On May 16, 2015, Spencer Nestico-Semianiw, the MSU’s Vice-President (Education), was elected President of the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance at the organization’s Transition Conference. The Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance (OUSA) represents students from seven universities in Ontario, including all full-time undergraduate students at McMaster.
Nestico-Semianiw previously served as OUSA’s research intern in the summer of 2014, and the MSU’s External Affairs commissioner before being elected as VP (Education) in April.
His duties as OUSA President will involve acting as the chief spokesperson of the organization, chairing the steering committee meetings composed of VP (Education) equivalents from all member schools, and representing the organization to media, the government, and other stakeholders.
Nestico-Semianiw says that increased internal advocacy support within the MSU will help balance the increased commitment to external advocacy as OUSA President.
“With some of the past VP (Education) there’s always that discussion of internally and externally-confused. This year we’re fortunate to have much more internal support with new research assistants that will be hired and an increase in [Advocacy Street Team] hours… I’ll be going to Toronto several times a month for meetings and working with [OUSA] home office. The time commitment is essentially more for travel and attending meetings.”
In his new role, he wants to continue the work of Jen Carter, his predecessor, by building consensus within OUSA’s member schools on issues pertinent to Ontario undergraduate students.
“It’s something that Jen did last year that gained a lot of positive reception. You’re the President, but the fact is that this is OUSA, and it’s not Western’s lobby group or Mac’s lobby group. The spirit that she took and I think I’ll be taking as well is making sure that all schools feel that they are satisfying what their students want.”
Tuition is one of the most topical advocacy points for undergraduate students across the province and at McMaster. Ehima Osazuwa, the MSU’s current President, was elected on a platform that included the creation of a task force that examines tuition advocacy options.
According to OUSA’s Tuition Brief, tuition in Ontario has increased by $2,658 in the past decade, whereas an increase consistent with inflation would have only amounted to $766. Ontario has the highest tuition fees in Canada, and they continue to rise at three percent every year for undergraduate students.
Nestico-Semianiw believes that the goals of the MSU’s Tuition Task Force are in line with OUSA’s advocacy.
“In the tuition policy that OUSA releasted this year, the principles and recommendations are essentially for a tuition freeze for the 2016-2017 year. This is what Ehima will be advocating and what our stance will be this year as well.
“Tuition assistance is very topical, even the funding formula is another big thing the province is engaging with this year. My goal is to talk to other VPs (Education) and see what their goals are,” said Nestico-Semianiw.
Although discussions about a tuition freeze will also be carried out internally with the university, Nestico-Semianiw believes that the bigger goal is provincial funding.
“We could always have this discussion between student unions and the university, but I truly do believe that when it comes to the university… if we’re asking for a tuition freeze, the money is just not there. We need to ensure we’re not high-fiving and student services are being cut because there’s now this lack of revenue. The main goal is to be able to use OUSA as a vehicle to advocate for increased funding from the province for more affordable education,” he said
As for next steps, Nestico-Semianiw will start by reaching out to other schools.
“The approach very much has to depend on what our schools want to see because, as I said, I ran for president because I did believe that this is something that our students wanted and that this was the time for us to do that, but it’s not just the MSU’s OUSA.”
“I did get the sense at TransCon that [tuition] is a priority for many of our schools, and figuring out how we want to advocate to the province.”
University fees are projected to increase by 13 percent on average over the next four years, according to a report from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA).
In their September report on Managing the Optics of Provincial Tuition Fee Policies, the CCPA projected the average cost of tuition and compulsory fees for full-time undergraduate students to rise from an average of $6,589 in 2013-14 to $7,755 in 2017-18. For comparison, the average cost in 1993-94 was $2,320.
The report tabs the declining role of government involvement as one reason for tuition hikes. In 1991, public funding accounted for 79 percent of university operating revenue. That figure has dropped to 55 percent in 2011. This is mirrored by a rise in tuition fees as a share of university operating revenue, of which have doubled from 18 percent to 37 percent over the same time period.
