Blast from the past… well from winter 2007
In light of recent suggestions that would affect university autonomy and academic freedom, I thought it might be enlightening to revisit an article published in Maclean’s magazine on transferability of post-secondary courses (4/2/2007, vol.120, issue 12, 41-42). In “Not all degrees are created equal” Erin Millar describes the problems had by a student named Dave Cryderman when after obtaining a BA from Capilano College in Vancouver he applied to Education programs in Ontario. He discovered that his “degree” did not meet the admission standards of the universities to which he applied. Thus although he had a BA, he could not advance into a post-graduate program in Ontario.
When Millar looked into the situation more closely she discovered that Cryderman’s “problem” was that Capilano College was not a member of the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada. It did not meet AUCC membership criteria. As a result, Cryderman and other students like him who study at institutions excluded from AUCC membership, cannot be assured that their degrees will fulfill admission requirements. In fact, Millar discovered that many Registrars use AUCC membership as a quick and easy way to determine if courses and programs taught elsewhere in Canada will be credited at their institution. Graduates of institutions not on the membership list could find themselves in the same predicament as Cryderman: the RO’s of the institutions where he applied wouldn’t even assess his application.
Interestingly, as pointed out by Millar, there is no official national accrediting body for universities in Canada and so, by default, those that qualify for membership in the AUCC are viewed as “real.” AUCC membership is the de facto measure by which students are assessed — especially those whose educational choices take them from one province to another.
What then, are the standards by which universities (and ultimately students) are judged?
AUCC member institutions must be dedicated to (1) teaching and research, (2) scholarship and the advancement of knowledge, and (3) service to the community. This trio of activities is, according to the AUCC, the mission of a university. In fulfilling its mission, a university must be autonomous, that is free from external influence, and it must ensure the academic freedom of faculty employed in the university’s mandate, namely “the pursuit and dissemination of knowledge and understanding.” Furthermore, the AUCC “Statement on Academic Freedom and Institutional Autonomy” states that “Academic freedom is essential in order that society may have access to impartial expertise for knowledgeable comments on all issues studied in universities, included those surrounded by controversy.”
Do we really want to re-jig the mission and mandate of New Brunswick universities so that they are out of step with those defining other national institutions?
