access to degrees randal collins

OPTIONS POLITIQUESAOÛT 2004

76

Access to post-secondary education has always been a major concern in Canada,and if student fees are usually a main concern in this regard, Dave Marshall warnsthat strategies adopted by the provinces in recent years to try and respond to theincreasing demand for degrees have fuelled an inflationary spiral that risksdiminishing the value of certain credentials. Marshall reviews the causes and effectsof this degree inflation and suggests that part of the answer lies with the process ofdegree accreditation, where in recent years several cracks appeared in the historicalprovincial degree-granting framework. “As long as individual provincialgovernments stayed mostly on the same page regarding degree-granting,” heconcludes, “Canada has never felt the need to establish a national degree orinstitutional accreditation process. Consumers (parents, students, employers,graduate schools, professional schools), both here in Canada and elsewhere, arenow suggesting otherwise.”

L’accès à l’enseignement post-secondaire a toujours été une question très sensible auCanada, notamment au chapitre des droits de scolarité. Cependant, prévient DaveMarshall, les stratégies adoptées ces dernières années par les provinces pour répondreà la demande croissante de diplômes ont provoqué une spirale inflationniste qui risqued’amoindrir la valeur de certains d’entre eux. L’auteur examine les causes et les effetsde cette spirale, suggérant que la solution réside en partie dans un processusd’accréditation des diplômes, étant donné les failles apparues depuis quelques annéesdans le processus de diplomation des provinces. « Tant que les gouvernementsprovinciaux appliquaient plus ou moins le même mode d’attribution, le Canada n’apas senti la nécessité d’établir un processus de diplomation national ou d’accréditationinstitutionnel. Mais au Canada comme à l’étranger, les différents intéressés (parents,étudiants, employeurs, établissements universitaires et professionnels) réclamentdésormais qu’on prenne les mesures qui s’imposent », conclut-il.

T he demand for access to degrees in Canada has beenwell documented over the past decade or so, as hasthe continued growth in that demand. The partici-

pation rate in degree programs of the typical grade ninecohort has almost tripled over the past 30 years in Canadato over 20 percent. As reported in the Association ofUniversities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC) Trends in HigherEducation (2002), we will need upwards of 100,000 newdegree places in the next decade to meet the demand forparticipation in degree-level study.

Our response in Canada to this dramatic increase indemand has been the same as it would be in any supply-demand environment: we have tried to increase the supply.We have done it by increasing capacity at traditional uni-versities. (Ontario alone has added 30,000 new first-yearuniversity places since 2001.) We have added new universi-

ties (five in the last 15 years — none in the previous 20). Wehave used other parts of the system to add capacity (forexample, deliver the first two years of university in commu-nity colleges in BC and Alberta). We have approved non-traditional delivery of traditional degrees (faith-basedinstitutions, distance delivery institutions, private institu-tions). We have implemented other types of degrees(applied, technology). And, in at least one province(Alberta) we are going to allow full, traditional baccalaure-ate degrees to be offered by community colleges.

In general, there is now such a proliferation of differenttypes of degrees and degree sources that it is difficult for theconsumer (student or employer) to sort out the value ormeaning of the credential. The US has always had a widearray of both institutions and degrees and, consequently,the value of a US degree has always been more related to the

ACCESS TO DEGREES IN THEKNOWLEDGE ECONOMYDave Marshall

POLICY OPTIONSAUGUST 2004

77

institution rather than the label. InCanada, this has not historically beenthe case. A Canadian degree was val-ued as a credential, since onlyCanadian universities that werereviewed by a national association andgiven provincial legislative approvalwere able to offer degrees. This is nolonger the case.

While these “alternate strategies”for degree access have indeed providedaccess for Canadians to undergraduatedegrees, they have fuelled the growth ofcredential inflation in Canada. RandallCollins in The Future of The City ofIntellect, defines degree inflation as thecombined circumstances where thedegree becomes a requirement for moreand more jobs and professions while, atthe same time, becoming an insufficiententry requirement to others. While theexistence of such degree inflation isclearly documented, the cause andeffects are much less discussed.

