This is very good news. A big part of providing education and career opportunities to women and young families is the provision of affordable and accessible childcare. Thank you CNC for making it work!

Why is there a budget issue? Thought training for skilled Labour shortages was to be full out or is that just smoke a mirrors?

That is some good news. I’m glad they’re able to find the cash.

The college needs to compare its expenses to the average spending in BC and Canadian colleges/universities and adjust/lower them.

On the average in a BC/Canadian university, around 50% of the budget is spent on instruction plus around 4.5% on additional non-credit instruction. 4% on library and 4% on computers and 15.5% on administration and 9.5% on student services and 9.5% on the physical plant and 3% on external relations.

I don’t have the full breakdown for CNC, budget, but a look at it suggests that one source of overspending in CNC seems to be in instruction with 64% (more than +10% to average BC). The next CNC president needs to do a full analysis of the budget (and no, I haven’t applied for the position :).

I agree saving the daycare was important. Good job for those that got out in front of the issue and made their voices heard.

When people ask me if starting out first and second year is better at CNC or UNBC. I always say CNC the first few years is the better option because of the closer access to the instructors for courses that are transferable anyways. I think the higher percentage at CNC for instructors is one of its strengths when competing with a university in the same town.

prof says “a look at it suggests that one source of overspending in CNC seems to be in instruction with 64%”

Comparing the costs of a small community college focusing on access to learning and instruction to a set of numbers incorporating schools like UBC and their emphasis on research funding is like comparing apples to broccoli. Both are good for you but are quite different. The prorated costs associated with 500 students in a UBC 100 course level lecture hall to 15 students in a program in Burns Lake. Or Vanderhoof. Really?

I am delighted you didn’t apply for the vacant position.

Eagleone … Hear, hear, well stated.

Actually, there is no vacancy in the president’s chair; it was filled a couple of months ago by a fellow from Kwantlen who starts in June.

I encouraged a dean colleague to apply for the position but he said it is a very tough job with UNBC next door. I think TRU data with less than 9000$ per student (FTE)cost for BC government is a good model for both CNC and UNBC (with double that cost). BTW with this attitude, you wont be able to improve the inefficiencies in PG. When someone shows you a path to help you, you should appreciate it and say “thank you”.

I have seen some parents in west of PG area sending their children to TRU because no one wants to graduate from a place that does not exist in a few years time. One parent had even participated in the drive to collect 5$ …

prof … nice to see that anotherside and Krusty are on the ball.

I gather you are not an employee of CNC nor an avoid reader of 250NEWS.

Here is the report of the new president of CNC from February, 2014.

blog/view/31182

Also, where do you get your information from. It does not seem to match the info from statscan and CAUBO.

http://www.caubo.ca/resources/publications/financial_information_universities

BTW, the term “colleges” used by CAUBO refers to degree granting colleges, not community colleges.

“I think TRU data with less than 9000$ per student (FTE)cost for BC government is a good model for both CNC and UNBC”

You realize that TRU is where Open Learning and Open University resides. Are those students counted in your data?

You also realize that TRU does not have the graduate programs that UNBC has.

There are a number of things which are simply not comparable.

You wrote: “When someone shows you a path to help you, you should appreciate it and say “thank you”.”

Sight unseen and unknown? I am sure that relatively savvy people will want to know a bit more about the capability of the person showing the path. So far I, for one, do not have much confidence.

Show me a bit more about why we should listen to you. Also, there is no path to follow. We followed another path to creating a University here and I and many others are not about to waiver from that without a very strong argument and a very clear path to follow.

Again, where is you data source?

Prof, do you teach at TRU? Your figures are not actually that good.

Here is a quick selection of a few community colleges and limited post grad universities as well as full research universities.

Numbers represent government funding + FTE + funding/FTE
Community Colleges – 2 year diplomas/associate degrees
okanagan$44,518,6614,851$9,177
cnc$29,191,1713,146$9,279

Undergrad universities
kwantlen$67,135,8599,097$7,380
viu$50,613,8586,678$7,579
tru$65,180,4318,123$8,024
Note that 31% of tru enrolment is distance learning rather than on campus. This should be at least a physical plant saving.

Full research universities
uvic$175,903,43616,528$10,643
unbc$47,261,6963,455$13,679

Notice that CNC + UNBC funded enrolment is 3146 +3455 = 6,501 which is larger than on campus TRU and within a 100 of Vancouver Island University in Nanaimo which has a similar catchment area to PG based institutions, except for the total physical area involved.

So tell me again why we should follow TRU or even VIU, neither of which have post graduate programs.

I didn’t post the UBC (or TRU data). I posted “the average”. I assume that you know the meaning of average?

