Selkirk students fight 'wanton destruction' as second year science, philosophy, and engineering are shut down
By Adrian Barnes
A funding shortfall of one million dollars has put Selkirk College in the position of having to make some difficult decisions for the 2012-13 academic year. To date these decisions have involved cutting all second year science (math, geography, economic) courses, the engineering transfer program, the college’s philosophy offerings, as well as cuts to the Kootenay School of the Arts.
Many in the region, including a group of Selkirk students, are beginning to state their opposition to both the provincial government’s funding priorities and the priorities of the college’s Board of Governors as they make these cuts. They have created a petition, now circulating in the ether, that asks the province’s Minister of Advanced Education, Naomi Yamamoto, to reconsider. It reads, in part, as follows:
“This year, Selkirk College, after receiving a request from your Ministry asking the College to identify $600,000 in administrative cuts, chose to suspend its second year courses in Science, Mathematics and its Engineering program. Selkirk College serves a rural region with limited access to universities...These drastic cuts are the symptom of a larger problem facing post-secondary institutions in BC, especially colleges located in rural areas who face significantly different challenges than those faced by urban universities.”
This week we had the opportunity to talk with Christina Livingston, a Selkirk science student and one of the organizers of the petition along with Henry Gerelle and Arielle Roberts. The group will also be attending next Tuesday’s meeting of the college’s Board of Governors.
Why have you started this petition?
We, as students of the college and residents of the region, are incredibly concerned by these potential program cuts. While Selkirk is obligated to make changes in order to satisfy the government's financial demands, we feel that cuts of this drastic and far-reaching nature are not in the best interests of the college or the population it exists to serve. We wanted to give the community, faculty, and students a chance to express their opposition to Selkirk's decision and their outrage over the government's mercenary attitude towards post-secondary education.
What do you see as the worst impact of cuts like these?
These cuts represent a death knell for higher education in this region. Vastly reducing the general pool of academics in rural areas further encourages population attrition to larger centres: a very short term plan, with dramatic long term effects. Selkirk's Board of Governors has cited low-enrolment numbers in its second-year science classes as a motivating factor behind their decision to eliminate these courses. While enrolment this year was lower than it has been in the past, we fail to see how cutting these courses will result in an increased student population at the college.
Selkirk is an asset to this region because of the calibre of education it provides, especially in the sciences. Alumni of the Associate of Science program go on to excel in larger institutions because of the small class sizes and dedicated faculty that make Selkirk such an incredible school. The loss of these programs ultimately means that students who wish to pursue a degree in the sciences, engineering, or liberal arts will be forced to leave home sooner, pay higher tuition fees, and go into more debt than they would have if they had been able to complete a significant portion of their degree locally.
The loss of University Transfer courses marks a dangerous shift in priorities for Selkirk College. Reducing University Transfer in favour of providing only "rubber stamp" certification programs to meet local needs has several deleterious effects:
i) It provides short term "accreditation" solutions for a select lucky few, thereby saturating a very small niche and encouraging people to travel elsewhere for work.
ii) Education is now an obstacle rather than an experience.
iii) Students are trained as workers, not critical thinkers!
What effect do you hope your efforts will have?
We hope that our efforts will galvanize the community to action. We want to draw attention to the Selkirk administration's lack of transparency regarding their decision to cut these programs, and their lack of foresight regarding the consequences of these actions. The decision to eliminate these programs has not yet been finalized, and we hope to have a productive dialogue with the administration about other possible solutions to this problem.
We need to remind the community of what a valuable resource they have in Selkirk College, and demonstrate our dedication to providing accessible higher education in this region. Lastly, we hope to call on our provincial government to address funding needs of post-secondary institutions in rural areas, as chronic underfunding is the root problem underlying this situation and it must be resolved.
Can you tell us about next Tuesday's Board of Governor's meeting and what you plan to present there?
On Tuesday, March 27th, at 5:00pm, the administrators at Selkirk College will present their budget plan to the Board of Governors for approval; this will include the proposed “suspensions” of programs. If there is a majority vote from the Board of Governors to approve the plan, then I fear that remedying the situation will become much more difficult. Our goal, therefore, is to persuade the Board of Governors to vote against said budget plan.
The Selkirk College Students' Union has kindly arranged for us to speak at this meeting for 15 minutes, for which we will have prepared a Powerpoint presentation centred around two main points: 1) it is important that the budget cuts imposed upon the college by the BC government be addressed in such a fashion so as to minimize the negative effect on students; and 2) Selkirk College is in dire need of the Board of Governors' aid in lobbying the BC government for more realistic funding for post-secondary education, rural colleges in particular.
In contending the first issue, we will point out that the “BC government [is going to be cutting] funding for post-secondary education by $70 million over the next 3 years . . . [and a]ccording to Finance Minister Kevin Falcon, the government expects this money to come from “administrative savings,” not from “front-line programs.” The problems at Selkirk, however, are only symptoms of a larger disease, the nature of which is elucidated in the projected $70 million cuts to post-secondary education over the next 3 years - prompting our inclusion of the second issue.
What can the average person in the WK do to support funding for their local community college?
-Come out to the Board of Governors Meeting on Tuesday, March 27th. We will be meeting at 4:30pm in the Pit (located right inside the front entrance) at Selkirk College, Castlegar Campus. Afterwards, the Selkirk College Students' Union will be providing food for participants.
Write a letter to the Minister of Advanced Education, Naomi Yamamoto, expressing your frustration over the chronic underfunding for post-secondary institutions. She can be contaced via email at aved.minister@gov.bc.ca or at her office in Victoria by phone at 250-356-0179 or fax at 250-952-0260. If you wish to send personal letters, they can be addressed to:
Honourable Naomi Yamamoto
Minister of Advanced Education
PO Box 9080 Stn Prov Govt
Victoria BC V8W 9E2
The Students’ Union on the Castlegar campus has also offered to act a as a communication hub in this matter. If you drop your letters off there, or email them to organiser@selkirkstudents.ca, they will be sent to all relevant parties on your behalf.
You can also sign our petition.
The government and the college need to know that the people in this region don't support the wanton destruction of opportunities for higher education in rural areas.
Further inquiries can be addressed to: organiser@selkirkstudents.ca