By Nathan Todd, Contributor
This year, Ontario has seen significant and damaging cuts to funding for students, student associations, universities and the public employees who keep universities and communities running.
Many of you may have already felt the impact of these changes — there are already reports of students who are no longer able to attend university because of the elimination of some Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP) grants. In addition, the Student Choice Initiative left student and graduate associations scrambling over the summer in attempts to prepare for and minimize the funding cuts that the SCI would bring.
Teaching assistants who are often students are not immune to these negative effects. As students, we are affected by the cuts to OSAP, and as members of either the McMaster Students Union or the Graduate Students Association, we are also members of associations facing considerable budget cuts. On top of this, our ongoing rounds of bargaining with McMaster University for a new employment contract, among other things, threatens to leave us in an even more precarious situation.
As public employees, we are also now facing Bill 124, a proposed piece of legislation which would mandate that our wage increases do not exceed one per cent, an amount that does not keep up with the cost of inflation. In other words, Bill 124 effectively mandates that we take pay cuts over the next three years.
To put this in a better context, graduate TAs who work 260 hours (which is usually the most a TA can work at Mac) earn less than $11,500 for the year, and undergraduate TAs earn considerably less than that. This is not enough to balance the tuition we need to pay in order to have access to the job in the first place. Given these circumstances, increases to our wages and benefits are always a priority for us in bargaining. Unfortunately, McMaster is not willing to entertain an agreement that wouldn’t conform to Bill 124 should the bill become law. Therefore, meaningful wage increases seem to be a non-starter for the university.
Beyond Bill 124, McMaster is also looking to roll back the amount of hours TAs are entitled to work, making our ability to pay for tuition and keep up with the cost of living even more difficult.
Wage increases are not our only priority. One of the top priorities we identified before heading into bargaining was paid job-specific and anti-oppressive training for TAs. As it stands, there is no training for TAs. This means that they are learning how to run labs, teach tutorials, mentor and grade on the job! In asking for paid training, we are not asking for anything you wouldn’t expect from working in an office, a high school or a McDonald’s.
McMaster, however, is unsure if paid TA training is feasible. Let me repeat that: A university isn’t sure if it is feasible to teach people how to teach.
As a TA of about five years, I think we do a good job. But running tutorials and grading the assignments that go on to impact the lives of undergraduates is serious, professional work. As TAs, we recognize that. This is why we are asking for professional training to ensure that undergraduates are getting the highest quality teaching possible. Not only would paid training help TAs financially, but it would also benefit us professionally and it would benefit the students who rely on us.
If our bargaining continues to stall, there is a chance you will get messages from McMaster or members in the community about TAs being difficult or that what we are asking for is unreasonable. If this happens, please keep in mind that we are asking for things that any reasonable professional ought to — the ability to keep up with the cost of inflation and the proper training to do our jobs.
Given the attacks that university members have seen through the cuts to OSAP, the Student Choice Initiative and the looming Bill 124, it is more important than ever that we collectively resist attacks on the most vulnerable. McMaster claims it is committed to making a “Brighter World” – TAs and students deserve to be part of it.
Nathan Todd is the President of CUPE 3906
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
Farzeen Foda
Senior News Editor
The faculty of Science offers courses that cross a range of learning objectives and styles, as some courses are lecture-based, while others require a lab component. In between, are Science courses that hold potential for more invigorating student experiences.
To tackle the issues facing the Faculty of Science specifically, an open forum was held on March 21, hosted by the McMaster Science Society to give students an opportunity to voice their concerns about Science education at McMaster.
The informal discussion began with an introduction from University president, Patrick Deane who opened with a snapshot of the current status of Canadian universities.
“Governments do recognize that higher education is important,” said Deane, after explaining that even in the difficult economic times currently facing government spending, every effort is going toward preserving higher education.
Not only is McMaster on the verge of transformation but the country as a whole, is in the process of rethinking education, a long-overdue endeavour. The current model of higher education, noted Deane, has not changed since 1967 and Ontario’s per student funding at the post-secondary education is the lowest across the country.
“I am still very proud of the quality of education, but it is not a sustainable way of doing things,” he said, with particular reference to how a degree is structured and how to best incorporate the foundations of a discipline into the curriculum.
It is important to garner those skills vital to developing a career, while building a holistic experience which may come from experiential education and incorporating research into undergraduate education in a feasible way.
Such far-reaching goals would only be a product of additional funding, something that will not be a reality for many years given the current economic situation. What can be done, however, is reconfigure the university’s budget system, “which might make the money go further,” said Deane. The University is currently in the process of implementing a new budget model.
One consideration proposed by an audience member, was the possibility of outsourcing education to companies that could provide the resources that the University is currently struggling to provide. As attractive as this alternative may seem, it may lend itself to numerous legal complications and there is no deficiency in faculty expertise at this University, explained Deane.
Another audience member expressed the promising role of mentorship programs, while another stated the need for students to take charge of their education as well.
The event concluded with a panel discussion, moderated by Alison Sills, associate professor in the Department of Physics and Astronomy.
Panelists spoke about problems faced when trying to implement discussion-based courses. The over-arching problem was that students don’t take charge of self-directed learning and poor test results are reflected in the teaching evaluation of professors.
To be noted as well, is that many students are juggling many different things and prioritization is a natural part of dealing with the copious amounts of work, noted Dr. Kimberly Dej, professor in the department of Biology.
A blended model of discussion and lecture-based approach is one that may be more effective. A financial investment has already been put toward to bringing online courses to McMaster and incorporating a blended model of teaching.
The Faculty of Science is among the faculties that may be used for the pilot project, noted Sills.