T here are two kinds of “creepingcredentialism” that illustrate the

debate regarding degree inflation. Thefirst is the increase in credentialexpectations due to changes in theworkplace. In the “knowledge eco-nomy,” the increased knowledgeexpectations of many jobs and profes-sions have resulted in a legitimateincrease in the credentials required forvarious jobs. This has occurred in allareas, from the trades and technolo-gies through to the professions such asnursing and accounting. Many of thecredentialing changes have beendriven by the expectations of the pro-fessions as they have examined theincreased knowledge levels expectedof their members. This has been espe-

cially true where the jobs (new or old)have required a greater level of gener-al or liberal education in order to beperformed effectively. The develop-ment of the MBA as an entry level cre-dential to an increasing number ofbusiness related jobs is an example, asis the increasing science knowledgebase required of the modern nurse.

Current estimates are that 50 percentof all new jobs created over the nextdecade will require six or more yearsof post-secondary education.

As the degree has increasinglybecome the entry point to many jobsand professions, the response has beento increase the capacity of the tradi-tional degree-granting system. That is,increase the supply of graduates hold-ing the skills, knowledge and attrib-utes traditionally associated with thedegree credential in order to meet thelegitimate workplace demands forthese attributes. Most agree that this isa useful and necessary kind of creepingcredentialism. In fact, it is a healthysign of a growing and advancing socie-ty and should be more appropriatelytermed expanding credentialism

A variation of this type of creepingcredentialism has been the efforts ofmost provinces to provide access to theuniversity level credential in non-tradi-tional means (distance, private, univer-sity transfer). While the value andexperience of the credential remainsintact, increasing the supply of degreecredentials through alternate deliverymeans has helped fuel degree inflation,although in a largely positive fashionfor both students and employers.

The second source or type ofdegree inflation is not as positive andis the type that gives the true meaning

to “creeping” and “inflationary.” Thisis where credentials simply changetheir labels without changing the sub-stance. For example, degree inflationoccurs when a college diploma isturned into a baccalaureate degree(applied or technology) with marginalchange in substance. That is why thePostsecondary Education Quality

Assessment Board (PEQAB)in Ontario has specified therequirement for both a 25percent “liberal studies”component to applieddegrees and demonstratedhigher levels of learningappropriate to the “degree”designation. In addition,the degrees would requireadmission levels compara-

ble to university-level credentials.These and other restrictions on thenew types of degrees, like applieddegrees, serve the purposes of bothidentifying for the student the uniquecharacter of the credential and main-taining standards that keep degreeinflation in check. These types ofdegrees also provide a high level ofmobility directly into the workplaceso some “value- added” componentmitigates the inflationary effect.

Other degree initiatives are not sobenign. The private University ofPhoenix’s very successful efforts tomass produce the university degreeundoubtedly fuels degree inflation.They sell to students the credential ascontent without any attempt to repli-cate the experience of the universitydegree credential. With an enrolmentof 75,000 students across the US, theywill undoubtedly increase access,increase the supply of degree holders,and assuredly fuel credential inflation.But, at least the degree is offered in an“accredited university” environment.

On the other hand, the initiativeacross the US (and parts of Canada) tooffer the foundational baccalaureatedegree on (community) college cam-puses is, perhaps, the newest and themost serious contributor to creepingcredentialism or degree inflation. Aspermitted in Alberta’s new Post-

Access to degrees in the knowledge economy

The US has always had a wide array of both institutions anddegrees and, consequently, the value of a US degree hasalways been more related to the institution rather than thelabel. In Canada, this has not historically been the case. ACanadian degree was valued as a credential since onlyCanadian universities that were reviewed by a nationalassociation and given provincial legislative approval were able to offer degrees. This is no longer the case.