By average, I mean the total of spending in each category for all universities divided by the number of universities. When in my last week comment, I compared the cost of student (FTE) in UNBC (over 17000$) with 10000$ of average BC. I calculated the BC average by total BC funding in all university and colleges in BC divided by the total students (FTE) to obtain a figure very close to 10000$ per student.

gus, why you don’t provide the average Canadian that you have (say for 2011) for the above categories and we then compare the data BC/Canadian and UNBC/CNC with yours.

instruction:
instruction(-cred):
library:
computer:
plant:
admin:
student service:
external Rel:

You guys tell us how much spending in your category of external relations we have in PG?

BTW gus 3455 in UNBC is the target no of students FTE and not the actual no of students (FTE) enrolled which is around 2800-2900.

> unbc $47,261,696 3,455 $13,679
^^^^^
With the actual no of students for UNBC you get for UNBC around 17000$ cost.

Here is a link that compares UNBC per FTE “actual cost” with 3 other universities over several years:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/161421766/42-BC-Universities—Provincial-Operating-Grants-per-Funded-and-Actual–Full-time-Equivalent-Student

The management mantra in both CNC and UNBC should be turning threats into opportunities and I have seen some in the administration (and some of their ext. relations guys here) doing the opposite and turning opportunities for growth into threats …

Posted by: prof on April 26 2014 9:44 AM

I encouraged a dean colleague to apply for the position but he said it is a very tough job with UNBC next door. I think TRU data with less than 9000$ per student (FTE)cost for BC government is a good model for both CNC and UNBC.

That is what you posted …. that is what I responded to ….. I won’t dignify the rest of your post.

You may not be, but you sure sound like one of the disgruntled instructors from CNC who left some time ago for Kamloops.

I posted a link to CAUBO which uses the statscan figures for total as well as individual financial information. The breakdown is completely different than yours. I am not about to spend a Saturday afternoon to interpret between the two. It is an impossible task in any case unless you work in the finance department of an institution and know how to reassign cost centres.

My 8 categories is based on two sets of data for BC and Canadian (2011) and the same data has been used in Budget reports to BC government. If you are claiming a difference then I assume that you had the data when you claimed it and posting them takes less than 1 minute and not an afternoon.

line 24 in Page 15 of the CAUBO PDF report (report 1.4) uses the 8 category for 2011 and matches well with 8 category data of Canadian that I used.

Gus, your claim above is simply false and the CAUBO data contradict you.

The 2013 preliminary enrolment according to the AUCC as well as other sources for Canadian Universities are listed here
http://www.aucc.ca/canadian-universities/facts-and-stats/enrolment-by-university

UNBC is shown with the following FTE count:
Full-time Undergraduate = 1,950
Full-time Graduate = 510
Part-time Undergraduate = 850
Part-time Graduate = 110
Total FTE = 3,420

The funding letters to the Universities and Colleges in BC are here.
http://www.aved.gov.bc.ca/budget/welcome.htm

For UNBC it states they are funded as follows for 2013
Undergraduate = 2,972
Graduate = 455
Undesignated = 28
Total = 3,455

If you have different figures like your 2,800 to 2,900, then show us where those come from other than your mind.

Your agenda here is clear and you have had that for the years you have been posting here. Your statement on April 26 2014 at 9:44 AM makes that abundantly clear: “I have seen some parents in west of PG area sending their children to TRU because no one wants to graduate from a place that does not exist in a few years time”.

Here is the full time graduate seat to total full time seat percentage for the public universities in BC for 2013:

Simon Fraser University27.0%
The University of British Columbia26.7%
University of Northern British Columbia26.2%
University of Victoria22.6%
Vancouver Island University4.9%
Thompson Rivers University2.8%
Emily Carr Institute of Art + Design1.8%
University of the Fraser Valley0.7%
Kwantlen Polytechnic University0.0%

Those who pushed to establish an independent university here got exactly what they wanted, a university which was an independent research university. They understood the politics of post secondary education in BC well enough to know that the creation of a university melded with the community college would result in what you see in the table, for VIU, TRU, ECI, UFV and KPU.

Only Kelowna has kept their community college intact and they have added a UBC campus. We do not see that in the above figures since it gets absorbed with the UBC figures. I am relatively sure that they will not match the graduate seat percentage that the main campus has for many, many decades, if ever.

I am hoping that the new president of CNC will be smart enough to find the appropriate niche for the college, because they have been struggling with that ever since UNBC first opened its doors in temporary facilities downtown.

Just for comparison, I ran the figures for the post grad seat profile of Ontario universities. BC is actually the second strongest, after Quebec, in delivery of post grad seats on a percentage basis.