Similarly, additional compulsory fees outside of tuition costs have been on the incline. The report notes that compulsory fees -- which are mostly unregulated on the provincial level -- have also been a means by which universities charge students, at times to avoid government fee caps. Again, the report notes this practice is done in part to offset declining public funding. In Ontario, compulsory fees have increased by 239 percent over the past 20 years.
Cost increases have varied by province. Tuition and compulsory fees in Newfoundland and Labrador, for example, are projected to increase by just $16 over the next four years -- an increase of less than one percent. Meanwhile, a 22 percent increase is projected for Quebec.
Data courtesy of CCPA's Sept. 10 report. Four-year period reflects changes in total tuition and compulsory fees for full-time undergraduates between 2013-14 and 2017-18
Percent increases, however, don't necessarily paint the entire picture with respect to costs. Ontario laps the field in both current and projected total fees; in 2013-14, the average total of tuition and compulsory fees for full-time undergraduates in the province was $8,162, with Saskatchewan ranking a distant second at $6,882. The gap figures to narrow slightly over the next four years, but Ontario schools are still projected to be the most expensive across provinces in Canada in 2017-18 at $9,483. The projected 2014-15 figures are listed below.
Data courtesy of CCPA's Sept. 10 report. Figures reflect total tuition and compulsory fees for full-time undergraduates
The report also mentions that Ontario tuition fees have repeatedly broken through capped figures for tuition fee increases. Prior to 2013, the Ontario government mandated that tuition fees were not to increase by more than 5 percent annually. The cap dropped to 3 percent in 2013, but the report cites that tuition fees increased by 4 percent last year. These figures also don't factor in to fees of non-undergraduate students, of which are also believed to have experienced even steeper increases.
Circumvention of provincially mandated caps, however, is a problem that afflicts multiple provinces, not just Ontario. Similar strategies of tying capped increases to inflation have also been implemented to varying degrees in Saskatchewan, Quebec, Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia, but the report denounces the move as more PR-related than effective. According to the CCPA, these trends reflect "an increasingly patchwork, privatized and individualized system of university financing," and that it "undermines our commitment to the principles of universal accessibility and affordability."
The Ontario Liberals announced on Jan. 20 that they are extending the ‘30 per cent off’ tuition grant eligibility to cover about 5,000 more students.
Co-op students in their final year of a five-year program and students in private postsecondary institutions who qualify for the Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP) are now also eligible for a 30 per cent off rebate on their tuition.
“For co-op students, while their program lasts five years [instead of four], a good part of that is taken up by work experience. When the 30-off tuition program was originally constituted, this was kind of an anomaly that was determined afterwards,” said Brad Duguid, minister of training, colleges and universities.
In spite of the expanded eligibility requirements, provincial student lobbying groups have pointed out perceived shortcomings of the program.
After the announcement, the Canadian Federation of Students – Ontario released a statement saying they do not support the extension of the grant to students in private career colleges and institutions.
“The issue is that the government is funding private institutions rather than prioritizing public postsecondary education and making it more affordable,” said Anna Goldfinch, national executive representative for the CFS-Ontario.
Goldfinch expressed concern over the ministry’s oversight of private career colleges, referencing public scrutiny over the ministry’s enforcement of the Private Career Colleges Act. In 2009, for instance, the Ontario Ombudsman’s office found that the ministry had “inadequate oversight” of Bestech Academy Inc. The owner had falsely advertised the academy as a registered private career college.
The CFS-Ontario maintains that while the expansion of the grant could help 5,000 more students, the funds would be better allocated to institutions’ operating grants toward a 30 per cent reduction of tuition over three years.
Duguid said the Ontario government is committed to providing targeted funding to lower-middle income students in the form of financial assistance.
“We want the funding that we’re providing to lower-middle income students to go directly to those students, rather than the institutions. That’s what’s important about the 30 off grant,” Duguid said.
Spencer Graham, vice-president (education) for the MSU and a member of the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance’s steering committee, said he was surprised the government would extend the grant eligibility to students in private career colleges. However, he said OUSA still supports the expansion of the grant.