78

Secondary Learning Act (2003), thedegree offered in the college environ-ment would have the same label asthe university credential, but wouldnot represent the same environmentor degree experience for the student.In fact, the whole purpose in provid-ing these degrees in this environmentis to offer a different degree: moreaccessible, lower cost, higher teachinglevels for faculty (less research) and soon. In general, instead of a new work-place reflective credential, it would bean existing credential in a differentenvironment with a different mean-ing and value.

T he primary reason, of course, forsuch an increasing proliferation of

alternate strategies to provide degreesis cost. No province in Canada hasbeen able to completely absorb thecost of providing unfettered access tothe traditionally delivered universitydegree credential and, consequently,has sought out cheaper alternatives.

Offering the first two years of uni-versity (university transfer) in collegesin Alberta and BC was simply a way ofoffering them cheaper than in a uni-versity setting. Access funds for theseuniversity transfer students in Albertacolleges cost the government about$1,500 less per student than the samestudents would cost in auniversity delivered envi-ronment. Similarly, pri-vate (for-profit andnot-for-profit) could havethe potential to dramati-cally shift the burden ofcost from the taxpayer tothe individual.

In the short term, forthe student that would not normallyhave access to a university degree, theavailability of any kind of degree cre-dential will be positive. If the degree isan applied/workplace degree, then theimmediate access to the job market in aspecific trade or professional area will bevalued. There is little doubt that in theshort term students will find the degreeexperience a positive one. By allaccounts, student satisfaction with the

University of Phoenix credential is high.Students taking university transfer incolleges are generally satisfied with theinstructional setting they experience.And after almost a decade of operation,the applied degrees in some Alberta col-leges are gaining increased respect asworkplace credentials.

Yet, the costs to the student ofcontinuing degree inflation are pro-nounced. Each additional year of post-secondary education carries bothdirect and opportunity costs to thestudent. To this point, in Canada,there appears to be no limit to theamount the individuals will pay toaccess higher credentials that willindeed pay off in the job market. Thissuggests that there is indeed a realvalue to the degree credential and aslong as that real value is there, thedemand will continue to increase.However, as a result of degree infla-tion, the value of the first baccalaure-ate degree has shifted from its value asdirect entry to the workplace to whatRandall Collins calls a “way station”toward achieving the higher level cre-dentials needed for a job. While thetraditional first degree still retains allof the social, intellectual and culturalbenefits that the experience has alwaysheld, its current value rests largelywith its ability to give the holder

access to more credentials and thenmore job access. Consequently, if a cre-dential loses its value as that “way sta-tion,” then the inflation of the costwill outstrip the return of the creden-tial to the individual and demandfrom the smart consumer will decline.If the degree is a foundational degreeor if the student has aspirations of fur-ther study, then the satisfaction will beshort lived as they learn that their cre-

dential is viewed as a second-choicecredential, as either the degree isrejected by other post-secondary insti-tutions or as degree inflation ultimate-ly ratchets up the job or professionalrequirements beyond their credential.

The first response of the universitypost-secondary system to the prolifera-tion of new types of degrees will be tocommunicate that these alternatedegrees (applied, technology, college-delivered) are not the same as universi-ty-delivered degrees. This means that,at least for purposes of further study,these degrees will be considered “sec-ond tier” for access to professionalschools and graduate schools. This hasalready started to happen acrossCanada as provincial organizations andindividual universities have adoptedadmission policies that make it clearthat these degree holders should notassume that they would be eligible foradmission to their institutions for fur-ther study. For example, to satisfy thebasis of admission requirement to anydegree program at Queen’s University,academic credentials obtained from aCanadian institution must be from aninstitution that is a member of theAssociation of Universities andColleges of Canada (AUCC).

