November29,2011DearDeputiesFergusonandWilliams,ThankyoufortheopportunitytoreviewthedraftMemorandumofUnderstanding(MoU)betweentheProvinceofNovaScotiaandtheUniversitiesofNovaScotiaatourNovember25

meeting.Weappreciatethegovernment’scontinuedwillingnesstoinvitestudentstothesediscussions.Wewritetoexpressourattitudestowardsthedraftagreementintheparagraphsbelow.Wehighlightthelanguagewearesupportiveofaswellassectionsthatareconcerningandareasrequiringimprovement.

Section10

Wearesupportiveofthecontinueddiscussionsoutlinedinsubsections“a”through“o.”WerecommendaddinganadditionalbulletpointonAccessandAffordability.WebelievethattheuniversitysysteminNovaScotiamustbeaccessibletoanycitizenwhowishestopursueaneducationwithinthatsystem,regardlessofthefinancialorsocialbackgroundofthatindividual.Whilediscussionsonqualityassurance,transparencyandaccountabilityinuniversitiesimportant,itseemstritethatthegovernmentwouldputsuchheavyfocusontheseissueswithoutatthesametimeensuringthatthissystemisaccessibletothepublicitserves.ThedecisionsmadebythisgovernmentsincetakingofficestillonlyservetomakeeducationinNovaScotialessaccessible.Improvementsinthestudentassistanceprogramoverthelastyeararewelcomed,butaswehaveshowninpreviouscommunicationswiththegovernment,theyhavenotkeptpacewiththerisingcostoftuitionandlivingcosts.Thepurchasingpowerofastudentloan,forinstance,hasdecreasedeveryyearsince2006.ThroughouttheMoUprocess,therehasbeennodirectdiscussionontheaccessibilityofouruniversitysystem.

Section11

InApril,thegovernmentmadeitclearthatstudentswereavaluedparticipantintheprocessofgeneratingthenextMemorandumofUnderstanding.TheissuestobediscussedasapartoftheChangeMandatethroughThePartnershipBoardandSteeringCommitteeandworkinggroupsarethesameissuesthatwereoriginallyintendedtobediscussedattheMoUtable.Anydiscussionsontheseissuesmustalsoinvolvestudentrepresentativesasfullandequalmembers.FollowingtherouteproposedinthedraftMoUrepresentsadramaticshiftinthegovernment’spositiononmeaningfulengagementwithstudentsfortheworse.Theprincipalweespouseinaskingtobeapartofthesediscussionsissimple.Ifit’saboutus,don’tdoitwithoutus.Universitystudentscontributeroughlyhalfofnon-researchoperatingrevenuetouniversities.Thegovernmentrepresentsthe

taxpayerwhocontributestheotherhalf.ItmakesperfectsensetohavetheprimaryfundersofthesystemanytablewheredecisionsaboutthefutureoftheuniversitysysteminNovaScotia.Thelanguageinsection11ofthedraftMoUispatriarchal.“Studentswillbeinvitedtoparticipateinappropriateworkinggroups,”readssubsection“c”.Thisbegstheobviousquestion“whowilldeterminewhatdiscussionare“appropriate”forstudentstoparticipatein?Itisouropinionthatisinappropriatetohaveanyoftheplanneddiscussionswithoutstudentsinvolvedasequalparticipantsalongsidegovernmentanduniversities.Thedraftdocumentstatesthatthepartnershipboardwillmeetannuallywithstudentgroups.Weappreciatethetoken,butdonotfeelthistypeofconsultationwillcreatetheclimateofcollaborationthatisnecessarytoensureaworkableuniversitysystemforall.Notengagingstudentgroupsinthesamelevelofdiscussionasuniversityadministration,orcreatinganalternateavenueforparticipation,placesstudentgroupsinapositionofperpetualreactionary,andoppositional,state.Thealternativeismeaningfulengagementthatcreatestheopportunityforustobeproactivecontributorsthatcollaborateoncommonprioritiestocreateasystemthatisthebestfitforthestudentsandstakeholdersitserves.

