Cost Cutting Reaches into the Ivory Tower
- Thread starter R.C.
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
As MCG stated, the whole of DND is being reviewed for financial streamlining/cutbacks, RMC is not isolated in these.
The content of the article deals more with the structure of the governance of the college, and the tension between academic freedom and federal oversight, than it does with cost-cutting. Budget reduction is simply the stage upon which this conflict is being analyzed.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Sounds very much like an argument between the civilian arm of the college and DND, which is a battle that's been going on for decades.
I also don't see how a report put together by alumni can really be independent. The chances of them being affected by their own biases from when they went to the school and were staff there (Sloan, as I recall, spent time as a Sqn comd I believe) are probably going to show in the report. We've seen it in retired sr officers when they write reports about how the CF should conduct business.
I also don't see how a report put together by alumni can really be independent. The chances of them being affected by their own biases from when they went to the school and were staff there (Sloan, as I recall, spent time as a Sqn comd I believe) are probably going to show in the report. We've seen it in retired sr officers when they write reports about how the CF should conduct business.
- Reaction score
- 22,780
- Points
- 1,090
So, whiny entitled university professors ignore the fact that the Royal Military College of Canada is a unit of the Canadian Forces.
RMC is not a civilian university; its goals and objectives are not the same as civilian universities; and its structure and breadth is dictated by military requirement. It is long past time for a comprehensive review and cull of useless programs.
For example: Why does RMC offer an MBA program? What business experience do military officers bring? Don't they do public administration? Why can't that education be acquired from other sources?
RMC is the most expensive university in Canada, per capita. If there are ways to reduce the cost they should be embraced. Of course, when it's the teacher's association writing the report, I'm not surprised that they oppose any reductions.
RMC is not a civilian university; its goals and objectives are not the same as civilian universities; and its structure and breadth is dictated by military requirement. It is long past time for a comprehensive review and cull of useless programs.
For example: Why does RMC offer an MBA program? What business experience do military officers bring? Don't they do public administration? Why can't that education be acquired from other sources?
RMC is the most expensive university in Canada, per capita. If there are ways to reduce the cost they should be embraced. Of course, when it's the teacher's association writing the report, I'm not surprised that they oppose any reductions.
- Reaction score
- 2,482
- Points
- 940
To be fair, it's an "independent" panel of RMC alumni, writing for the teachers' association, hence the complete absence of bias making it an "arm's length" report.dapaterson said:
Want to hear about the great deal I got buying some swamp land? :nod:
- Reaction score
- 22,780
- Points
- 1,090
Full report is available online at: http://www.caut.ca/uploads/RMC_Commission_report_final.pdf
And, to engage in some self-criticism, the G&M piece is goes further than the report does; the report is largely focused on status quo issues between faculty and administration, and the degree of influence faculty should have internally. It's the G&M that spun it into "The sky is falling! Money is being cut!" My critiques (above) should be read more as a critique of the G&M article than the CAUT report.
I will observe that, in a discussion of hierarchy, it would have been useful to refer to the MOO and CFOO; to omit those from your analysis is a glaring oversight.
And, to engage in some self-criticism, the G&M piece is goes further than the report does; the report is largely focused on status quo issues between faculty and administration, and the degree of influence faculty should have internally. It's the G&M that spun it into "The sky is falling! Money is being cut!" My critiques (above) should be read more as a critique of the G&M article than the CAUT report.
I will observe that, in a discussion of hierarchy, it would have been useful to refer to the MOO and CFOO; to omit those from your analysis is a glaring oversight.
Similar threads