Chances are that over time, thegovernment and the institution that

offered the new degree will start com-plaining about the reticence to acceptthese degrees (they are provinciallyapproved credentials). In response tothese pressures (governments pay thebills after all), the universities will begrudgingly forced to consider thesedegree holders as at least eligible foradmission to professional schools andgraduate schools. Faced with a greatlyexpanded pool of eligible “degree”

Dave Marshall

The primary reason, of course, for such an increasingproliferation of alternate strategies to provide degrees is cost.No province in Canada has been able to completely absorb thecost of providing unfettered access to the traditionallydelivered university degree credential and, consequently, hassought out cheaper alternatives.


79

holders, graduate and professionalschools will be under the same accessproblems as the undergraduate creden-tial and will respond in kind withincreased number of graduate pro-grams. And the workplace, graduateschools, professional schools and pro-fessions will ultimately change the cre-dential for access from anundergraduate degree to an undergrad-uate degree “plus.”

For example, many states in the USand some Canadian provinces are con-sidering moving to a master’s as theentry to teaching. And now that theCGA certificate requires an undergrad-uate degree, how long will it bebefore the CA designationrequires an MBA? And now thatexecutive MBAs proliferate, howlong will the “market value” ofthe credential be sustained?

P art of the answer to degreeinflation may lay with the

degree accreditation proce-dure. Up until recently, allpost-secondary institutionswere government approvedand were part of a relativelyhomogenous two-sector sys-tem: a college (community)system and a university sys-tem. While there was certainlywide differentiation withinthese two sectors, if an institu-tion was provided with aprovincial charter or legisla-tion to be one type of institu-tion or the other, then the institutionwas seen to be an “accredited”Canadian college or university. Thisissue has been complicated by the factthat there is no federal system of edu-cation at any level in Canada, so eachof the ten provinces and three territo-ries established their own methods tomanage and control the credentialsoffered by post-secondary institu-tions. However, the issue is greatlysimplified in Canada by the fact thatwhile many existing universities hadprivate/religious origins, until recent-ly there was virtually no history ofprivate-for-profit universities to com-

plicate the degree accreditation issue. The result was a simple system of

accreditation by legislation. If an insti-tution was approved by the respectiveprovincial government, it was deemedto be accredited. Since only universi-ties were traditionally provided thelegislation to offer degrees, the qualityof the Canadian degree was seen asconsistent (and generally high quality)from coast to coast.

Obviously, there were inter-provincial differences regarding therecognition of non-public institutionsor credentials, the right of differentinstitutions to grant different creden-

tials, and the relationship between thevarious types of post-secondary insti-tutions. But historically these differ-ences have been mostly on the margin.That is, the differences have not his-torically been significant enough todisrupt the tacitly accepted frameworkof Canadian degree-granting post-secondary education.

Provincial-level changes inresponse to unprecedented demandfor degree-level credentials are threat-ening to disrupt this inter-provincialharmony. To date, the common ele-ment in all of these responses has been

the intention that all new degree expe-riences will ultimately lead to a provin-cially approved university credential.Consequently, while there is somefraying at the edges, the informalnational compact that the Canadiandegree has a value and reputation to beprotected has endured. However, somecracks in this compact have beendeveloping.

P erhaps, the first crack was thegranting of a university charter to

a number of unique institutions suchas Nipissing University in North Bay(1992), Athabasca University in

Alberta (1970), Royal RoadsUniversity in British Columbia(1995), and Ryerson Universityin Toronto (1993). All have his-tories of high-quality program-ming, but were also charteredas very different and distinctdegree-granting institutions.Athabasca University was oneof Canada’s first distance edu-cation university; Nipissingwas Canada’s first (subsequent-ly revised) undergraduate onlyuniversity; Ryerson wasCanada’s first career or voca-tionally focused university;and Royal Roads was the firstpublicly chartered universitywith a mandate to be self fund-ed. Since receiving their “char-ters,” all have established goodreputations as degree-grantinguniversities and have been

accepted into the university fold.While they certainly represent differ-entiated missions, they function with-in the framework of the traditionaluniversity environment. However,their establishment did suggest a firstsign of change in the degree-grantingbusiness in Canada. Ontario’s newestuniversity, the University of OntarioInstitute of Technology (2003), contin-ues the tradition of developing newand unique degree-granting possibili-ties by establishing a new “university.”

