President's Newsletter — Issue 9 (March, 2010)
We have all just gone through the remarkable experience of the Winter Olympics and basked in the remarkable success of our Canadian athletes and of the Games generally, and of the remarkable spirit that suffused our country. A large number of you were volunteers for VANOC, and I want to congratulate you for being such an important part of the Games. I am certain that it was a once-in-a lifetime experience. For all of us, of course, the memories of our own Olympics will remain forever, and I think we all agree that the Games constitutes an important coming of age for Canada. We still have the Paralympic Games later this month, and I expect a number of you are involved in this important event. Certainly I look forward to following the performances of our Paralympic athletes in what I know will also be a very successful Games.
I welcome everyone back, although I know how challenging it is to return to day-to-day activities after the experience of the Games. Having said this, however, we have our own sense of expectation concerning Kwantlen, and I look forward to continuing with all the excellent work we started earlier in the year.
Our Future as a Polytechnic University
Some of you will have been asked for input into the current branding exercise by Creative Intelligence. While there is further work to be done, and we are far from finished, we have discovered that one of our biggest challenges is the word “polytechnic,” and, more specifically, what it means for Kwantlen. This is hardly surprising, as it was a major topic for debate for the Mission and Mandate Task Force, even as it ultimately ended up figuring prominently in the Mission and Mandate statement, which explicitly states, “Kwantlen is B.C.’s Polytechnic University.”
It would seem that our challenge here is a straightforward one. While Kwantlen might call itself a “polytechnic” university, it does not currently have the range of programming associated with such institutions elsewhere in the world. At the same time, our programming does not differ in any significant way from the other new British Columbia universities, which have, for the most part, the same breadth of programming as Kwantlen (in particular Thompson Rivers, Fraser Valley, and Vancouver Island). This, inevitably, creates additional confusion in people’s minds. It would not be inaccurate to say that some of us were surprised about our name when it was announced, and wondered what it meant, especially given the existence of BCIT and the very recent failed experiment of the British Columbia Technical University.
The obvious conclusion is that Kwantlen, at least at present, is not what it says it is, and this begs the question of how can we make this happen? Developing into a true “polytechnic” institution is not something that will come easily or overnight. The other option, of course, is to eliminate the term “polytechnic” from our name altogether, and choose to concentrate on being a regional undergraduate teaching-intensive university. The idea that we would be an essentially undergraduate university that offers technical, trades, and college programs, along with degree programs, is a perfectly legitimate position to take, and is certainly consistent with the mandate specified in Kwantlen’s enabling legislation.
It was with these issues in mind that Gord Schoberg, Vice-Chair of the Board of Governors, Mary Jane Stenberg, Executive Director of External Relations, and I recently met with Dr. Moira Stilwell, Minister of Advanced Education and Labour Market Development. The confluence of the Ci branding exercise and our meeting with the Minister could not have been more propitious. The results of our meeting with the Minister are compelling. The Minister made absolutely clear that the term “polytechnic” will remain part of the University’s name, and that there is considerable ownership of the name by the Government. Further, there is the expectation that Kwantlen will use this opportunity to differentiate itself as a very particular kind of university. Further, there was general agreement that Kwantlen should put together a plan for the next three to five years which will allow it to move towards legitimizing its role as a polytechnic university. We have therefore agreed that the University will present the Minister with a preliminary plan by the Fall, 2010. This undertaking is hugely important for Kwantlen, as it will focus attention on clarifying what we know is a source of confusion for many, both inside and outside the institution, and will provide a context for the necessary planning which must follow-up the recent Mission and Mandate exercise.
We need to get moving on this exercise quickly if we are to meet the September deadline. The Board is exceedingly engaged in the question, and will have a critical voice in determining the final shape of Kwantlen as a “polytechnic university.” There will be a role for Senate and the Planning and Priorities Committee of Senate, especially related to academic offerings. Obvious, too, is the need for involvement by the individual Faculties through their Academic Councils, and by the Deans, who are charged with providing academic leadership to their respective Faculties. The first task, then, is to determine how all these bodies should interact to ensure that there is full consultation and input. It is important to remember, too, that we are not starting from scratch. While the polytechnic label associated with a university might be unique to British Columbia, the notion of “polytechnic university” is used elsewhere, and we need to look at these examples as we map out our future.
