Good article. But I do think you are underestimating how much damage the academy did to itself by willingly taking on a project of radical social change from 2012-2022. It was the same spirit as 1965-1975 (equality of outcome demands tearing down every old institution) but instead of university deans representing the establishment, continuity, etc. they leaned into the Social Justice cause. It wasn’t popular in the 1970s and led to a backlash, and it wasn’t popular the second time and led to an even bigger backlash.
You say: “If you talk to parents of university-age children, these days you’re likely to hear them talk about four undergraduate years as a questionable indulgence.” Not true of engineering schools. But if you’re talking liberal arts, absolutely. The Long Summer is over. Pax Americana and the zero-interest-rate world is rapidly receding in the rear view mirror. And AGI is about to decimate the job market for email jobs and creative brain jobs. But we’ll always need electricians!
Basically: People are focusing on education that leads to employment that can put food on the table. The bottom of Maslow’s Hierarchy, not whatever lofty tier the Social Justice project was on.
Is it any wonder that universities writ large are unpopular? They did it to themselves. The technical side is the only thing keeping their reputation from being totally shredded.
The areas of concern for me - articles that state patents tend not to stay in Canada. University research that brings financial gain leaves the country. - articles that state approval for research is contingent on DEI. Tying approval for gender concerns on, say, space particles. Oh, not acceptable to push ideologies. - Again with DEI as job postings specify which race of people will not be hired. Racism.
A few years ago, a woman was fired from U of A. She let the public know that Global Warming was proven to benefit crop growth. (barley)
So very ideological. Very much training ground for fostering Woke teaching/Woke trained minds. Is it any wonder that it also fosters resentment of my tax dollars supporting this indoctrination.
Our universities are struggling with operating deficits due in part to government underfunding but also as the result of increased administrative costs and declining enrolment. When student course enrolment drops, as York recently experienced, ( class sizes of a dozen or so), tenured professors demanded the programs not be cancelled. When faculty and departments are so autonomous,how can university- wide needed changes be made? In the past decades, the role of the university has been transformed to offer students a wide range of non learning, classroom services. Today administrative staff now equal or outnumber teaching faculty. This costs money. Can we afford this? I would also like to hear more discussion of the damage done to public support by hiring and promotion policies which have set faculty hiring quotas and targets based on the individual’s membership in a designated group ( gender, indigenous, race, etc). We now even have Universities saying that only black or female candidates can apply for a specific position. I acknowledge that they do so with the support of our federal government.
We need to have more constructive discussions about the changing role and legitimate needs of our universities. Glad to see you are participating in one.
We need to drop all of that. University leaders won’t admit it publically yet; but I’ll bet they know it and discuss it in private. To survive, the ratio of core mission (research and teaching) to non-core-mission (administrative/ student-support/ DEI) staff is probably going to have to return to what it was in, say, 1973.
University as combination lifestyle experience, therapy, and social project for a substantial portion of the population was something we could afford during the Long Summer. Those days are over.
Thank you for raising this important topic, and the great observations. To add some context for readers, my company's January 2025 trust research shows that educators as a whole are trusted by 60% of Canadians. That is consistent with trust for "university and college professors" at 59%. But for university and college Presidents, we find trust at a significantly lower 47%. One of the issues is who is running these schools, and the decisions they make.
I think you'll find a similar divergence if you compare how much Canadians trust workers at large organizations (like a grocery store chain) verses the CEO's of those chains. And likewise politicians: MPs vs Prime Ministers. Our society has developed a hate for our leaders, and it is not entirely rational.
Very insightful commentary Mr Wells. I hope you find your way to UofT for one of these discussions.
I have wondered/speculated that research done in “real time” is very messy and impacts confidence. Both Hinton and Pawson flew under the radar until the value of their work was more established.
These days many researchers want to get into the press quickly, both for competitive advantage, and perhaps because they have a startup they are trying to build.
And real research has setbacks and contradictory findings that must be corrected. That situation is new for those outside research endeavors when they see science done in real time.
I have not seen you once address about the massive increase in administration and bureaucracy in Canadian universities that suck away the dollars from research, and to actual programs available for students. Universities have built an administrative “political officer” layer to enforce allowable expression and behavior on professors and students, which inevitably infects research. More dollars will not address the research problem when the administrative cancer within the university system continues metastasizing. Your commitment to the non-controversial part the university problem (i.e. we need more money for research, and pure research) is admirable, but neglects what is truly ailing the modern Canadian university.