The second crack in the degree-granting compact occurred in theprovince of British Columbia as the


Provincial-level changes in responseto unprecedented demand for

degree-level credentials arethreatening to disrupt this inter-provincial harmony. To date, thecommon element in all of theseresponses has been the intention

that all new degree experiences willultimately lead to a provinciallyapproved university credential.

Consequently, while there is somefraying at the edges, the informal

national compact that the Canadiandegree has a value and reputation tobe protected has endured. However,

some cracks in this compact havebeen developing.


80

government responded to both theshortage of universities in general andthe shortage of degree places by estab-lishing a collection of five degree-granting, diploma-granting hybridsthat they called “university colleges.”Every attempt was (and is still being)made to ensure that the student envi-ronment and the degrees offered are asuniversity-like as possible. For exam-ple, the degrees were initially offeredby an established university in BritishColumbia, although the completedegree was delivered on the collegecampus. Nonetheless, the existence ofdegree-granting institutions that werenot in the traditional university model(they are government funded and leg-islated under the Colleges Act), causedsome discomfort in the area of degreerecognition. And the government ofBC is currently dismantling parts ofthe university college model.

The third crack relates to privatedegree-granting institutions. Canada hasaccepted for some time the validity of theprivate, not-for-profit, (primarily faith-based) degree-granting institutions. Mostprovinces have at least one such institutionchartered to offer a limited range of under-graduate degrees. However, (with the excep-tion of the AUCC member institutions) thecredibility of the faith-based baccalaureatesoutside of the faith-based post-secondaryenvironment has always been questioned,and even more so over the past decade asmore and more such institutions have beenestablished and have received permissionfrom the provincial government to operateas a university or university college.

Accreditation is certainly an issuefor such institutions, but the relativelysmall impact on the Canadian degree-granting scene and their ability toarticulate solid one-to-one transferrelationships with established publicuniversities has resulted in a certainlevel of acceptance by the nationalpost-secondary education system.

Private-for-profit degree-grantinginstitutions, however, are another matter.Canada has literally no history of private-for-profit universities in general, muchless private-for-profit universities/degree-granting. At the current time, only the

DeVry Institute of Technology in Calgaryis actively operating as a for-profit degree-granting institute. So while it wouldappear that the per student or competi-tive impact is relatively small, the exis-tence of these degrees in Canada has puta large crack in the compact of theCanadian degree credibility and called

into question the default system ofaccreditation at the provincial level.

The fourth crack occurred in 1995when Mount Royal College in Albertabecame the first “college” in Canadato offer applied baccalaureate degrees.Other Alberta colleges, and colleges inOntario and British Columbia have

Dave Marshall

Demand for access to higher education has grown sharply in Canada over the last years, and this is unlikely to change shortly. The Association of Universities and Colleges

in Canada expects that by 2011, Canadian universities will need to respond to a projected 20 to 30 percent increase in demand for university enrolment.

CP Photo


81

followed suit. Colleges in BritishColumbia and Alberta had been offer-ing university transfer for many years(Mount Royal as early as 1931), but itwas with the introduction of the“applied degree” credential that theuniversity monopoly on the baccalau-reate credential in Canada was bro-ken. Still, these credentials have notcaused a significant challenge to thetraditional degree-granting environ-ment, since they were approved andcontinue to be recognized as uniqueapplied workplace credentials and notintended to be in competition or asubstitute for a traditional baccalaure-ate degree. There is no commonunderstanding across the country ofthe program for these degrees (e.g.,Alberta applied degrees and Ontarioapplied degrees are quite different).However, the graduates of at leastsome of these degreesare gaining increasedrespect in both theworkplace and the pro-fessions and finding acredible and recognizedplace in the post-secondary spectrum.

