The Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO) has launched a number of controversial ideas over the last few years, of which the most troublesome was the suggestion that Ontario universities should be divided into \u201cresearch intensive\u201d and \u201cteaching only\u201d groups, with appropriate adjustments to their funding.\u00a0 Thus far, that one has not gained much traction with the provincial government, although research \u201cintensity\u201d, however defined, is likely to be a significant factor in the forthcoming allocation of additional funded graduate places.<\/p>\n
HEQCO\u2019s most recent report, entitled \u201cTeaching Loads and Research Outputs of Ontario University Faculty Members: Implications for Productivity and Differentiation\u201d, continues in much the same spirit, with a call for faculty members who are not producing research output to take on a larger share of teaching. \u00a0As stated in the introduction, \u201cIn theory, given the typical distribution of effort, faculty members who are not active in research might be expected to teach double the load of research-active faculty.\u201d\u00a0 The rationale is purely practical: \u201cIf research non-active faculty members were to teach twice the teaching load of their research-active colleagues, the overall teaching capacity of the full-time professoriate in Ontario would be increased by about 10%, a teaching impact equivalent to adding about 1,500 additional faculty members across the province.\u201d\u00a0 That\u2019s a big number; and given that all Ontario universities are dealing with serious budget and staffing issues, it will draw some attention \u2026 and indeed has done so already.<\/p>\n
The report then goes on to compare the teaching loads and research outputs in three disciplines \u2013 Economics, Chemistry, and Philosophy \u2013 at 10 Ontario universities, Carleton included.\u00a0 And the results for our Department of Philosophy make for rather interesting reading.\u00a0 Carleton\u2019s department is smack in the middle in terms of the total number of regular faculty members (13), and we are also in the middle in terms of the number of faculty who received their Ph.D. from a Canadian university (46%). \u00a0(I am not exactly sure why HEQCO measured that, and why it is significant, but they did.) \u00a0In comparison, Toronto\u2019s figure is 30% (11\/33), and Lakehead\u2019s 80% (4\/5).\u00a0 Once again we are in the middle in terms of the number of courses taught per regular faculty member, although near the bottom in terms of the overall percentage of courses taught by regular faculty.\u00a0 Does this mean that we have more courses on offer each year than the others, I wonder?\u00a0 This might explain our apparent greater use of Contract Instructors.<\/p>\n
But then it gets much more interesting.\u00a0 When it comes to the median number of publications in peer-reviewed journals per faculty member between 2007 and 2012, we are tied with Western at the top (3.0), and also tied with Toronto for the number of publications per department in the \u201ctop seven\u201d Philosophy journals over the same period (5) \u2026 not bad going when you remember that U of T has more than twice our number of Philosophy professors!<\/p>\n
There is a lot of interesting food for thought in this report, including HEQCO\u2019s conclusion that some 15% of Ontario faculty members are not active in research, and consequently are doing considerably less work than their “research active\u201d colleagues. My personal rule of thumb, based on the experience of the last few decades, is that government intervention in post-secondary education is inversely proportional to their financial contribution \u2026 and the latter has now fallen well below 50% of our operating budget. What this report \u2026 and those that follow \u2026 will mean for post-secondary education in Ontario remains to be seen, and it could well get ugly.\u00a0 But for the moment we can bask in the glory of knowing that our Department of Philosophy is arguably the best in the province on a \u2018per capita\u2019 basis \u2026 at least according\u00a0to\u00a0HEQCO\u2019s analysis.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO) has launched a number of controversial ideas over the last few years, of which the most troublesome was the suggestion that Ontario universities should be divided into “research intensive” and “teaching only” groups, with appropriate adjustments to their funding. Thus far, that one has not gained much<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_relevanssi_hide_post":"","_relevanssi_hide_content":"","_relevanssi_pin_for_all":"","_relevanssi_pin_keywords":"","_relevanssi_unpin_keywords":"","_relevanssi_related_keywords":"","_relevanssi_related_include_ids":"","_relevanssi_related_exclude_ids":"","_relevanssi_related_no_append":"","_relevanssi_related_not_related":"","_relevanssi_related_posts":"","_relevanssi_noindex_reason":"","_mi_skip_tracking":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_active":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_note":"","_exactmetrics_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n