Alberta government launches post-secondary review amid funding strains and competitiveness concerns, excludes students’ unions in formation
By Imran Ahmed, February 10 2025—
Update
According to an SU media spokesperson, U of C economist Jack Mintz informed the SU that the newly formed panel would reach out for further consultation. The SU is now waiting to see if this consultation will be meaningful.
Original article
Alberta, long celebrated for hosting some of the world’s leading academic and research institutions, now faces cracks in its foundation. Funding cuts, concerns over competitiveness and the federal government’s tightening restrictions on international students has led the provincial government to rethink its post-secondary education strategy to ensure sustainability, global competitiveness and alignment with its Alberta 2030 plan. Part of this recalibration involved Alberta’s Minister of Advanced Education Rajan Sawhney organizing an expert panel to conduct a review of Alberta’s higher-level education and funding mechanisms for the province’s post-secondary institutions (PSI).
The panel, composed of five experts and headed by U of C economist Jack Mintz, is tasked with evaluating the competitiveness of Alberta’s public and independent PSI’s on a domestic and global scale and analyzing alternative funding models for higher education. These experts, who come from varying fields, include Charlene Butler, Ray Block, Joan Hertz and Peter Mackinnon.
Union concern
In an interview with the Gauntlet, Mateusz Salmassi, the Students’ Union (SU) Vice-President external, expressed concern that the SU was not consulted in the formation of the panel.
“I’m worried that students’ unions won’t be meaningfully involved, though I hope I’m wrong. The timeline and focus of the review are still unclear, but it’s critical that students’ unions are included,” he said. “We have deep experience holding post-secondary institutions accountable and ensuring money is spent efficiently on students’ needs. Student unions provide an independent and objective perspective that would benefit both the province and students. Without our input, the panel’s results will have a significant gap.”
The Gauntlet reached out to the Office of Advanced Education for comment on the panel and student involvement but did not receive a response.
The goal of the panel report, which is expected to be delivered directly to Sawhney in late 2025, is to provide insight to the provincial government on the trajectory of higher education in Alberta. The initiative aims to develop a highly skilled and competitive workforce, strengthen innovation and the commercialization of research and forge stronger relationships between employers and post-secondary institutions.
The panel review comes after major cuts and changes to PSIs across the province and a slowing inflow of international students, which has negatively impacted revenues and left many universities grappling with larger funding gaps. These recent changes include tying part of a university’s funding to performance-based metrics such as enrolment and graduate employment rates. Some stakeholders worry that aligning higher education too closely with labour market demands could lead universities to prioritize programs with higher earning potential, potentially marginalizing disciplines that foster broader intellectual and societal growth.
Performance metrics
Critics also highlight the arbitrary nature of performance metrics, such as Ontario’s “student skills and competencies” measure, which would require standardized testing and risk-biased quantifiable outcomes instead of holistic development. They argue that such metrics fail to capture the full breadth of intelligence, creativity and critical thinking that universities aim to cultivate.
The U of A SU has criticized performance-based funding, warning it could lead to selective admissions, unfairly punish universities during recessions and create a financial “death spiral” for underperforming institutions.
Salmassi cited the risks of performance-based funding.
“Performance-based metrics themselves are often unstable in Canada, depending on how they’re designed. For example, if funding is tied to research commercialization, it risks compromising inventions that weren’t initially designed for commercial purposes but became significant later, like GPS or touchscreen technology. This model creates instability and could pressure institutions in unproductive ways,” Salmassi said.
Beginning in 2020, Alberta has proposed and implemented performance-based funding, crafting and signing unique Investment Management Agreements (IMA) with all post-secondary institutions, which detail a set of target metrics, the amount of funding weighted to each metric, and tolerance bands. Some funding metrics being used are the proportion of approved programs that offer work-integrated learning, research commercialization and graduate outcomes, which is measured as the proportion of recent graduates in program-related employment two years after graduation.
Initially, 15 per cent of an institution’s funding from the Campus Alberta Grant (CAG) was tied to performance according to each respective IMA. That number was increased to 40 per cent by 2022–2023. The CAG is a significant and essential source of operational funds for most universities. This comes as the CAG was simultaneously cut for institutions across the province, including a $135 million cut to the U of C, totalling approximately 23 per cent of total CAG funding.
Salmassi also emphasized the importance of increasing the CAG after the recent cuts.
“Major cuts to the CAG have led to dirtier classrooms, larger class sizes, more competition for required courses, and delayed graduation, which impacts workforce entry. Students are now footing the bill for tens of millions of dollars that institutions need to function,” said Salmassi.
Previous reviews — conducted during years of deficit spending by the provincial government — recommended no further increases in provincial funding to postsecondary education and a restructuring of the funding mechanisms. These recommendations have been largely followed, with an estimated funding cut of 31 per cent in the past five years.
International students
The federal government’s tightening of restrictions on international students has further strained Alberta’s PSI funding. International students are a major revenue source for universities as they pay significantly more than domestic students. Reductions in the amount of new international students coming to Albertan universities has created financial challenges that will persist as these students typically enroll in multi-year programs.
Amid these challenges, the expert panel tasked with advising the government must address key issues, yet concerns remain about the exclusion of students’ unions from the process.
“Students and student unions have [in the past] been able to identify areas where improvements are needed and follow up on issues that require attention,” said Salmassi. “These gaps are only evident to those who engage with these processes daily, which are students, not the government.”
Learn more about the post-secondary review panel on the Government of Alberta website.