“OUSA believes increases to base operating budgets is important and that remains a priority for us. That doesn’t mean we’re coming out against the increased Ontario tuition grant eligibility, because it does help students. It’s not necessarily an either-or,” Graham said.
OUSA continues to lobby for expansion of the tuition grant. The grant currently covers students who attend college or university up to four years after they graduate from high school, and those in a five-year co-op program.
“That policy serves as a barrier to a number of students who attend postsecondary education after the four years after high school are up,” Graham said.
“Particularly this speaks to students who have dependents and children. We also see that Aboriginal learners tend to wait a number of years before entering postsecondary education. The grant doesn’t cover those two types of students, who face particular barriers,” he said.
OUSA’s pre-budget submission to the Ontario government also recommends that the grant should offer 35 per cent off tuition, up from 30 per cent.
Currently, eligible students can save $1,730 in tuition on average for degree programs and $790 for diploma or certificate programs. The deadline to apply for the grant for the winter semester is March 1, 2014. According to the Ontario government, 230,000 students received the tuition grant last year. About 310,000 were eligible before the expansion of the program.
This article was originally published on the Canadian University Press's newswire.
Ontario’s Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities has introduced a new set of tuition billing regulations that will begin taking effect in the 2014–15 academic year. The changes are expected to be fully implemented by 2016.
The new policy, announced in December 2013, states that all post-secondary students in Ontario will be able to pay tuition per term without having to pay deferral fees. Tuition payments for a fall term cannot be due before August, and students who apply for the Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP) by the beginning of August will not have to pay tuition before receiving their financial aid.
In response to the policy, the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance (OUSA) and the Canadian Federation of Students-Ontario (CFS-Ontario) commended the ministry but also flagged some concerns.
“One thing we need to note is that we’ve heard from many university presidents that with these fees gone, there’s going to be less money in the system,” said Amir Eftekarpour, president of OUSA and vp external of the University Students’ Council at Western University.
“We definitely don’t want students to experience a lower quality of education because of this. There needs to be some discussion around ensuring that there is a funded reduction of these fees,” he said.
Another issue of contention, flat-fee tuition billing, will be more regulated but not altogether eliminated.
The ministry has committed to raising the current 60 per cent threshold to 70 per cent in 2015, then to 80 per cent by 2016. Students with disabilities will not be charged flat-fee tuition.
While some have argued that flat-fee billing provides institutions with a more predictable revenue stream and encourages students to finish their degrees sooner, student representatives have strongly criticized the model for charging some students for education they do not receive.
“From a student perspective, we very much advocate for full per-credit tuition and that there needs to be some way to find funding for it so it can happen in the short term. Unfortunately, given the economic reality, there doesn’t seem to be a lot of money floating around the province,” Eftekarpour said.
Eight universities in the province currently charge flat-fees above the 60 per cent threshold. The University of Toronto is the only university in Ontario charging flat-fee tuition to students taking 60 per cent of a course load. With the new policy, the U of T could see a $16 million annual loss in revenue, the university’s president told the Toronto Star in anticipation of an increased threshold.
The CFS-Ontario, which also lobbied for the elimination of flat fees and deferral fees, had further recommended that institutions be prohibited from charging interest on unpaid balances and deposits on tuition.
With the new rules, students will continue to be charged late fees and interest if they are unable to pay by per-term deadlines. Institutions will be allowed to charge deposits on tuition, but they will be capped at $500 or 10 per cent of tuition, whichever is greater.
“Unfortunately, some of the proposals provide new opportunities for institutions to burden students with additional costs,” said CFS-Ontario chairperson Alastair Woods in a release. “Students will continue to advocate at the institutional and provincial levels to end these and other unfair fee practices.”
The ministry’s new policy also eliminates graduation fees but does not address ancillary and online testing fees. Both the CFS-Ontario and OUSA have maintained that students should not pay to be evaluated through learning software.
