News
The Vice President for Student Affairs at the University of Ottawa advocated for the constant renewal of institutions in order to adapt to and respond to the sociocultural changes in communities. He also affirmed that "Chile is a good business partner for Canada.".
As part of the joint work between the CALDO group of Canada and the Council of Rectors (CRUCH), we present the interview with the Vice President of Student Affairs of the University of Ottawa, Gary Slater, who recommends that it is necessary to "work on the quality of what you have and not on regulations.".
-How can innovations be introduced into doctoral programs and what are the most significant obstacles?
Before discussing innovation, it's important to note that quality control processes in doctoral education in Canada don't mandate a set number of courses. Therefore, we have considerable freedom to design new programs, as quality control focuses on the quality of the final outcomes, not the structure. The term we increasingly use in our system is "learning objectives." The question we ask ourselves is: what are these objectives, how do we ensure students achieve them, and then how do we verify that they have indeed been met? If I can design a program with clearly defined objectives and a pathway to achieving them, and I can convince subject matter experts that it corresponds to a master's or doctoral level, then it is a master's or doctoral program; we don't get bogged down in structure or regulations.
To put it another way, if there's an obstacle to innovation, it's not regulation but people. We have to convince people that innovation is a good thing, that things can change, that we can't continue as we were fifty years ago, because times have changed, the job market has changed, students aren't what we were when we were young, so the obstacles lie in convincing people more than anything else.
-What lessons can we draw from this experience for a country like Chile in the innovation of doctoral programs?
I think the biggest obstacle to achieving this is people who are stuck in the past. Those who say, “When I did my PhD 30 years ago, this is how it was, and therefore this is how it should be.” Then you have to say no, because things have changed. Convincing people is the first step. The other is creating a structure, setting milestones in doctoral training, since in some disciplines, PhDs have very little structure. In some areas, a PhD is basically a research project, and for many professors, you do research for four years, and if you do enough, you get a PhD; if not, you don't. Another important thing is that students need feedback; you have to be proactive.
For a country like Chile, the primary recommendation is to focus on the quality of existing resources rather than regulations. If things are done correctly, a good program should be a given. Therefore, it's crucial to be able to define objectives and ensure that students meet them, regardless of regulations.
-What are the external regulations for Canadian universities?
We have accreditation processes, but it's not about comparing master's programs to each other or to a single model. When accreditation reviews the quality of a master's or doctoral program, it seeks to understand the program's objectives; it examines whether these objectives are appropriate for a master's or doctoral program; then it assesses whether the necessary conditions exist for students to achieve those objectives. It also considers whether the program aligns with what is expected of it. For example, if you say your students will graduate and be skilled in communications, but your program has nothing to do with communications, there's a missing element.
-Is it a good starting point to begin collaborating between countries with doctoral programs?
I think so. In my opinion, in this case, we're much more interested in understanding the expectations of Chilean universities regarding this exchange, because what we're looking for are partners. Of course, we already have collaborations with major universities like Oxford and Cambridge, but we want to diversify these interactions, and doctoral programs are a good place to start because the only way to build a truly excellent university is to have good researchers and professors with doctorates. Therefore, in any country, it's important to begin with these universities and at this level.
To illustrate the importance of doctoral degrees, I can say that where I come from (Quebec), the vast majority of my professors were from abroad because we didn't have many people with doctorates, so we hired people with doctorates from other countries. My generation is the first generation of university professors trained in Canada. If we can help build this doctoral infrastructure in Latin America, we can play a positive role, not by taking people away, but by training them together. That's why we've discussed joint supervision, so that students can study at both universities.
-Why could Chile be a good strategic partner?
Because Chile is a good business partner for Canada, and we have a historical connection with Chile, we Canadians, especially those on the French side, feel a strong connection given past events and the number of Chileans who participated in the resistance from Canada. Chile is one of Canada's key countries in South America; it's a highly educated country with a good standard of living. Besides, Canadians love Chilean wine (laughs).
What Canadian universities are looking for is diversity. We're overwhelmed with applications from Asia; in some programs, the entire 50% class is from China. We need people from India, Chile, Mexico, Germany, and so on. Latin America is interesting because there are fewer language barriers than with Asia, and we share a similar European-American culture. That's another reason why we want to work with you.
Interview with Alain Boutet, Director of International Relations, Dalhousie University
Interview with Nicole Lacasse, Vice-Rector for Academic and International Affairs, Laval University
Photo: University of Ottawa.
Spanish 
English