In essence, by 2000,the degree-granting scenein Canada was starting toshow the signs of differ-entiation usually associ-ated with the post-secondary system inthe United States. Consumers, theworkplace, and graduate schools werenow having to distinguish betweenprivate degrees, distance degrees, faith-based degrees, applied degrees and theold fashion run-of-the mill universityundergraduate degrees. By this time,all of these groups, in addition tobeing confused, were questioning thelong accepted notion of the efficacy ofprovincial-level processes to approve“accredited” institutions or degrees.

It now appears that the next (andperhaps final?) crack in the degree-granting compact is in progress in atleast one province in Canada (and cer-tainly being watched by others). Withan escalating demand for university-level degrees and continuing concerns

for the funding of post-secondary edu-cation, some provinces are now con-sidering the “college” (traditionalcommunity colleges in Canada) as anagent to deliver the complete founda-tional baccalaureate degree; the BAand the BSc that represent most of thedemand and most of the enrollment inexisting universities. College-leveldegrees would solve several of thedegree-access problems from a govern-ment’s perspective. ● Governments traditionally have

far more control over collegesthan with universities.

● Governments can avoid “bicamer-al” governance and the perceivedproblems of faculty control overacademic decisions.

● Governments can ensure facultyteaching loads that are, in someinstances, twice the university setting.

● Governments can separateresearch from teaching and havedegree-granting institutions wherethe faculty role does not includeresearch.

● And most importantly, because allof the above, government candeliver an undergraduate degree(in a college) for perhaps 60 per-cent of the cost to both the tax-payer and the student of the“same” degree in a university.Alberta has recently passed the

Post-secondary Learning Act 2003 (Bill43) as the first provincial legislationthat allows public colleges the oppor-tunity to extend their current ability tooffer the first two years of universitytransfer, to offering the complete foun-dational degrees which to this point

have traditionally been the domain ofthe provincially chartered university.

The bill also provides for theestablishing of the Campus AlbertaQuality Council. The governmentbelieves that this quality assessmentprocess can suffice as the “accrediting”agency and the quality control ondegree-granting in Alberta.

It is possible that this step by theAlberta government to allow tradition-al (community) colleges to offer for-merly university-level foundationalbachelor of arts and bachelor ofscience degrees may be the final crackin the tacit international acceptance ofa Canadian degree. Despite the fid-dling with degree-granting at the mar-gin (e.g., private, virtual, applied etc.),degree-granting has remained largelythe domain of the licensed or char-tered university in Canada. But now,

the implicit acceptance that provincialgovernment control over the degree-granting environment has been a suffi-cient “accreditation” process will beunder question. In essence, as long asindividual provincial governmentsstayed mostly on the same pageregarding degree-granting (as they dowith many other standards of practicein many professional areas), Canadahas never felt the need to establish anational degree or institutional accred-itation process. Consumers (parents,students, employers, graduate schools,professional schools) both here inCanada and elsewhere are now sug-gesting otherwise.

C redential or degree inflation isnot a bad thing. There are gen-


It is clear that the continued expansion of alternate degreesources and the concomitant degree inflation is simply apalliative to the real problems of equality and access to post-secondary education in Canada. By giving students access tocredentials with the implied promise of some sort of highereducation mobility but, at the same time, setting up thecircumstance that those credentials will always be seen assecond choice is a cruel hoax being played on sectors of oursociety that can little afford the hoax.


82

uine, changing workplace and furtherlearning expectations that require anincrease in the supply of and access toundergraduate degrees. In addition,there is a growing need for new typesof degrees such as applied degrees andtechnology degrees that represent thegrowing knowledge base of some tech-nical, professional or vocational work-place environments. Neither of thesecircumstances is an inappropriate con-tributor to degree inflation.