I want to conclude this part of my discussion with one very clear message. In the last few days I have heard expressions of concern that a move in the direction of a “polytechnic university” will mean a diminution of the traditional disciplines at Kwantlen, especially those in the Humanities and Social Sciences. Nothing could be further from the truth. Those of you who are familiar with polytechnic universities elsewhere in the world will know that many of them have outstanding, indeed world class, programs in the Humanities and the Social Sciences, which remain at the core of the institution. We know from other universities, too, that by establishing a distinctive identity, every program in the institution benefits. This is clearly our intention. Finally, I have spent my entire career teaching and writing in a variety of disciplines in the Humanities, and know full well the critical role the Humanities and the Social Sciences play in undergraduate higher education. I would hope that Kwantlen will remain true to that tradition.
Institutional Reorganization
There has over the last several months been a number of significant administrative changes. Deborah Harkin has, of course, announced her retirement. As a result of Deborah’s departure, we aim to restructure the institution’s senior administration. The position of Vice-President (Human Resources Services) will become Associate Vice-President (Human Resource Services), and will report to the Vice-President (Finance and Administration), while the current position of Associate Vice-President (Academic) will become Associate Vice-President (Academic and Faculty Affairs) and will continue to report to the Vice-President (Academic). The redefined Associate Vice-President (Academic and Faculty Affairs) will have responsibility for academic planning and will take on further responsibility for all matters pertaining to the Kwantlen Faculty Association that are now the responsibility of the Vice-President (Academic). The Associate Vice-President (Human Resource Services) will continue to handle all other matters currently the responsibility of the Vice-President (Human Resources Services), including those relating to the BCGEU. There is no intention of changing any of the current reporting structure.
Since my arrival at Kwantlen, I have been concerned that we are not sufficiently focusing on the student experience, and indeed various student surveys, while praising Kwantlen on many fronts, and especially for its teaching, express concern that the institution does not offer the breadth of experience found at other universities. Among the reasons for this situation are that Kwantlen is largely a commuter campus, is comprised of four campuses, and has no residences, which might serve as a foundation for campus life. If we are to provide our students with something more than is currently the case, we will need to focus our attention accordingly. An associated issue has been the way in which we handle recruitment, registration, and admissions, which because of administrative idiosyncrasies, does not, at present, allow for a single, integrated process. With these concerns in mind, we will make the following changes, effective April 1, 2010.
Ron Maggiore will take on the title of Associate Vice-President (Strategic Enrolment Management) with the following units reporting to him. New Student Programs will be responsible for Student Recruitment and New Student Communications (including international student recruitment and support). Other units will be reorganized according to the following: Admissions and Records, Registration and Student Information Systems, Student and Financial Award Services, Front Desk Services, and Recruitment Technologies.
Jody Gordon will assume the role of Associate Vice-President, Students, with a broad mandate relating to improving the quality of the student learning experience and the learning environment at Kwantlen. In her new role, the following will report to her: Student Engagement, which includes Educational Advising, Aboriginal Student Services, and Student Life and Development; Athletics and Recreation; Student Development and Success, which includes the Learning Centre, Student Counseling, and Services for Students with Disabilities; and Student Judicial Affairs. It is also our intention to begin a feasibility study for student residences at Kwantlen; this, too, will be Jody’s responsibility.
A major part of this reorganization has relevance for the current Department of Marketing and Communications. The Department will be split in two, with all Marketing and Communications relating to student recruitment moving to Strategic Enrolment Management. Peter Chevrier, who is currently Director of Marketing and Communications, along with several of his current staff, will move to the new position of Director of Recruitment Technologies. He will be specifically responsible for recruitment web development and maintenance, multimedia production, and social media management, and will provide administrative support for Kwantlen’s student communication plan.
