Man. Educ. & Train. Post-Secondary Edu. Roblin Report Summary

ROBLIN REPORT:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Manitoba's university education system constitutes one of the principal assets of our society. It provides educational services to a client group composed of some twenty thousand full-time students and over sixteen thousand part-time students. Increasingly, it is being called upon to respond and adapt to the lifelong learning needs of Manitobans. Besides the talents of close to four thousand full-time scholars and staff, it was supported in 1993/94 by a public contribution of $202 million. In the light of our terms of reference, it is the task of the Commission to advise how best that asset should be managed in the public interest. This executive summary sets out our main observations and recommendations. They are intended to identify issues and opportunities, sharpen the focus, strengthen the coherence and promote excellence in the post-secondary education system.

Over the years, the support Manitobans have given their universities compares well with other provinces, but the limitations imposed by the exigencies of public finance have become increasingly apparent. Never was this more so than now, when universities have been notified of a reduction in provincial support. We note, however, that despite these developments, in their 1994/95 budget submissions to the Universities Grants Commission, universities are collectively proposing an increase of close to $19 million, or a 9.5% increase in provincial grants.

While it is right that we should look forward to better times, we have no means of knowing when public finances will ease. It is wise, therefore, to accept the evident probability that public financial constraints will continue for the medium term planning horizon. Universities must therefore so order their affairs as to make the best use of present resources in discharging their responsibilities to the Manitoba community. Such internal discipline need not be so much a handicap as a challenge to the skill of management and to academic adaptability. As our report will show, this is by no means a zero-sum game.

The University of Manitoba is the largest of the four institutions. It provides a wide range of undergraduate, graduate and professional programs; it serves 70% of the student population; and it receives the largest share of public support. Although the University of Manitoba is cited in many of our examples, we note that the spirit and intent of our recommendations apply to each institution. While smaller and focusing mostly on undergraduate programs, the University of Winnipeg, Brandon University and the College universitaire de Saint-Boniface play important and distinct roles in higher education in Manitoba. We recommend that the proposed Council on Post-Secondary Education take into consideration their separate individual financial requirements when advising the proposed Cabinet Committee on Post-Secondary Education.

The most important question we examine concerns priorities within the institutions and in the post-secondary education system as a whole. With respect to the institutions, we raise the question of academic programs. Not every program is of equal importance. When resources are limited, choices must be made. More important things will be identified and reinforced. Matters of lesser importance will be allowed to diminish. The process of prioritization allows us to do first things first, to underwrite excellence and to make room for new initiatives that the times may require. This process is essential to the health of the universities and will make possible a positive and significant reallocation of resources. To do little or nothing is not an option but a prescription for mediocrity. We recommend that the boards of governors/regents exercise their statutory responsibilities of leadership and oversight in cooperation with the academic community to identify strategic priorities that will contribute most to the economic, social and cultural needs of society. Priorities will mean program changes. But it does not follow that options for students will be unduly limited. Expanded distance education delivery will broaden possibilities for Manitobans. Priorities need not to be a limiting factor.

Scholars and staff at the universities comprise a formidable combination of teaching, research and service skills. It is critical that such talent and skills be deployed to the best advantage of the university and the community, and that there be the most effective use of resources. To this end, we examine the core university functions of teaching, research and service. We conclude that the universities can make better and more effective use of available resources. In the event that any new arrangements we propose were to affect adversely the careers of scholars or staff, then adequate provision should be made for compensation.

The service function at the universities engaged our attention. In the case of the University of Manitoba, most of that activity is accounted for by internal service as opposed to service rendered external to the university. Internal service is described as time spent in consultations, committee work and related activities among academic colleagues. The 900 committees reported by the University of Manitoba are part of this service function. We estimate the cost of that internal service in 1992/1993 to be $30 million. We accept that these activities have their place. But by our reckoning such an allocation of costly academic time is excessive. We recommend that the University of Manitoba target a reduction of fifty percent so that a streamlining of this function will release very substantial amounts of academic time for other activities such as teaching.

The quality of teaching also came under question in our public hearings. A bias in the reward structure against teaching and in favour of research was identified as a basic problem. We recommend this bias be corrected by giving equivalent status and value in the reward structure to teaching, research and service in a manner consistent with the employment objectives for individual academics. We recommend the creation of a more effective evaluation system for academics as a basis for promotion and tenure decisions. Student input should be a significant factor in the evaluation of teaching performance. Information was not available to allow the Commission to be satisfied on the question of teaching assignments or the so-called teaching load. These assignments bear on the size of classes and on the number of courses offered. We recommend that a monitoring of teaching assignments be undertaken and that this be reported to the proposed Council on Post-Secondary Education.

Research is an essential university function in which the wider community has a vital interest. A more effective link between universities and the community must be achieved. We estimate that, in 1992/ 1993, in addition to externally sponsored research, the University of Manitoba devoted about $60 million, mostly publicly funded, to internal unsponsored self-directed research including graduate studies. Over time, this represents a large investment by Manitobans. As far as we could ascertain from the information available to us, this self-directed research is only tenuously linked to Manitoba's social, cultural and economic interests. There is little policy pointing the direction of research to these areas. Technology transfer is underdeveloped. This need not be so. The success of the University of Manitoba Faculty of Agriculture in undertaking outreach to its provincial constituency while gaining scholarly recognition internationally is a case in point. We recommend that better links be formed both by policy and infrastructure to connect internally self-directed university research to Manitoba's social, cultural and economic interests. To assist the process, we recommend that the Provincial Government, through the Economic Innovation and Technology Council, convene regular meetings of interested parties, especially from the small business sector, to highlight the issues and promote practical interconnections.