I was a working class kid who was lucky enough to get degrees from three elite universities. I was grateful for that opportunity. But isn’t it amazing – and very revealing – how many of the “outsider comments” to this podcast are lamenting the “ideological takeover” of universities and the distasteful “woke imprint” that it has produced – even, it seems, in science and engineering.
Because, your readers/listeners seem to think that intellectual excellence has been subordinated to an identity-based quota system and submerged by a distasteful – but assiduously policed - regimen of right- thinking (which is actually left-thinking). It reminds me of the allegations against the CBC, with its list of prohibited words.
In my experience, a large number of people working in universities, including in academic functions, agree broadly with this claim. This isn't some redneck fantasy.
Yes, and I certainly wouldn’t describe myself that way. But when an institution has been “taken over” by a dominant set of beliefs in this way, it is hard to wrest it back. Especially when, in the case of academic institutions, the university’s independence from the state is an important value as well. Hence “tenure”. Moreover, it is the kind of problem that unions have also wrestled with from time to time; and I gather that it is an issue for newspapers and journalists too.
Canada’s universities, like those in the US, are going to have to purge themselves of the Marxist element that has been allowed to displace liberal education in favour of ideological dogma.
These educational establishments permitted the Marxist element to enmesh liberal progressivism with their communistic philosophy to create the generation of the neo-progressive graduates who have extended its core ‘Critical Theory’ dictates throughout both country’s public institutions including government.
Essentially, the Marxists were able entice liberals into subscribing to the notion that social revolution could expedite progressive objectives more rapidly than evolution.
It turned out to be a very successful strategy that allowed the Marxists to gain control over student and faculty organizations as well as significant influence over administrations.
The neo-progressive ideology nurtured in educational institutions spread throughout our society as graduates moved to public and private careers wherein they could implement the agendas they had been indoctrinated with.
The promotion of Diversity, Inclusion and Equity’ and Critical Race Theory emerged along with other social imperatives that employed ‘White Privilege’ guilt to justify their role in defining governmental policy.
Neo-progressives proceeded to test social tolerance for their revolutionary agenda to the breaking point - tolerance for the intolerable collapsed spectacularly in the US and is in the course of collapsing in Canada.
The last hold-outs are the academic institutions where neo-progressivism was conceived and where the Marxists who created it still retain undue influence and control in the face of insipid administration reaction to their challenges.
Until university administrations are willing to recover their control from radical leftists and reinstate legitimate liberal education that protects freedom of thought and promotes open debate of all ideas, they will not be able to assist in the production of the academic excellence our country needs to support its future development.
I believe that the students attending the school should pay for their own education. I think it is fair to ask how many of them actually end up doing the thing they studied. Does our society really need everybody to have a degree?
Paying for my Practical Nursing school out of my own pocket. It's not that amusing to find out how little provinces want to help students with their nursing education. They constantly cry out in regards to nursing shortages. I once promoted an idea to my local rural municipality to underwrite my nursing education in exchange for a service contract. They declined.
My small southwestern Manitoba town is short of 13 nurses.
I pay my way, I go where I like. I shall follow the money.
I listened to the podcast with great interest. I appreciate the thoughtful soliloquy that you started with. When our politicians don't even want to include universities or research in their speeches and platforms, that's a telling sign. But it's also troubling in that I want our leaders to be able to come up with and articulate a plan.
I feel that education is a common good, and that investing in education of all young people is a role that I do want government to undertake. Not to oay the whole shot for everyone, but to make it available to those who qualify, regardless of income. I would say the same about trades education and other forms.
I do also cherish the university as a place where ideas can be articulated and debated. That's not to say that violence or encampment have a place at the campus, but if you support Palestinian freedom or Israel's right of defense, those should be opinions that our university spaces can handle, at the same time.
I benefited from a liberal arts degree and even though I didn't go into the field I studied, it is not something I would change. And though I paid my tuition grumpily, I did get part of my student loan forgiven, and I realize that part of that education might have been underwriten by government.
The university is NO LONGER a place where ideas can be articulated and debated. What you CHERISHED does not exist anymore. There are an army of “political officers” enforcing a particular narrative orthodoxy.