The growing concern is with theprovision of various credentials (diplo-ma or degree) that represent some sortof dilution of the meaning of the cre-dential. For example, simply changingthe name of a diploma to a degreewithout changing the substance repre-sents the extreme of this dilution ofthe meaning of the degree credential.Other examples include the mass pro-ducing of degrees through institutionslike the University of Phoenix, the pro-liferation of “executive” MBAs and,most recently, the movement to offerfoundational (BA, B.Sc.) degrees incommunity college environments.

The result of such dramaticincrease in supply without a concomi-tant maintenance of the foundation orexperience of the degree is inflationnot dissimilar to the kind of fiscalinflation that occurs when govern-ments print money without a changein the financial base of the country.The long-term result of degree infla-tion includes the following:1. Consumers, parents, students,

employers and graduate schoolsand professional schools through-out the country will have to startlooking beyond the particular“degree” to the institution deliver-ing the degree to determine therelative value of the credential.

2. While there is some implicit tier-ing with university credentials atthe current time, the tiering willbe increasingly explicit as differ-ent types of institutions enter thedegree business.

3. Professional associations such asthe Association of Colleges andUniversities in Canada (AUCC)

will become much less cavalierabout the importance of the stan-dard of practice that they establishand the implications of member-ship in their association. This willinclude increased efforts to estab-lish the measures of “quality” in adegree experience.

4. There will be political and nation-al pressures to establish a nationaldegree-granting accreditationbody that is arms-length fromboth professional associations andprovincial politics.

5. The issue of degree accreditationand degree credibility will heat upconsiderably in Canada over thenext decade as competition forspaces in graduate schools andprofessional schools increases.These schools will begin to use theinstitutional source of the degreeas an initial triage for admittance.

6. The challenge to bridge provincialautonomy and education withnational interest and the profes-sional “standard of practice” will bea serious issue. Without an attemptto reconcile provincial-nationalinterest, there is a real danger thatin less than two decades Canadawill have gone from an interna-tionally recognized national stan-dard of practice in degree-grantingto 10 (or more) different degreemeanings and standards. Theimplications for international edu-cational trade are significant.

7. Finally, it is clear that the contin-ued expansion of alternate (non-university) degree sources and theconcomitant degree inflation issimply a palliative to the realproblems of equality and access topostsecondary education inCanada. By giving students accessto credentials with the impliedpromise of some sort of highereducation mobility but, at thesame time, setting up the circum-stance that those credentials willalways be seen as second-choice isa cruel hoax being played on sec-tors of our society that can littleafford the hoax. The result of

increasing degree inflation that isfuelled by a cheap solution todegree access will be a clear tieringof degree credentials. This, in turn,will result in a kind of degreedivide whereby the “real” degrees(or at least the ones most valuedin the workplace and for furtherstudy) will be available to thosethat either know the difference, oras more and more private oppor-tunities arise, can afford the differ-ence. For those that aren’t knowl-edgeable about the differencesbetween the types of degrees, thehoax is that it may be years afterthey graduate before they learnthe difference. And, the perceivedsocial equalizing of access todegrees is not only mythical, butreversed. Given the strong correla-tion between socioeconomic lev-els and levels of education, thiscould, in some ways, represent thecircumstances where there wouldbe degrees for “the uninformedand the poor” and those for “theinformed and the rich.”Given the growing demand for

degrees, and given the value of citi-zens with degrees to economic devel-opment, too much restriction on thevolume of undergraduate degrees is apoor economic development strategy.In general, the control of degreeinflation caused by demand and sup-ply of high quality undergraduatedegrees is not a good policy for mostgovernments.

However, governments can andshould control excessive degree infla-tion by ensuring that whatever infla-tion occurs is appropriate inflationrelated to the supply of quality creden-tials rather than simply due to the typeof degree delivered.

Dave Marshall was appointed presidentof Mount Royal College in Calgary inSeptember 2003. He was president ofNipissing University in Ontario for 13years and Dean of Education for 5 years.He was chair of the Council of OntarioUniversities Committee on Relationshipswith Other Post-secondary Institutions.

Dave Marshall

access to degrees randal collins

Documents