Section12

Ascommunicatedtothegovernmentbefore,webelievethattuitionshouldremainfrozenforallprograms,ashadbeenthecaseunderthepreviousmemorandumofunderstanding.

Medical,DentistryandLawStudentTuition

Thepolicytoallowunregulatedtuitionincreasesfortheseprofessionalprogramshighlightsthegovernment’slackofcleardirectiononaccessibility.Weknowthattheseprogramsaresomeofthemostinaccessibleprogramsinouruniversitysystem,yetthisdraftagreementwillallowtuitiontoincreasewithoutlimit.Thisisparticularlyconcerninggiventhecurrentparentalincomelevelsofmanystudentscurrentlyinprofessionalprograms.Forinstance,inmedicalschools,a2002surveyofCanadianMedicalSchoolsdemonstratedthatalmosthalf(43.5percent)ofthen-medicalstudentscamefromneighborhoodswithmedianfamilyincomesinthetopquintileofCanadianearners.Meanwhile,only15percentofparentsofmedicalstudentshadannualhouseholdincomeslessthan$40,000,while39.7percentofCanadianhouseholdsreportedincomesof$40,000orlessannually

Alreadyfewerstudentsfromlow-incomebackgroundsattendmedicalschool

1Dhalla,I.A.,Kwong,J.C.,Streiner,D.L.,Baddour,R.E.,Waddell,A.E.,&Johnson,I.L.(January01,2002).Characteristicsoffirst-yearstudentsinCanadianmedicalschools.CanadianMedicalAssociationJournal,166,8,1029-35.



comparedtootherstudents.Growthintuitionfeesataratenearlytriplethatofinflationaswehaveseenthisyearwillnotmakemedicaleducationanymoreaccessibleforthesestudents.Asimilarchallengeexistsforstudentsconsideringlawanddentistry.

InternationalStudentTuition

Theproposeddraftallowsforunregulatedincreasesininternationalstudenttuition.Thisraisestworelatedissues:fairnessandaccountability.Fromataxpayerperspective,itmakessensetohaveinternationalstudenttuitionfeesthataccountforthetruecostofeducatinganinternationalstudent.Undertheexistingfundingformula,thegovernmenthasagreedtofundinternationalstudents,upto10percentoftotalenrollmentataninstitution,nodifferentthananyotherCanadianstudent.ItisourunderstandingthatinpractisethegovernmentfundsallinternationalstudentsasiftheywereCanadianstudents.Fromthisperspective,thecostofaninternationalstudent’stuitionshouldbenodifferentthanthecostofanyotherstudent’stuition.Aspubliclyfundedinstitutions,theuniversityshouldbeaccountableforwherethemoneycollectedfrominternationalstudentsgoes.Ifthecostoffundingtheeducationofaninternationalstudenthasbeencovered,whatisthejustificationforcollectingadditionalrevenue?Theobviousansweristhattheuniversities“need”areleasevalvefromwhichrevenuecanflowtocompensateforfundingreductionsfromgovernment.Thispresentstheobviousproblemoffairness.Ifthecostofeducationisincreasing,thequalityofeducationisstagnantordecreasing,andinternationalstudentsarebearingagreaterburdenofthecostthananyoneelse,howisthisfair?Wesuggestsection12oftheagreementbeamendedtoaddressissuesofaccountabilityandfairnessforinternationalstudents.

FullCostRecoveryPrograms

InadditiontoconsultationwiththeDepartmentofLabourandAdvancedEducationpriortoconvertingaregularprogramtoafullcostrecoveryprogram,universitiesshouldalsoberequiredtoconsultationwithstudents,tobedefinedinasimilarwayasAncillaryandAuxiliaryFees.

Section13

AncillaryandAuxiliaryFeesWerefertoouroriginalrecommendationsfromthepreviousMoUthatwerecommendbeappliedtothewordinginsection13.1.

UniversitiesagreetoonlyraiseAncillaryandAuxiliary(A&A)feesafterreceivingapprovalfromthestudentswhowillpaythosefees.(Clause15h)