“The ministry didn’t say that [online testing fees] are okay now. It certainly was a difficult discussion about what the best solution is,” Eftekarpour said. “I think it’s unfortunate that student unions will now have to engage with their universities to hammer out some sort of process for all of this. We really wish it was just maintaining that these aren’t allowed.”
“Just to clarify, we’re not at all against the online testing materials,” he added. “It’s really good quality software and it’s a great learning experience. Students just can’t pay to be tested to use it, that’s just against our principles.”
This article was first published on the Canadian University Press's newswire.
Every year, Canadian postsecondary students are eligible for tuition, education and textbook credits that cost billions of dollars in funding. But, as it turns out, students from low-income households are least likely to benefit from the credits during school despite needing the money the most.
A recent study, conducted through the C.D. Howe Institute, found that tax credits “disproportionately” benefit students from well-off families in a given tax year. Most students from lower-income households benefit from the non-refundable credits only after they finish school and start earning enough taxable income.
Christine Neill, an associate professor of economics at Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo, Ont., authored the study. She found that the tax credit savings amount to about $2,000 per year for the average Canadian undergraduate student.
“For youth from relatively high income families, a couple thousand dollars per year may not change their decision to go to university or college, but it might change those from low-income families. The problem is, they tend to get the money later,” Neill said.
In 2012, households with family incomes below $30,000 used only 7 per cent of education credits transferred to parents in 2012, but made up about half of tax filers.
Households with an income above $80,000 used about 42 per cent of education credits transferred to parents but made up just 10 per cent of tax filers.
Neill recommended that simply making the credits refundable would vastly improve the program. Students not earning enough taxable income would then get a cheque in the mail for what they couldn’t claim on their taxes, instead of having to carry the credits forward.
The same recommendation has been made in the past by the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations (CASA) and the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance (OUSA).
According to Neill’s study, undergraduate students in British Columbia save the least from the tax credits, followed by students in Ontario and Newfoundland. Students in Alberta save the most out of all the provinces, but by a small margin.
A 2010 study found that college students save a larger proportion of their tuition from the credits than university students. However, college students end up with a smaller dollar value from the credits because their tuition is, on average, lower.
Last year, the federal government spent $1.6 billion on tuition, education and textbook tax credits — more than the $0.7 billion it spent on the Canada Student Loan Program.
Tuition and education credits were first introduced in 1961, and the option to “carry forward” unclaimed amounts was introduced in 1997.
“Before the carry-forward was introduced, kids from low income families may never have been able to claim the credits — after 1997, the program became more expensive but it became better,” Neill said.
In 2006, a textbook credit was added, raising questions from the academic community on the efficacy of the program.
Whether to stimulate enrolment in postsecondary education or to distribute wealth to students from lower-income families, the purpose of the tax credits hasn’t been clearly articulated.
Neill argues that the credits currently fail on both efficiency and equity principles. She also made a point that the credits aren’t well-advertised on university and college web pages that display tuition fee information.
“One major issue is that many people don’t know about [the credits], and they don’t know before going through postsecondary education,” Neill said. “If you don’t know something exists, how would it affect your behaviour?”
Infographic by Ben Barrett-Forrest / Multimedia Editor
Several student unions in Ontario have joined the campaign to raise the minimum wage to $14. Anti-poverty groups proposed the minimum wage hike in March this year as part of their ‘Fair Wages Now’ campaign.
Alastair Woods, chairperson of the Canadian Federation of Students (Ontario), said members voted unanimously in their August general meeting to support the cause. Leading up to Nov. 14, a designated day of action, students joined community groups in voicing their concerns to local politicians.
“The last time we had a minimum wage increase was in 2010. Since then, the cost of education and living has gone up significantly,” Woods said. “The $14 [was determined] through community consultation to bring full-time workers about 10 per cent over the poverty line.”
Guled Arale, VP (external) for the University of Toronto’s Scarborough Campus Student Union, has been working with community groups to advocate for a $14 minimum wage.
“We had a forum a few weeks ago with 200 to 250 people in Scarborough and it was really good to see that many people working on this issue - not all of them were students, but many were parents of students,” Arale said.
