THE ART AND CRAFT OF UNIVERSITY COORDINATION by James Thomas Barmby A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in The College of Graduate Studies (Interdisciplinary Studies) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Okanagan) December 2013 © James Thomas Barmby, 2013 ii Abstract The purpose of this study is to understand the apparent acquiescence of senior officials at Alberta‟s universities to legislation that might pose a threat to their institutions‟ autonomy. In 1975 the Alberta government under the leadership of Premier Peter Lougheed attempted to introduce a mechanism for coordinating university programs in the Adult Education Act by placing Alberta‟s four universities against their will within a system of provincial public post- secondary institutions. The 1975 Act failed to receive third reading due to successful lobbying efforts, yet in 2003 Lougheed's vision was finally realized with the passage of the Post- Secondary Learning Act (PSLA), which enlisted Alberta‟s four universities without resistance as members of a provincial system that coordinates post-secondary programming. A historical analysis, this study was framed within the dimensions of Wenger‟s Communities of Practice model to analyze the interaction and trust between and among senior university and government officials in their attempts to find agreement on matters concerning the coordination of university programming. The study found that, only where there was evidence of all three dimensions of the Communities of Practice model, was there mutual trust as well as agreement by the university officials on government initiatives regarding the coordination of university programming. The main conclusion of the study is that university officials responded well to the program coordination concerns of the provincial government when the university officials, treated as equals to their government counterparts rather than as agents of government policy, were given the opportunity to participate in the development of the program coordination legislation and policies in conjunction with government officials. iii Preface The identification and design of the research came about through the researcher‟s background as a former member of Alberta Advanced Education, and later of Alberta Advanced Education and Career Development, from 1986 to 1994. First as an intern in the Deputy Minister‟s office, later as Special Assistant to the Deputy Minister, and finally serving as a communications specialist and speechwriter seconded to the Minister‟s office. As the researcher, my personal awareness of the enduring yet sometimes dormant intent of the Alberta government, under Premiers Lougheed, Getty and Klein, to coordinate university programming was a key factor in the development of this study. Personal knowledge of department activities made easier the gathering of relevant government and university data, but great care was taken to ensure all data used would originate from sources other than the researcher‟s personal knowledge. I may have contributed to the development of some of the government materials used in this research, for example by editing Alberta Advanced Education 1971 – 1985 or by drafting the policy document New Directions for Adult Learning in Alberta. However, these and other materials were produced under the watchful and guiding eyes of senior government officials, were approved by these same senior government officials, and can be verified as such. The interviews conducted prior to August 31, 2011 were in accordance with the Conjoint Faculties Research Ethics Board at the University of Calgary, which provided Certification of Institutional Ethics Review as stated in file number 6471. All interviews conducted after September 1, 2011, when I transferred to the College of Graduate Studies at the Okanagan campus of the University of British Columbia, were in accordance with the Behavioural iv Research Ethics Board as stated in Ethics Certificate number H12-03395. This dissertation is original, previously unpublished, and independent work of the author. The relationships between senior officials of the universities and of the department may have appeared to at times be tested, but for the most part were solidly respectful, professional and sincere. At one point I expressed my dismay to Peter Meekison at the end of my interview with him that, aside from any advantages the University of Alberta may have enjoyed over the other universities due to its proximity to the Alberta Legislature, I had uncovered no outrage, intrigue or systemic injustice among this exclusive group of senior officials. Controversies and conflicts between universities and governments seem apparent in other provinces, but there have been few clashes in Alberta. “Then that‟s your story,” Dr. Meekison replied, and my objective became to understand why. James Barmby v Table of Contents Abstract .......