We recommend that the Council on Post-secondary Education administer an incentive fund to stimulate and reward innovative developments in the core activities of teaching, research and service.

Tuition fees were examined. At present, in the Faculty of Arts at the University of Manitoba, tuition fees cover about thirty-three percent of faculty program costs. In some other faculties, the percentage of costs covered by tuition fees is dramatically less. We judge this to be inequitable. When tuition fees are again reviewed, across-the-board increases should be avoided. Subject to the limitations of practical considerations and good judgement, using the Faculty of Arts' thirty-three percent of faculty program costs as bench mark, we recommend that tuition fees in other faculties be related over time to faculty program costs. Tuition fees for graduate students should also be related over time more closely to faculty program costs. Tuition fees for foreign students should be double the fees paid by citizens of Canada. We note that after such increases, tuition fees would cover less than twenty-five percent of the university's operating expenditures. However, it is our view that, pending decisions on the financial recommendations of this report, the present level of tuition fees should be maintained. In the area of student assistance, we recommend that Manitoba urge the Federal Government to introduce an income contingent repayment plan.

It was made clear to us at the public hearings that, by and large, university performance is not well understood by the public. This is at the root of increasing pressure for accountability. Accountability involves ways and means of making clear to an outside observer what academics may take for granted. We have used the word "transparency" to describe this requirement in a shorthand way. In our reviews, we too have found that important aspects of university operations have not been transparent to us. A better organization and presentation of university affairs to the public is required, not least in the interest of the university itself. We recommend that the universities, in cooperation with the Council on Post-Secondary Education, report on the three core activities of teaching, research and service so that their activities may be "transparent" to the general public.

Up to the present, community colleges have occupied a subordinate and relatively isolated place in the Manitoba post-secondary education system. Student enrolment is among the lowest in Canada. The community college system must be reinforced and expanded. As a first priority for the post secondary education system we recommend, as a reasonable target, a doubling of the participation rate in community college diploma programs over the next five years. Full-time year round operation will be needed to increase the number of places available. We recommend that a broader choice of diploma programs be developed to expand career options for high school students and to supply a pool of well-trained technicians to support economic development. We recommend that Keewatin Community College be the post-secondary education coordinating Centre for Northern Manitoba. Distance education delivery will help to expand community college outreach. We recommend that community colleges be placed within the remit of the Council on Post-Secondary Education to provide for their articulation within the post-secondary education system.

Distance education combined with current communication technology gives our universities and community colleges the opportunity to improve the quality of their offerings and to increase their variety. The technological highway enables institutions within Manitoba to exchange programs and courses. Outside the province the same electronic highway makes it possible to import programs and courses from any source desired. But even more valuable is the use of the electronic highway to open the door of accessibility to students in most places in Manitoba. Interactive two-way audio-visual communication brings any student into the education network. It serves students in rural Manitoba, in the North, in urban situations, at home and in the workplace. As a second priority for the post secondary education system we recommend the further development of the distance education delivery system. A special agency of the Council on Post Secondary Education will coordinate the various interests involved.

One of the important questions for the future is that of post-secondary education for the Aboriginal population of Manitoba. When constitutional responsibilities are clarified, we expect that the federal government will have financial responsibility for the post-secondary education of Aboriginal peoples. In the meantime, the issue is too important to neglect. The federal and provincial governments, the institutions and the Aboriginal community are presently engaged in a variety of useful initiatives. These are likely to continue. However, to bring focus and coherence to this matter, we have suggested that the Manitoba First Nations consider the concept of a First Nations Post-Secondary Education Authority.

We find that the provincial structure of post-secondary education governance now in place is inadequate for the formulation and implementation of post secondary education policy. Substantial changes are called for. We recommend a Cabinet Committee on Post-Secondary Education to focus on policy in the post secondary education sector just as the present Economic Development Board of Cabinet focuses on economic policy. The Committee will give strategic guidelines for the post-secondary education system and coordinate inter-departmental interests. In the interests of better communication, the Committee will meet at least annually with the chairs of universities and colleges.

We recommend a Council on Post-Secondary Education to replace the Universities Grants Commission. It will have a broad, proactive mandate to mediate government policy with post-secondary institutions, coordinate system wide planning and budgeting, as well as responsibility for distance education, accountability reporting, accreditation, system data and community interconnecting relationships.

We find the internal governance of universities ill-adapted to respond in a timely fashion to a rapidly changing environment. Over the years, the effective diffusion of power from the board and president to faculties and departments offers, as an unintended consequence, resistance to change and a reinforcement of the status quo. Nevertheless, boards of governors/regents are by statute the paramount authority in the university structure, being endowed with plenary power. The responsibility for overseeing the proper management of the university is entrusted to their care. If our recommendations for resource allocation and institutional priorities are accepted, it will be the task of the boards of governors/regents to supervise their implementation in accordance with their statutory obligations. We believe that boards should take under advisement their own methods of operation with a view to improvement. It will be their primary task to reexamine the ways in which the university system deals with resource allocation decisions, institutional priorities and strategic direction. The principle of academic collegiality may co-exist with, but should not be allowed to encroach upon, management responsibilities.

Doing things differently is the theme of this report. Some of our recommendations respond to the financial constraints of the present day. But beyond that we intend other recommendations to promote the long term health of our post-secondary education system and to reinforce its capacity to serve our society. Though our mandate obliges us to propose remedies for shortcomings brought to our notice, we feel a strong obligation to respect the good work and accomplishments of good people in the universities and community colleges of the province. We trust that this report may be useful in continuing that good work in the cause to which we are dedicated.

Your suggestions and questions are always welcome at the Department, mbedu@minet.gov.mb.ca