Arale said a minimum wage hike would help students earn a living wage, particularly those working in casual or part-time positions while in school.
“Every year, the cost of living goes up for students, but a lot of students who do work minimum wage don't see their wages increase,” he said.
In a similar vein, Carleton University’s Graduate Students’ Association recently supported the hike in a presentation to the Ontario government’s minimum wage advisory panel. The panel was formed in the summer and will advise the province on future minimum wage increases.
“A lot of graduate students work as a TA or RA and take other jobs on the side,” said Lauren Montgomery, VP (external) of the Carleton GSA. “If the minimum wage were to be $14, grad students could take on less part-time jobs and put more into their schoolwork and teaching.”
She also mentioned the mounting pressure graduate students face in terms of rising tuition, debt load and, in many cases, childcare costs.
Along with groups such as the Workers’ Action Centre, the CFS-Ontario has submitted recommendations to the province’s advisory panel.
“Just two decades ago, a student could work full-time at minimum wage over the summer at 35 hours a week for 9 weeks, and pay off a year’s worth of undergraduate tuition fees. Today, it would take at least 20 weeks at minimum wage...more weeks than are in the summer,” CFS-Ontario’s submission states.
According to Statistics Canada, 60 per cent of minimum wage workers are under 25 years old, and of those youth workers, 44 per cent aged 20 to 24 attend school.
Stephanie Mascarin
The Silhouette
Parents often tell their children that they can be whatever they want when they “grow up.” Teachers support this notion, decorating their walls with posters that have slogans like, “your attitude determines your altitude.” The media glamorously portrays young men and women with fun and prosperous careers. Society promotes hard work as the key for success.
What they don’t say, though, is that no one will help you get there.
Obtaining a university degree or college diploma in Ontario should be more affordable for students. As is engrained into children from elementary school onwards, education is a fundamental aspect of having a successful career. But with rising tuition costs it is increasingly difficult for students to afford this education. Coupled with rising credentialism and increased competition in the job market, this generation of students is faced with more obstacles than generations past.
In Ontario, the average student debt has increased and youth unemployment is higher. The game is the same as it was for past generations, but the rules have changed; a university or college education is still necessary to obtain a good job, but it is more costly.
Between 1976 and 2012, tuition costs in Ontario have more than doubled, from around $2,500 to $6,600 per year. Although the Ontario government offers the Ontario Student Assistance Program, or OSAP, not every student can qualify for this. OSAP is a government-funded student loan that is based on “educational plans and personal circumstances.” OSAP does help many students afford school, as they offer a combination of loans and grants that do not need to be paid back until the student’s schooling is complete. In this way, Ontario is making strides in the right direction for making college and university more affordable for students.
However, this loan does not apply to everyone; the amount of money a student and their parents earn during the fiscal year, through their income tax return form, determines if aid is offered and how much. It seems that an education is only obtainable for the upper class and those who are considered by the government to be financially needy. But what about the middle class? What about the average family who earns too little to pay tuition in full, yet too much to qualify for OSAP?
In 1990, an Ontario family on average would spend 93 percent of their disposable income on tuition for their child. This equated to about 87 workdays to pay off tuition debt for one child.
This figure has drastically increased to date, with tuition now costing 150 percent of their disposable income to put a child through school, which translates to 195 workdays to pay back the debt. For families with more than one child, these numbers become staggering. And students often need to obtain graduate or professional degrees to stay competitive, which substantially increases their debt. Students and their families get caught in this trap of needing to obtain an education that they simply cannot afford.
This ties into the issue of student unemployment, as graduates are finding it increasingly difficult to get a job to pay off this debt. This year, the unemployment rate for people age 15-24 was 15 per cent, which is double the unemployment rate of the general population. When graduates do find a job, it is often in fields that they are either overqualified for or ones that are unrelated to their degree. This is partially due to baby-boomers staying in the workforce longer, which is a variable that the education system cannot control.
However, the system can control how many students are accepted into programs with a low demand in the economy. Since schools do not do this, there are more graduates than jobs available. Students used to come out of school with a guaranteed job; now they come out with a piece of paper and $30,000 debt. Students are sent out to battle in the real world being told they have ammo, but instead they are given blanks.
