Letter: Not a time to push panic buttons

a/Letters to the Editor/Opinion by

Tuesday’s “Campus Conversation” item in the Tribune features four students offering their opinions on whether McGill is in decline. The range of responses covered the entire spectrum: definitely, maybe, maybe not, not really.

I applaud the fact that our students take the future of our institution seriously. I also applaud and welcome the fact that they constantly challenge us to be better.

Kate Sheridan, a student Senator, provided the key to reading this diversity of opinion among student leaders: “It depends on your perspective.”

 PGSS Secretary-General Jonathan Mooney took the tack of examining first the external situation, and noted several facts:

  • Quebec is dead last among provinces in funding its universities’ operating budgets.
  • McGill is a Quebec university.
  • McGill is suffering – but it saved itself by having a strategy of improving the research performance of its professoriate.

Former SSMU President Josh Redel argued that the failure to allow student groups to use the McGill name, a symptom of trying to protect a “brand,” showed how far the University depended on its past glories, and he expressed the view that McGill is doing too little to get professors to take their pedagogical role as seriously as their research efforts.

SSMU Science representative Devin Bissky Dziadyk, while recognizing the external constraints on the University, pointed to the resilience of McGill and the still outstanding quality and performance of its professors, staff and students, and implied that any downhill motion could be checked in time to protect McGill’s reputation.

Ms. Sheridan, in addition to offering insight on perspective and showing she is aware of the external constraints, described an overall positive trajectory that could be used to the advantage of a new Principal and new Deputy Provost (Student Life and Learning).

As McGill’s chief academic officer (after the Principal), I take the opinions of these students very seriously and I share their communal sense of ambiguity when it comes to answering a question like, “Is McGill declining?”

So please allow me to take a crack at answering that question and commenting on the thoughtful responses of the four students.

There should be no doubt that McGill, in comparison with its peer group of public research universities, is underfunded. That underfunding comes from two sources: a lower average contribution on the part of the provincial government to the operating budget and much lower average tuition fees paid by students, especially for undergraduate and professional programs.

However, regardless of the financial constraints, there are legitimate questions about what we actually do with what we have. Our scorecard on student-centredness is far from enviable, according to the survey data, yet the examples of the interactions between researchers and students in the various venues across Faculties indicate positive experiences that should be expanded. Facilitating innovative learning environments is, in fact, a pillar of our academic strategic plan.

I do not think it is accurate or fair to say McGill is resting on its laurels. Until the cuts were announced in December 2012, we had experienced 12 years of increased revenues. Over that time, we hired more than 1,000 new professors (400 net), reducing the average age of the professoriate and changing completely the composition of that body.

During those years, the quality of our undergraduates continued to rise. Student aid increased by a factor of 10. Programs of study were redesigned, institutes established, graduate student numbers and quality reached new heights.

Relative performance in research inputs, outputs and outcomes rose as well.

But, impressive as these things are against our baseline, the institutions with which we compete were also making significant gains. So our relative standing among the world’s universities, all things considered, did not improve – at least in the QS and Times Higher rankings. Those who are ready to declare that McGill is in decline might want to look at this year’s Shanghai rankings, where we in fact have recently posted our highest score ever in that set of measurements.

So this is clearly not a time to be pushing panic buttons. New leadership and fresh perspectives will help McGill by reinvigorating the debate and discussion on how well we meet our mission of research-intensity, student-centredness, international reach, quality standards, and public purpose.

Insights like those provided by the four students who engage in the Campus Conversation, have got us off on the right foot.

Prof. Anthony C. Masi
  is McGill’s Provost.

  • A

    3 Main Issues McGill is terrible at:
    1) Academic advising – Not only do students not receive the correct advice, they actually receive WRONG advice that causes them to take extra class.
    2) Career Services/Job Placement – It sucks. Let’s be honest.
    3) Academics – Class size, Course offerings etc all need to be improved.

    Often as a student we’re treated like we’re lucky to be here. Maybe you think we are, but realistically, for better learning and career prospects I should have gone to Queens, and it’s not even questionable. Many students feel this way.

    • Mike

      I agree. The advisors here at McGill don’t appear to give a crap about helping you, even when your future is at stake. I’ve waited in line to see them, and many times I’ve only gotten vague answers such as “that’s for you to decide”. Clearly, we need their help to make decisions, otherwise we wouldn’t be there. They’re the professionals that students turn to for advice, and they should act out their roles rather than just coast along.

  • Pingback: A campus conversation: Is McGill in decline? | McGill Tribune()

  • Jim

    What’s the slope? In decline from what to what? From a more exclusionary elitist university to one that is more inclusive and deeply cares about the process of learning in a society? It seems like we, in general, are looking at the y-axis as the quality of reputation. Some may argue, as a society that places strong importance on the individual, that it is about the quality of education of an individual who attends McGill. But few of the rankings are about that. They highlight the relative importance of the words that people doing research at McGill publish in peer-reviewed journals, something that has dubious correlation to the quality of education. This quality of education of an individual argument seems to go against the idea of university as being a source of social good. Aren’t hyper-individualism, exceptionalism, and “getting ahead” things that we should be working to deconstruct? Is McGill a social force working in the direction of deconstructing or upholding these forces? Is that not a measure of McGill worth plotting to see whether it is trending up or whether this university is “in decline” with regard to its societal obligations?