/
Measuring diversity in Ontario’s university sector: 1994 – 2010 Measuring diversity in Ontario’s university sector: 1994 – 2010

Measuring diversity in Ontario’s university sector: 1994 – 2010 - PowerPoint Presentation

phoenixbristle
phoenixbristle . @phoenixbristle
Follow
342 views
Uploaded On 2020-08-28

Measuring diversity in Ontario’s university sector: 1994 – 2010 - PPT Presentation

Pierre G Piché May 16 2013 1 Focus Ontarios university sector Period 1994 and 2010 What Quantitatively measures diversity Type Systemic and Climate How Hierarchical cluster analysis ID: 806453

higher diversity 1994 education diversity higher education 1994 2010 analysis matrix institutional systemic universities methodology climate simpson

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download The PPT/PDF document "Measuring diversity in Ontario’s unive..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

Measuring diversity in Ontario’s university sector: 1994 – 2010

Pierre G.

PichéMay 16, 2013

1

Slide2

Focus: Ontario’s university sector

Period: 1994 and 2010

What: Quantitatively measures diversityType: Systemic and ClimateHow: Hierarchical cluster analysis* Diversity matrix** Simpson’s ****Huisman, J. (2000). Higher education institutions: As different as chalk and cheese? Higher Education Policy, 13, 41-53.**Birnbaum, R. (1983). Maintaining Diversity in Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass*** Huisman, J., Meek, L., and Wood, F. (2007). Institutional diversity in higher education: a cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis. Higher Education Quarterly, 61(4

).

 

Overview

2

Slide3

Variables: 1994 and 2010

Graduate enrolments (full and part-time)

Undergraduate enrolments (full and part-time)Full-time facultyTuition revenueOperating grants revenueNon-credit operating revenueSponsored research revenueHierarchical Cluster Analysis

3

Slide4

Hierarchical Cluster Analysis

1994

4

Slide5

Hierarchical Cluster Analysis

2010

5

Slide6

Categorizes institutions into unique institutional types*

Same values for all variables means the institution belongs to the same cell*

Makes use of indices to measure diversity*Used Simpson’s as another measure***Birnbaum, R. (1983). Maintaining Diversity in Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass** Huisman, J., Meek, L., and Wood, F. (2007). Institutional diversity in higher education: a cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis. Higher Education Quarterly, 61(4). 

Diversity Matrix Methodology*

6

Slide7

Operationalizing variables for Systemic Diversity

Size:

Small – less than 5,000 studentsMedium – between 5,000 to 10,000 studentsLarge – more than 10,000 studentsType:Primarily undergraduate*Comprehensive*medical/doctoral*Special purpose*Maclean’s

Diversity Matrix Methodology

7

Slide8

12 possible Unique Institutional Types for Systemic Diversity

Diversity Matrix Methodology

8

Slide9

Systemic Diversity

Distribution of unique institutional types

for Ontario universities – 19949

Slide10

Systemic Diversity

Distribution of types for Ontario universities – 1994 and 2010

10

Slide11

Measuring Diversity

Four indices*:

Index A - # of universities / total number of unique typesIndex B - # of universities most pop cell / # of universitiesIndex C - # of universities in high 10% of cells / # of universitiesIndex D - # cells with only one institution / # of universitiesSimpson’s ** ∑pᵢ²pᵢ - proportional abundance of the ith institutional

type

*

Birnbaum, R. (1983).

Maintaining Diversity in Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass** Huisman, J., Meek, L., and Wood, F. (2007). Institutional diversity in higher education: a cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis.

Higher Education Quarterly, 61(4).

 

Diversity Matrix Methodology

11

Slide12

Systemic Diversity

Four indices:

Simpson’s

 

1994: (5/22)²

+ (5/22)² + (5/22)² + (4/22)² + (2/22)² + (1/22)² =

0.1983

2010: (5/23)² + (5/23)² + (5/23)² + (5/23)² + (3/23)² = 0.2060

12

Slide13

Operationalizing variables for Climate Diversity

Enrolment Profile:

Low – less than 10% of FT grad students / total FT enrolmentMedium – between 10% and 20%High – over 20%Undergraduate Profile:Low – less than 60% of FT undergrad students / total undergrad enrolmentMedium - between 60% and less than 80%High – 80% or overDiversity Matrix Methodology

13

Slide14

Operationalizing variables for Climate Diversity (continued)

Student-Faculty contact:

High – less than 20 – Total enrolment / # of FT facultyMedium – between 20 and 30Low – over 30Diversity Matrix Methodology14

Slide15

Climate Diversity

Distribution of types for Ontario universities – 1994 and 2010

15

Slide16

Climate Diversity

Four indices:

Simpson’s  

1994:

(4/22)² + (4/22)² + (3/22)² + (3/22)² + (2/22)² + (2/22)² + (1/22)²

+ (1/22)² + (1/22)² + (1/22)² =0.1281

2010: (6/23)² + (4/23)² + (3/23)² + (3/23)² + (2/23)² + (1/23)² + (1/23)² + (1/23)² + (1/23)² + (1/23)² = 0.1493

16

Slide17

Hierarchical cluster analysis – very little change

Diversity Matrix Methodology* &

Simpson’s **: Systemic Diversity – decrease in diversity from 1994 to 2010 Climate Diversity - decrease in diversity from 1994 to 2010Stay tuned…What are the factors and policies that contributed to this convergence from 1994 to 2010?What government policies are most likely to promote systemic and climate diversity in Ontario’s university sector?*Birnbaum, R. (1983).

Maintaining Diversity in Higher Education.

San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass** Huisman, J., Meek, L., and Wood, F. (2007). Institutional diversity in higher education: a cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis.

Higher Education Quarterly, 61(4).

 

Conclusion

17