Good article. But I do think you are underestimating how much damage the academy did to itself by willingly taking on a project of radical social change from 2012-2022. It was the same spirit as 1965-1975 (equality of outcome demands tearing down every old institution) but instead of university deans representing the establishment, continuity, etc. they leaned into the Social Justice cause. It wasn’t popular in the 1970s and led to a backlash, and it wasn’t popular the second time and led to an even bigger backlash.
You say: “If you talk to parents of university-age children, these days you’re likely to hear them talk about four undergraduate years as a questionable indulgence.” Not true of engineering schools. But if you’re talking liberal arts, absolutely. The Long Summer is over. Pax Americana and the zero-interest-rate world is rapidly receding in the rear view mirror. And AGI is about to decimate the job market for email jobs and creative brain jobs. But we’ll always need electricians!
Basically: People are focusing on education that leads to employment that can put food on the table. The bottom of Maslow’s Hierarchy, not whatever lofty tier the Social Justice project was on.
Is it any wonder that universities writ large are unpopular? They did it to themselves. The technical side is the only thing keeping their reputation from being totally shredded.
The areas of concern for me - articles that state patents tend not to stay in Canada. University research that brings financial gain leaves the country. - articles that state approval for research is contingent on DEI. Tying approval for gender concerns on, say, space particles. Oh, not acceptable to push ideologies. - Again with DEI as job postings specify which race of people will not be hired. Racism.
A few years ago, a woman was fired from U of A. She let the public know that Global Warming was proven to benefit crop growth. (barley)
So very ideological. Very much training ground for fostering Woke teaching/Woke trained minds. Is it any wonder that it also fosters resentment of my tax dollars supporting this indoctrination.
Our universities are struggling with operating deficits due in part to government underfunding but also as the result of increased administrative costs and declining enrolment. When student course enrolment drops, as York recently experienced, ( class sizes of a dozen or so), tenured professors demanded the programs not be cancelled. When faculty and departments are so autonomous,how can university- wide needed changes be made? In the past decades, the role of the university has been transformed to offer students a wide range of non learning, classroom services. Today administrative staff now equal or outnumber teaching faculty. This costs money. Can we afford this? I would also like to hear more discussion of the damage done to public support by hiring and promotion policies which have set faculty hiring quotas and targets based on the individual’s membership in a designated group ( gender, indigenous, race, etc). We now even have Universities saying that only black or female candidates can apply for a specific position. I acknowledge that they do so with the support of our federal government.
We need to have more constructive discussions about the changing role and legitimate needs of our universities. Glad to see you are participating in one.
We need to drop all of that. University leaders won’t admit it publically yet; but I’ll bet they know it and discuss it in private. To survive, the ratio of core mission (research and teaching) to non-core-mission (administrative/ student-support/ DEI) staff is probably going to have to return to what it was in, say, 1973.
University as combination lifestyle experience, therapy, and social project for a substantial portion of the population was something we could afford during the Long Summer. Those days are over.
Thank you for raising this important topic, and the great observations. To add some context for readers, my company's January 2025 trust research shows that educators as a whole are trusted by 60% of Canadians. That is consistent with trust for "university and college professors" at 59%. But for university and college Presidents, we find trust at a significantly lower 47%. One of the issues is who is running these schools, and the decisions they make.
Here's that report, for anyone who's curious...
https://getproof.com/trust/cantrust/
I think you'll find a similar divergence if you compare how much Canadians trust workers at large organizations (like a grocery store chain) verses the CEO's of those chains. And likewise politicians: MPs vs Prime Ministers. Our society has developed a hate for our leaders, and it is not entirely rational.
Very insightful commentary Mr Wells. I hope you find your way to UofT for one of these discussions.
I have wondered/speculated that research done in “real time” is very messy and impacts confidence. Both Hinton and Pawson flew under the radar until the value of their work was more established.
These days many researchers want to get into the press quickly, both for competitive advantage, and perhaps because they have a startup they are trying to build.
And real research has setbacks and contradictory findings that must be corrected. That situation is new for those outside research endeavors when they see science done in real time.
I would enjoy a deeper discussion.
I have not seen you once address about the massive increase in administration and bureaucracy in Canadian universities that suck away the dollars from research, and to actual programs available for students. Universities have built an administrative “political officer” layer to enforce allowable expression and behavior on professors and students, which inevitably infects research. More dollars will not address the research problem when the administrative cancer within the university system continues metastasizing. Your commitment to the non-controversial part the university problem (i.e. we need more money for research, and pure research) is admirable, but neglects what is truly ailing the modern Canadian university.
