Glen A. Jones New Perspectives on Higher Education and Regional Development CHEPS, University of Twente “One University,” Regional Development, and the.

Glen A. JonesNew Perspectives on Higher Education and Regional

Development

CHEPS, University of Twente

“One University,” Regional Development, and the Evolution of Provincial Higher Education Systems in Canada’s Western Provinces

Organization of Presentation

• Institutional Differentiation in Higher Education – review key concepts

• Use these concepts to analyze the evolution of the higher education systems in Canada’s four western provinces.

Diversity

• Diversity – difference in static terms

• Birnbaum’s topology of diversity makes a central distinction between:– Internal diversity (differences within an

institution)– External diversity (differences between

institutions)

Diversity

• The emphasis in this analysis in on the system-level; on external diversity

• Diversity is about the variety of entities at any point in time (Huisman, 1995)

• Surprisingly little attention has been made to the “regional mission” in the scholarship on external diversity.

Categories of External Diversity

• Programmatic Diversity• Procedural Diversity• Systemic Diversity• Constituential Diversity

– (Geographical Constituency)

• Reputational Diversity• Values and Climate Diversity• Structural Diversity

(Birnbaum, 1983)

Differentiation

• Diversity refers to a static phenomenon

• Differentiation refers to a dynamic process

• Differentiation: “a process in which new entities emerge in a higher education system” (splitting up of existing units, or the creation of entirely new units). (van Vught, 2008)

Differentiation

• What are the environmental factors that are associated with differentiation within a higher education system?

• What are the environmental factors that are associated with decreasing differentiation (homogenization)? (for example, academic drift)

Benefits of Differentiation

• Accessibility (increasing choice leads to increasing participation because there are more opportunities for a match)

• Economic benefits (increasing ability to support complex human resource needs)

• System efficiency (greater specialization: teaching balance, program, etc.)

Canada in 1905

New Provinces and New Universities

Province Created University Founded Provincial Mission

Manitoba 1870 U. Manitoba 1877 1901British Columbia 1871 U. British Columbia 1908 1908Alberta 1905 U. Alberta 1906 1906Saskatchewan 1905 U. Saskatchewan 1907 1907

“One University” Concept

• A single university was assigned a public monopoly (designed to avoid public/private denominational battles in Eastern Canada)

• Heavily influenced by the American land-grant university movement, especially the “Our campus the state” notion from Wisconsin. Quickly developed Faculties of Agriculture, Engineering, and Extension.

Size of Provinces (Current Borders)

“One University” in Massification

• Each university evolved to include colleges serving other urban areas.

• Colleges focused on undergraduate (non-professional) education.

• These colleges would later become independent universities in post-WWII expansion

Regional Colleges and New Universities

University Regional College New University

University of Manitoba Wesley College (1888) University of Winnipeg (1967)

  Brandon College (1938) Brandon University (1967)University of Saskatchewan Regina College (1925/1934) University of Regina (1974)University of Alberta University of Alberta, Calgary (1947) University of Calgary (1966)University of British Columbia

Victoria College (1903/1920) University of Victoria (1963)

Abandoning “One University”

• Massive post-WWII support for expansion of HE (supported by federal and later provincial governments)

• Provincial task forces (late 1950s/early 1960s) recommended creation of new universities and institutional types.

• Each Canadian province developed its own “system”

Manitoba and Saskatchewan

• Small number of universities located in urban centres (Winnipeg, Brandon, Saskatoon, Regina); specialized First Nations University

• The “provincial university” retained a monopoly over professional/graduate programs

Manitoba and Saskatchewan

• Each created “community colleges” that focused on technical vocational programs and apprenticeships.

• Credential was a diploma/certificate. No degree programs. No university transfer programs.

• Parallel pathway to university

• Located in the same urban centres (plus)

British Columbia and Alberta

• First phase of expansion to university sector involved:– granting independence to previous colleges

(Victoria, Calgary) – creating a limited number of new universities

(Simon Fraser, Lethbridge, Athabasca)– “Provincial university” retained a monopoly

over most graduate and professional programs

British Columbia and Alberta

• Created community colleges that combined university-transfer programs with vocational programs designed to address the needs of regions.

• Created specialized technical institutes (BCIT, SAIT, NAIT) located in urban centres.

British Columbia

• In order to further increase degree completion, selected community colleges evolved into “university colleges” and offered four-year degrees plus vocational/apprenticeship programs.

• Created University of Northern British Columbia and university colleges recently became “Regional Universities”

Alberta

• Several community colleges evolved to become primarily teaching universities (Mount Royal, MacEwan)

• Government legislation establishes distinct institutional types – ranging from adult education institutes to research universities.

The Western Provinces

• Emphasis on regional access• Expansion of degree-granting to non-university

sectors of these systems• Manitoba and Saskatchewan: Two clear sectors

with emphasis on major urban centres• British Columbia and Alberta: Multiple integrated

institutional types to serve more diverse industrial base and dispersed population

Differentiation and Regional Development?

• Size matters – Systems serving large geographic areas are more likely to have some level of institutional diversity (program diversity) to serve regions. Preserve efficiencies of monopolies over expensive professional/graduate programs.

• Serving regional interests in a large geographic area does not necessarily imply major differences between institutions in mission, quality, emphasis

Differentiation and Regional Development• Transition from mass to universal education has

led to an expansion of degree-granting to non-university sector (expand access to credentials through greater choice) (decrease in program diversity)

• Major emphasis on transfer, addressing needs of diverse populations (greater integration, but also development of special mission universities)

Differentiation and Regional Development• Complex environments are associated with

greater system diversity (British Columbia and Alberta vs. Manitoba and Saskatchewan) (van Vught; Codling & Meek)

• Regional emphasis in system policy is largely about teaching; all universities have a research function, but research-intense (urban) universities serve the “province”.

• Regional service mission continues to be embedded in system culture

Thank you

[email protected]

www.glenjones.ca