We shall create a new Department of Communications, which will be responsible for all other internal and external communications. There is currently a senior vacancy in Marketing and Communications which we shall use to recruit a new Director, so there are no new costs attached to this reorganization. The new Department of Communications will become part of an enlarged University Advancement Office, which will include Fundraising, Alumni Development, and Communications. This is a common model found in universities across North America. Jeff Norris will continue in his current position as Chief Advancement Officer and Executive Director of the Kwantlen Foundation.
Executive Recruitment
No one doubts that we have some challenges relating to recruiting senior administrative staff to the University. As I have mentioned in a previous Newsletter, we currently have or will shortly have four decanal searches, a Vice-Presidential search, and two Associate Vice-Presidential searches. Managing all this is going to be challenging, especially as it requires substantial input of time and energy from different quarters of the institution.
For this reason, we are starting immediately with the searches for the Associate Vice-President (Human Resource Services), the Dean of Academic and Career Advancement (formerly the Faculty of Qualifying Studies), and the Dean of Community and Health Studies. We have engaged Pinton, Forrest, and Madden to help with the first of these; Odgers Berndston will handle the remaining two. Over the last few months, we have been developing a comprehensive set of procedures for the appointment and reappointment of senior administrators. To the extent possible, we shall be following these procedures in the current searches.
We are continuing, as well, with the search for a Director of Continuing Education. I am pleased to advise that we have developed a further short list of candidates, with initial interviews planned for the coming week. I am optimistic that we shall be able to announce an appointment very soon thereafter. We shall continue with an Acting Dean of Humanities for the coming year. Also, it is my intention to appoint an Acting Dean of Science and Horticulture, and we have asked for nominations and applications from the Faculty. In this regard, too, we have had discussions with Horticulture about the possibility of splitting off in the coming year as its own Faculty, given its very explicit academic focus, its plans to develop distinctive degree programs, and its established research program through the Institute for Sustainable Horticulture.
2010-2011 Budget
The budget process went more smoothly this year than last and will conclude when the budget goes to the Board for consideration at the end of this month. The Board of Governors must approve the budget, as required by government regulation. Despite our best efforts, we still need to back the process up further if we are to provide adequate time and opportunity for meaningful discussion and consideration of any proposed budget in light of the institution’s academic priorities. I do want to thank all those who participated in the budget process this year, especially our staff in Finance and the Finance Committee of Senate, who were especially helpful in focusing the budget. As per past practice, the budget will be discussed with the KSA, the KFA and the BCGEU.
No one should doubt the challenge of the current budget, given the difficult economic circumstances of the province. Be that as it may, we based the process on the Academic Priorities approved by Senate and on the Board of Governor’s interim Ends Statements. Given the limited amount of money available, we choose to focus on three priorities:
- Implement and support new programs
- Expand applied learning opportunities
- Support student success and retention
Faculties and Service Departments submitted budget proposals in excess of $25 million, and while we were not able to come remotely close to funding them, these proposals will constitute part of the process for next year, thus eliminating the need for deans and directors to start from scratch. Given the need to support the institution’s core program, no new resources will be allocated to administration.
The fiscal environment in which we are working is an exceedingly difficult one, and will limit our revenue capacity. We do not expect there to be any grant increase between 2010 and 2012, and we anticipate that there will be further cuts to our Capital Allocation budget, which has already been decreased from $1.8 million to under $500,000 in two years. It is expected that general tuition rate increases will be in the range of 0-2 %. The budget we shall put before the Board recommends a 2% general increase in tuition, although we shall not know this with any certainty until we hear from the Government. In the 2010-2011 budget, we are also proposing a $30/credit increase for international student tuition and higher tuition for new programs. These tuition fees are exempt from the government cap.
Other sources of revenue will also be limited. Parking fee increases, which are substantial, will only cover Translink and HST tax costs, and any revenue from food services will need to be reinvested in food service enhancements, something which is desperately needed. As people might know, we are in the final stages of a search for a food provider. We are concerned, too, that bookstore revenues may be negatively impacted by electronic texts, and we shall be focusing on the bookstore over the next year to determine how more revenues might be realized.
