There's a lot of value in this report (62 page PDF) but there are weaknesses as well, and the report should be read in that light. In his blog post announcing the report, Alex Usher writes that "although government funding has been falling, students have made up the difference," though he notes that international students have seen higher fee increases. But this isn't what jumps out as you read the 62 pages; the tone of the report (and many of the evaluative comments) paint a picture of adequate funding, reasonable (sometimes even "trifling") tuition, and the idea that complaints about the system constantly overstate the problem or miss the point. Although the report is written in a generally neutral tone, readers will see a lot of evaluation, assessment, and ad hoc explanations for the data displayed in its pages.
More importantly, though the data is drawn largely from Statistics Canada, much of the data presented are the author's own calculations, raising questions about why the data are presented this way. Additionally, this is a purely economical look at the state of post secondary education - there is virtually nothing written about what was studied (much less researched), what wealth (if any?) was generated by this investment, what contributions the post-secondary system makes to industry, culture and society as a whole. By depicting the system in its entirety as nothing but an expense - borne either by students or by governments - the study misrepresents in an important way the point of having a higher education system.
Today: 9 Total: 102 [Direct link] [Share]
