 days a week 24 hours which serve the youngest students on campus and computer labs are open 24 hours a day. The Women’s Campus Safety Grant has been used to make Ontario campuses safer in countless ways. The value-added benefits from these safety initiatives and security awareness programming has become even more evident with this round-the-clock culture on our campuses. Some of the initiatives include emergency telephones, panic buttons for front-line staff, women’s self-defense courses, improved parking lot lighting, educational programs and the inclusion of personal safety in building design criteria. Students and staff need and want their campuses to be safe and to feel safe and the Women’s Safety Grant makes them safer for women, men and especially for the disabled.

12. It is recommended that Ontario college students be provided with adequate services to assist them in getting into the correct program at the correct time, to be supported to succeed to the best of their abilities, to have adequate extra and co-curricular learning experiences while in college and to help them obtain program-related employment upon graduation.

13. It is recommended that colleges be encouraged and supported financially to continue to construct their buildings, their residences and their campuses with a view to maximizing personal security and that personal security initiatives continue to be funded so that the entire experience on campus will be a quality experience in a safe environment.

Quality and Efficiency – Where is the Trade-Off ?

For years we have worked within our institutions to maximize the number of seats filled in our classes. We have worked hard to maximize class and lab utilization rates. We have struggled to have classes scheduled round the clock to make the most use of our aging facilities. This is done to be good stewards of our budgets. Yet there is a real trade-off here.

When we maximize acceptances so we don’t waste seats in costly programs we run the very real risk (just like the airlines!) of overbooking and having our new students standing at the back of classrooms until other students drop out and make room for them. We also have large anonymous classes where many students at risk can get lost and attrit. When we maximize the bookable hours of the day we run the real risk of making timetables which are not student/child/parent/part-time job/ friendly and our students let us know about it. When we cut back in our cleaning hours our crowded washrooms show the results and we learn to live with a certain degree of complaints. When we cut back on our physical resources budget the pot holes in our parking lots grow bigger and muddier.

College staff work extremely hard to offer quality programs and services to large numbers of student in a client-centred manner and the Ontario colleges are very good places in which to study and work – but – they could be much much better if the ever-present burden of underfunding could be alleviated and quality and client-centredness could truly be embraced in a manner appropriate to our Charter.

In closing, we thank the Postsecondary Education Review for the opportunity to provide this input and remain available for further consultation at any time.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download