Institutional costs are also rising. The University will need to fund contractual increases relating to staff increments, regularizations, and recruiting costs, which are themselves substantial ($1,841,100). We also continue to face difficulties concerning the offering of additional course sections. In the coming year, marginal revenues (tuition) for 130 new demand sections will exceed marginal costs (as determined by class size) by about $300,000, which, of course must come from the continuing operating budget. The College Pension Fund will increase for both plan members and the University; the estimate is 0.5% for each. While Parking Fees will go up for students by 14% to cover Translink taxes, the University will continue to subsidize employee annual parking as per both collective agreements. This subsidy may be a taxable benefit for all employees. Finally, HST will increase parking costs by a further 7% on July 1, 2010.
The biggest challenge for Kwantlen, however, relates to how the Government requires the institution to have a balanced consolidated budget. At present, the University has over $32 million in investments, and land and property in excess of our planned needs valued at approximately $12 million. In other words, we are far from being in difficult financial circumstances. Accordingly, one might ask why some of these funds cannot be used to support new and much needed initiatives? The problem hinges on the Government requirement that the University cannot run a consolidated deficit. Simply put, although the University has substantial capital assets, required accounting practices result in increasing deficits in our capital fund. We can therefore only balance the University’s consolidated budget by running multi-million dollar surpluses in our operating budget.
While there are good reasons for this form of accounting, it makes life difficult for an institution such as Kwantlen, which has demonstrated sound and prudent management of its assets. The solution for Kwantlen is to be removed, along with other post-secondary educational institutions, from the Government Reporting Entity, in which our budget becomes part of the overall provincial budget. The good news is that in the recent Speech from the Throne there was an indication that universities will be allowed out of the Government Reporting Entity, although there are as yet no criteria for exemption except that it will be done on a case by case basis. It goes without saying that this is a major advocacy issue for all post-secondary institutions and especially the universities.
Notwithstanding the current difficult circumstances, Finance has worked very hard to free up resources for new initiatives. Once the budget has been reviewed and approved by the Board, I shall have more to say concerning detailed allocations. Regardless of the excellent job that Finance has done for the coming year, I am not yet satisfied that the University has sufficiently examined the possibility of using its current resources efficiently. There is the inevitable assumption each year that what we currently have is inadequate and that we need more resources. Given the current limited resources, we need to look at what we spend and whether or not it is spent in the wisest possible manner. This must become part of the budget process. It is very likely therefore that we shall be introducing a percentage claw-back on all units for the 2011-2012 budget, which will then either be allocated back to a unit or reallocated to other units depending on need and institutional priorities. If we are to continue to develop as a university in difficult economic times, I do not know any other way.
A Few Final Words
It is perhaps a bit corny to use the cliché, “we live in interesting times.” I know there are many discussions occurring across the institution on a whole range of issues—institutional governance, the role and authority of Senate, program development, resource allocation. This, though, is to be expected at an institution which is in Kwantlen’s place. I remember at the very beginning of my career when I was at the University of Lethbridge, then a very new institution trying to find its way, debates were intense and there was often disagreement. But the commitment to the future of the University was extraordinary. I sense the same thing at Kwantlen. Yes, Kwantlen, has been around as an institution for thirty or so years, but the current change to University status is without question the singular most important change in the institution’s history. We are a new university, and so it is hardly surprising that I see the same forces at play that I experienced many years ago at Lethbridge. At the same time, we are in a different place. We cannot ignore our history and traditions, even as we look to find new ways of doing things. And thus we must be willing to allow for the fullest kind of discussion with the knowledge that only through such conversation can we together shape the future of Kwantlen. I was particularly taken in this regard by the recent discussions at the Senate Finance Committee, where concern was expressed about a lack of detail in some parts of the draft budget. This concern was perfectly legitimate, and as a result we were able to produce a more transparent budget. It is exactly this kind of conversation we should be encouraging. If nothing else, universities are built on openness.
David W. Atkinson
President & Vice Chancellor
