The purpose of this research was to study the impact of institutional forces on higher education policy processes. The project involved a case study analysis of the alignment between intention and perceived impact, focused specifically on the implementation of higher education differentiation policy within two of Canada’s provincial norths (Northern Alberta and Northern Ontario). These provinces were chosen because they represent two of the largest jurisdictions in Canada by population, and because they have both implemented differentiation policy frameworks within the last decade and a half. The research was undertaken within a theoretical framework that combined elements of new institutionalism (North, 1990; DiMaggio Powell, 1991; Thelen, 1999; Peters, 2012; Lowndes Roberts, 2013; Scott, 2014), strategic reaction theory (Oliver 1991), pragmatism (Allison Pomeroy, 2000; Duemer Zebidi, 2009; Anderson Shattuck, 2012; Kaye, 2013), and power (Foucault, 1980; Mills, 2003). Through examination of the ways in which similar policy goals were implemented in Northern and Rural Central Alberta, and in Northern Ontario, it was possible to identify institutional forces that impacted the policy process in each jurisdiction. The central argument of this study was that, in order to improve alignment between policy intentions and policy outcomes, policy makers (political decision makers) and policy implementers (organizational decision makers) must take these institutional forces into account at every stage in the higher education policy process.
In the past 20 plus years, governments have implemented neoliberal policies requiring Ontario colleges to be more entrepreneurial, efficient, and fiscally sustainable amidst declines in funding. Funding, enrolment and burgeoning demand from international students led some colleges to enter third-party arrangements (TPAs) with for-profit private career colleges (PCCs). What began as a trickle is now a flood. More than 50% of Ontario public colleges have TPAs. This presentation summarizes the results of an exploratory, descriptive, qualitative research study using document analysis and semi-structured interviews to understand the trajectory of and the factors giving rise to the TPAs, their impact on public colleges and the implications of these arrangements on the future of Ontario’s public college system. The research is grounded in two overarching theoretical frameworks, historical institutionalism (Streeck & Thelen, 2005), which describes how institutions in advanced political economies change over time and Principal-Agent Theory (PAT) (Lane & Kivisto, 2008; Mitnick, 1975; Ross, 1973), which describes problems of external oversight relationships. Three complementary theoretical frameworks, which share similar assumptions about the nature of institutions in society, are used to situate the findings and extend the analysis. These include the coordination of tertiary education systems (Clark, 1983; Salazar & Leihy, 2013), Marginson’s framework for describing and analyzing higher education in political economies (2016), and processes of differentiation in tertiary education (van Vught, 2008). I argue that Ontario’s CAATs are being transformed through a process of layering, as theorized by Streeck and Thelen (2005). With the support of government policy, the TPA model contributes to the marketisation and privatisation of Ontario’s public college system.
While research and innovation activities are a relatively new undertaking for colleges in Canada, there has been a tremendous increase in college research capacity over the last two decades. The CICan applied research survey demonstrates the tangible impact of college and institute applied research across all sectors of the economy and in communities all over the country: colleges and institutes received over $354M in research funding enabling 42,000 students to work with 8,000 partners on 6,400 projects in 2019-2020. As enablers of local and regional industry and community innovation, colleges are uniquely positioned to help Canada improve its relatively weak innovation record. This session will explore approaches and best practices for developing and sustaining college impact beyond the classroom. Participants will be invited to discuss challenges and opportunities for engaging in this important work.