Quebec = 28.7%
BC = 23.3%
Newfoundland = 18.3%
Alberta = 16.1%
Ontario = 14.8%

University of Toronto (includes colleges)24.3%
University of Western Ontario (excludes colleges)22.0%
Queen’s University21.9%
University of Windsor19.5%
University of Ottawa (includes Saint Paul University)18.2%
McMaster University15.6%
Carleton University (includes Dominican University College)14.9%
University of Waterloo (includes colleges)13.7%
Lakehead University12.5%
University of Guelph10.5%
York University9.8%
Ryerson University9.4%
Brock University8.8%
Laurentian University (includes Sudbury)7.0%
Wilfrid Laurier University6.5%
Trent University6.5%
Ontario College of Art & Design4.7%
University of Ontario Institute of Technology4.0%
Nipissing University2.9%

When it comes to breakdowns of costs of operating a post secondary institute, whether 65% or 50% is spent on teaching staff or 4% on library operations is really a function of factors that include notions such as program mix, union agreements, geographical region and associated satellite operations, distance to major provincial centres, weather, research functions, etc.

Looking at compartmentalized cost centres really does not tell the story. They are indictors that is all.

One needs to find out more before one can reach an informed conclusion. Without that one does not know if a path to change is required and what that path would look like.

I have already posted a link highlighting the difference between “actual” FTE (enrolled) of UNBC and target/funded FTE:

Ghttp://www.docstoc.com/docs/161421766/42-BC-Universities—Provincial-Operating-Grants-per-Funded-and-Actual–Full-time-Equivalent-Student

>UNBC is shown with the following FTE count:
>Full-time Undergraduate = 1,950
>Full-time Graduate = 510
>Part-time Undergraduate = 850
>Part-time Graduate = 110
>> Total FTE = 3,420

You know perfectly well that “part-time” student numbers (850+110) do not count in the “FULL TIME” equivalent (FTE) counts by simply adding them into it. So are you telling us that UNBC has only 1950+510=2460 full time students now?! Your 2460 is lower than 2800-2900 that I mentioned and is reported in 2011-12:

http://www.biv.com/article/20121023/BIV050101/121029992/-1/BIV/top-post-secondary-institutions-in-bc-in-2012

So again you are trying to mis-inform the public by inflating the count of “full-time” students (FTE) in UNBC by adding the “part-time” numbers into it. You think people cannot differentiate between part-time and full-time?

I don’t speculate on your agenda here but in an information age you cannot hide the facts by mis-information.

Dream of 300 FTE (2 sets) …

“You know perfectly well that “part-time” student numbers (850+110) do not count in the “FULL TIME” equivalent (FTE) counts by simply adding them into it”

Having dealt with this in a past professional life, I know perfectly well that you are wrong.

The actual number of individual students who is far higher. Some take one course, some two courses, etc. The student-course registrations are agglomerated into an a FULL TIME EQUVALENT number.

See the capitalized words? I am not “yelling”. That is just to draw you attention to the operative words in this discussion of numbers and what they mean. If they were all full time students, the term FTE would not be required.

My last post on this matter. You have proven that you are functionally illiterate when it comes to post secondary education administration and funding.

Have a great day.

You don’t get anywhere by distorting the numbers and inflating them here. Ask it from the last lady in UNBC with her yoga mat who lost her job doing what you are doing here. Facts and not lies are the basis of our education system, and go have some sleep …

Business Vancouver (above article link) publicly reports these facts:

CNC FTE: (2011/12: 2278)(2010/11: 2351)
UNBC FTE:(2011/12: 2884)(2010/11: 2934)

Read for content

The heading is: “Number of full-time equivalent (FTE) students enrolled in 2011-2012”

Under that there are two lines.

Top one is 2,577FTE (as the heading says!!!!)

Bottom one is 1,654FTE

In case you can’t add the total is:

4,231 FTE

As I said, you are continuing to show that you are functionally illiterate in this matter.

Move onto something you are good at. You are out of your depth and are blinded by your hatred for UNBC!!! It shows big time.

gus, you are the worst propaganda machinery I have ever seen. Here are the FTE counts of UNBC based on UNBC senate April 2013 public report.

(2011/12) 2884 – Dr Dale contract renewed
(2010/11) 2934
(2009/10) 3005
(2008/09) 3054 – Dr Dale was hired as VP
(2007/08) 2976
(2006/07) 2929
(2005/06) 2868
(2004/05) 2973
(2003/04) 2943
According to UNBC, -571 FTE short of the target for UNBC. Go ask UNBC to correct its own numbers by your imaginary data …

How much you are being paid for these lies and personal attacks? You are being paid overtime for posting at 3:29 AM on a weekend?
We should call you “sleepless in PG” …