The Ontario government says it wants its university students "to succeed in the modern world," but one of its own rulings has effectively expelled some kinds of modern learning technology from provincial classrooms. And that needs to change.
For several years, Ontario has barred universities from arbitrarily charging students extra fees beyond tuition. This is to prevent schools from getting around government limits on tuition increases.
But, in July, the government extended this rule to commercial online products that students pay to access. These include quizzes that provide rapid feedback, and simulations that give students a feel for running a real business. Professors can no longer make these online services mandatory in their courses. They can only add them as optional materials alongside paper-based ones.
And as students return to campus, we are seeing the effect of this ruling. Those innovative online products are disappearing. My colleagues are removing Web quizzes from their courses and reverting to paper tests, and I've abandoned thoughts of trying an online business simulation – because we can't require our students to buy access to them.
Companies have spent money developing these tools, so they're not going to give them away. Someone has to pay for them. But if not students, then who? Ontario universities, under pressure to rein in operating costs, can't cover these new bills.
And if professors can't assign online exercises to every student, they're not going to use them. It makes no sense to spend time designing an online assignment for one group of students, then design a paper one for others. Automation should make processes more efficient, not less.
The Ontario restriction might have had the noble intent of saving students money, but, in practice, it's discouraging classroom innovation.
It's not that these products don't work. Even supporters of this restrictive policy, such as Carleton University's Frances Woolley, acknowledge that the online tools are valuable. She notes they engage student interest and build their understanding, so that, "in many ways, they're better than a standard textbook."
And the restriction doesn't even make economic sense. If a professor can assign students a $150 paper textbook, why not a $15 online simulation?
Another concern should be the well-being of our software industry. Some of these products were developed by Canadian firms. If they're shut out of their home market, there's less incentive to stay in Canada.
Queen's Park certainly has no discomfort in imposing fees for its own online services. Last summer, I renewed my driver's licence at a Service Ontario kiosk. A computer kiosk is undoubtedly cheaper to operate than a full-service office, but I had to pay an extra $1 "convenience fee" to use it.
University campuses have computers in the libraries and Wi-Fi in the hallways. Students access the Internet on their cellphones and bring laptops to class. But when it comes to teaching, we're supposed to stick with ye olde paper and pencil for our assignments.
I understand students' desire to save money. That's why I switched to a less expensive textbook in my course this year. But I also want to give students the best education I can.
Quality improvement by its nature requires change. Change can be hard, and we don't want government to make it even harder.
Dalton McGuinty, the "education premier," should undo this ruling. In fact, all the parties in Ontario's election campaign should promise to reverse it.
The Liberals themselves say that, "in today's global economy, the best jobs go to the best-educated." But to ensure that the best-educated continue to go to Ontario, we need to support these innovations in the classroom – not smother them.
Michael Armstrong teaches quality management in the Faculty of Business at Brock University.