……………………………………………………………………………………ii Preface ………………………………………………………………….……………………..iii Table of Contents ………….…………………………………………….…….……………..….v Acknowledgements …………………………………………………...…………………………x Dedication …………………………………………………………………………………….xii Chapter 1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………….1 The concept of institutional autonomy …..……….……………………………………….1 The call for government controls ………………………………………………………….2 Statement of the problem …………………………………………………………………..5 Purpose of the study ………………………………...…………………………………….6 Significance of the study ………………………………………….………………………6 Definitions …………………………………………………………………………………7 Summary …………………………………………………………..……………………9 Chapter 2 Literature Review……………………….………………………………………….11 The origins of the university and its autonomy ……...……………………………………11 Oversight by the church and state ……………………………..………………………….13 The dawn of the research university …………………….………………………………..14 The American university ………………………………………….……………………..17 The Canadian university ………………………………………………..…………………18 The Alberta university …………………………………………….………………………24 An era of change …………………………………………………………….…………….33 vi The need for research on program coordination at Alberta‟s universities ………………37 Chapter 3 Research Methods ……………………………………………………….…………39 Theoretical frameworks for this study ..…………….……………………………………..39 Communities of Practice - Wenger ………..……………..……………………………..39 Trust - Shoorman, Mayer & Davis …………………………………………….………..42 Purpose ……………………………………………………………………………………43 Research questions ……………………………………………………………….……….44 Guiding themes in the analysis of data……………………………………………………45 Methodology ………………………………………..…………………………...….…….46 Documents …………………………………………………………...……………………48 Interviews …………………………………………………..……………………………..50 Trustworthiness of data …………………………………………………….……………..52 Data analysis ……………………………………….……..……………………………….52 Delimitation ………………………………………………...…………..…………………54 Limitations ………...………………………………………………………………………56 Chapter 4 The Lougheed Years ……………………………………………………………..57 Subjugating the scholars ……………………………………….………………………….57 Institutions versus organizations ………………………...………………………………..59 Out with the old …………………..……………………..………….……………………..61 Transferability: the first engagement of the universities with Advanced Education …..…65 Round two: A coordination policy ……………………………………………….………67 The Kolesar paper …………………………………………………………………………78 The “Failed Act” ………………………………………..…………………………………79 vii The road not taken …………………………………………………………….….……….84 An analysis of the Lougheed years ………………………………………………………..89 Washing of the hands …………………………………..….……………………..……….99 Changing of the guard ………………………………………………………….………..100 Chapter 5 The Getty Years …………………………………………………………………..103 Getty‟s financial challenges ……………………..………………………………………103 First, stop the bleeding …...………………………………………..…………………….104 Let‟s start talking …………..…………………………………………………………….105 A new deputy …………...………………………………………..………………………106 A new approach …………………………...………………….………………………….109 Too much information? ….……………...……………………………………...………..112 Athabasca University – autonomy as a double-edged sword ……………………………116 The situation according to Wenger‟s model ……………………………………………..118 At least they were still talking ……………………………………….…………..…….120 Tuition fees and program coordination ………………..…….…………………..………122 Board appointments and program coordination …….……………………………...……123 An analysis of the Getty years …………………………………….……………………..125 Chapter 6 The Klein Years ……………………….………………………….…………….127 Sharing the pain …………………………….………………………..…………………..127 New directions, new attitude ………………………………..………….………………..129 New terms of reference ……………….…………………………………………………131 A consolidated ministry; a consolidated system……………...………………………….134 The call for a common agenda …………………………………………….…………….138 viii Responding to the call …………………………………………..……………………….141 Participation ……………………………………………………………………...………144 Turning practice into policy ……………………………………………….……...……..145 The community of practice continues ……………………………..…………………….149 Trust and testing the community of practice …………………………………………….150 Chapter 7 Findings and Recommendations ……………………..………….………………154 The argument ……………………………………………..……...………………………154 A scale for evaluation ……………………………………………………..……………..155 Walter Worth - 1972-1976 ……………………………………………………...……….156 Henry Kolesar - 1976-1987 …………………………………………………...……..…..159 Lynne Duncan - 1987-1999 ……………………………………...………………………160 Maria David-Evans - 1999-2004 …………………………………………………...……163 Other contributing factors ………………………………………………….……...……..164 The research questions revisited …………………….…………………………...………166 In closing ……………………………………………..………………………………….169