Thank you for sharing this. This kind of insight is exactly why I subscribe.
I remember my University days with joy!
I was a working class kid who was lucky enough to get degrees from three elite universities. I was grateful for that opportunity. But isn’t it amazing – and very revealing – how many of the “outsider comments” to this podcast are lamenting the “ideological takeover” of universities and the distasteful “woke imprint” that it has produced – even, it seems, in science and engineering.
Because, your readers/listeners seem to think that intellectual excellence has been subordinated to an identity-based quota system and submerged by a distasteful – but assiduously policed - regimen of right- thinking (which is actually left-thinking). It reminds me of the allegations against the CBC, with its list of prohibited words.
In my experience, a large number of people working in universities, including in academic functions, agree broadly with this claim. This isn't some redneck fantasy.
Yes, and I certainly wouldn’t describe myself that way. But when an institution has been “taken over” by a dominant set of beliefs in this way, it is hard to wrest it back. Especially when, in the case of academic institutions, the university’s independence from the state is an important value as well. Hence “tenure”. Moreover, it is the kind of problem that unions have also wrestled with from time to time; and I gather that it is an issue for newspapers and journalists too.
Canada’s universities, like those in the US, are going to have to purge themselves of the Marxist element that has been allowed to displace liberal education in favour of ideological dogma.
These educational establishments permitted the Marxist element to enmesh liberal progressivism with their communistic philosophy to create the generation of the neo-progressive graduates who have extended its core ‘Critical Theory’ dictates throughout both country’s public institutions including government.
Essentially, the Marxists were able entice liberals into subscribing to the notion that social revolution could expedite progressive objectives more rapidly than evolution.
It turned out to be a very successful strategy that allowed the Marxists to gain control over student and faculty organizations as well as significant influence over administrations.
The neo-progressive ideology nurtured in educational institutions spread throughout our society as graduates moved to public and private careers wherein they could implement the agendas they had been indoctrinated with.
The promotion of Diversity, Inclusion and Equity’ and Critical Race Theory emerged along with other social imperatives that employed ‘White Privilege’ guilt to justify their role in defining governmental policy.
Neo-progressives proceeded to test social tolerance for their revolutionary agenda to the breaking point - tolerance for the intolerable collapsed spectacularly in the US and is in the course of collapsing in Canada.
The last hold-outs are the academic institutions where neo-progressivism was conceived and where the Marxists who created it still retain undue influence and control in the face of insipid administration reaction to their challenges.
Until university administrations are willing to recover their control from radical leftists and reinstate legitimate liberal education that protects freedom of thought and promotes open debate of all ideas, they will not be able to assist in the production of the academic excellence our country needs to support its future development.
I believe that the students attending the school should pay for their own education. I think it is fair to ask how many of them actually end up doing the thing they studied. Does our society really need everybody to have a degree?
So Paul what is your hard evidence for your claim in response to Mr Macdonell.
I'll let you know as soon as you post "hard evidence" for every comment you've posted on my Substack.
Paying for my Practical Nursing school out of my own pocket. It's not that amusing to find out how little provinces want to help students with their nursing education. They constantly cry out in regards to nursing shortages. I once promoted an idea to my local rural municipality to underwrite my nursing education in exchange for a service contract. They declined.
My small southwestern Manitoba town is short of 13 nurses.
I pay my way, I go where I like. I shall follow the money.
I listened to the podcast with great interest. I appreciate the thoughtful soliloquy that you started with. When our politicians don't even want to include universities or research in their speeches and platforms, that's a telling sign. But it's also troubling in that I want our leaders to be able to come up with and articulate a plan.
I feel that education is a common good, and that investing in education of all young people is a role that I do want government to undertake. Not to oay the whole shot for everyone, but to make it available to those who qualify, regardless of income. I would say the same about trades education and other forms.
I do also cherish the university as a place where ideas can be articulated and debated. That's not to say that violence or encampment have a place at the campus, but if you support Palestinian freedom or Israel's right of defense, those should be opinions that our university spaces can handle, at the same time.
I benefited from a liberal arts degree and even though I didn't go into the field I studied, it is not something I would change. And though I paid my tuition grumpily, I did get part of my student loan forgiven, and I realize that part of that education might have been underwriten by government.
The university is NO LONGER a place where ideas can be articulated and debated. What you CHERISHED does not exist anymore. There are an army of “political officers” enforcing a particular narrative orthodoxy.