It is evident that this needs to change. Imbedded in higher education is the notion of exclusion; part of what makes a degree or diploma so valuable is that it is specialized and elite. However, this exclusion should only be based on academics.
Why should someone’s financial situation affect the level of education they are able to obtain?
Privileging the wealthy, or those who can qualify for funding like OSAP, over other students is not conducive to societal progression. Just because someone can afford school does not mean they will benefit society. Excluding a substantial portion of the population from being able to afford an education is limiting society’s potential; perhaps the next Steve Jobs will come from a low-income family.
This generation of graduate students is Ontario’s, Canada’s, and the world’s future. It is a shame that society leaves them so ill equipped to be successful in the real world—successful not only financially, but also personally. Imagine how productive students could be if they did not have to worry about staggering tuition debt, or if they could enter into the field of their choice. There might be fewer students entering the corporate rat race and more pursuing careers based simply on their passion.
For the sake of graduates and society, hopefully there will be at time when children can be whatever they want when they “grow up.”
A new proposal from the Ministry of Colleges, Training and Universities suggests the province is looking to reduce deferral fees, regulate ancillary fees more and put a threshold on flat-fee charges.
According to the Ministry’s proposal, which has not yet been made public, changes to tuition payment and ancillary fees across Ontario could be implemented starting in 2015.
The Ministry outlined a province-wide cap on late fees and reduction in deferral fees. Student advocates have been outspoken about deferral fees being an unnecessary penalty for students struggling financially and those who receive OSAP in two instalments.
While student groups including OUSA and CFS-Ontario acknowledged the Ministry’s work to address the issues, they continue to push for elimination of deferral fees and flat-fee tuition.
Currently at McMaster University, students opting into an OSAP “Flex Plan” are charged $35 per term in deferral fees.
Non-OSAP students unable to make a full payment by Sept. 1 are charged a one-time $35 late fee on top of monthly interest, which amounts to 14.4 per cent annually.
Spencer Graham, Vice-President (Education) of the McMaster Students Union, said deferral fees are unfair and should ideally be eliminated, not just reduced.
“We believe universities should have flexibility in their funds for students who will end up paying their tuition anyway,” Graham said.
The Ontario government also addressed ancillary fees in its proposal. According to OUSA, Ontario students pay some of the highest ancillary fees in the country. The Ministry proposed to clarify that institutions cannot charge extra fees for credential completion or graduation.
“We’re pretty happy the government is starting to talk to us more about technology,” Graham said. “A lot of programs use technology that charges students extra – if those things are made mandatory, that’s not allowed.”
Both the MSU and OUSA are recommending a 20 per cent off rebate for students who have to buy e-learning materials. Their estimate is that 20 per cent is roughly the evaluation component that should already be covered in students’ tuition.
The MSU’s “Stop, You’ve Paid Enough” campaign launched this fall encouraged students to report and take notice of “mandatory” course materials besides textbooks that they had to pay for out of pocket.
For example, software such as APLIA, CAPSIM and Mastering Chemistry should not be mandated by professors for evaluation purposes.
“To get around the Ministry’s rules, professors can make it an optional part of your grades. For organic chemistry, for example, it’s just not included in your course breakdown so you would be evaluated based on 90 per cent instead of 100,” Graham said.
“You may also have the option to have a percentage added to your final exam…But we don’t think students should have to opt out of assignments.”
Graham said he is currently following up on one student’s report of Top Hat Monocle’s interactive classroom software being mandated in a course.
While many students are required to buy iClickers, the technology does not fall with other e-learning materials that cannot be mandated, since students can still use their iClickers or sell them after they complete a course.
The Ministry’s proposal to put an 80 per cent threshold on flat fees would not apply to McMaster, which charges tuition per credit. However, nine universities in Ontario currently have flat-fee models. The University of Toronto, for example, charges students taking a 60 per cent course load the same tuition as students taking a full course load.
