The communications pundits at Trent have been hard at it of late. Producing encouraging and self-congratulatory press releases, they tell us Trent is receiving top ratings from all corners. Not surprisingly, the administration’s media machine is reluctant to reveal all the facts because these are less than pleasant, and might be bad for sales: Trent’s rankings have slipped and are not exactly what Trent represents them to be. We all want Trent to regain the high national standing and recognition it once truly enjoyed justifying the proclamation that Trent is “Canada's outstanding small university”. But to run a university requires more than a greased communications department busy spinning and repackaging glitzy material to sell Trent with TV spots and ra-ra stories. Some serious and honest analysis is required if we are to identify why Trent’s ratings have fallen, and what obstacles must be addressed to recapture, and surpass, its former standing.

Trent has recently claimed for itself various accolades, but can these claims be substantiated when subjected to critical analysis? Has Trent honestly represented its performance? We see various inaccuracies, omissions and manipulations in Trent's media reporting that some might consider purposefully misleading.

It is timely to review some facts in the shadow of the recent publication of Macleans University Rankings ’05 issue (November 14, 2005) and the earlier Macleans’ guide to Canadian Universities, as well as the Research University of the Year scorecards published by Re$earch Infosource.

In the press release of November 6, 2005 entitled Trent University #1 in Ontario among Primarily Undergraduate Universities in Annual Macleans Rankings” Trent media moguls neglected to include the big picture.

It is somewhat pitiful, if not outright misleading, to narrow the focus to Ontario. Trent has always been 1st in Ontario. But in the 1990’s Trent ranked in the top two or three primarily undergraduate universities in the country. Now it’s down to eighth place in national standing. Trent made one last appearance in 3rd place Canada-wide in 2001, but has since slipped, down to 6th place in 2004, down to 8th this year. It may still be 1st in Ontario, but it is now middle of the road in the country. (See Macleans Overall Rankings -Primarily Undergraduate)

If this trend continues we might look forward Trent’s communication department spin-doctoring press releases announcing, with trumpet blaring, that "Trent University is #1 in The Kawarthas”!

The part of the Macleans’ survey that compares entering grades among universities includes all three categories – medical/doctoral, comprehensive, and primarily undergraduate: 47 universities in Canada in all.

This means that primarily undergraduate institutions like Trent in principle can out-compete with comprehensive or doctoral institutions. Take, on average entering grade, St. Francis Xavier (rank 10th: average entering grade: 86.1%) or Mount Allison (rank13th: 85.3%), both above U of T (rank 14th: 85.1%), McMaster (rank 18th: 83.7%), or Guelph (rank 22nd: 83.0%). Where did Trent end up? It is in second-last place, 46th out of 47, with an average entering grade of 77.8%, higher only than Lakehead (rank 47th: 77.1%).

Trent ends up with a similarly poor ranking in the category of students with an entering grade of 75% or higher. A stunning 39.8 % of Trent’s entering students fall below this mark. By comparison: St. Francis Xavier 3.65% or Mount Allison 11.69%. Canada’s top 19 universities have fewer than 10% students entering with a grade average below 75%.

Does it matter? Quality of students certainly matters to those who are deciding which university to choose for themselves. Trent is now caught in a vicious circle, as it has reached the bottom for all to see.

What are the factors responsible for this shocking decline in standards? Is this administration’s fundamental decision to significantly expand the size of the institution a commitment that imposes a financial imperative to hunt for student bodies, just as long as they can pay?

This might explain Trent’s consistently high ranking in the category of value added. Since 1999, Trent has placed first or second countrywide, across all categories of universities. Does top performance in this category mean more than having very low admission standards combined with a pretty good retention rate?

Trent is 1st in the primarily undergraduate group in scholarships and bursaries, committing just under 10% of its operating budget for this purpose, followed closely by Lakehead. Apparently this does not translate into attracting a larger share of students with high grade averages. Without this extra effort in financial aid would Trent’s average entering grades slip even further?

Trent is rightly proud of its researchers. But to be clear it’s the natural sciences that perform near the top of primarily undergraduate institutions (2nd, behind Lethbridge in medical/science grants). Ranking in social sciences and humanities grants is merely middling (11th out of 21).

Trent still enjoys a surprisingly good reputation, according to the Macleans survey. But how fast is this accumulated resource being depleted by an administration committed to institutional expansion measured only in term of dollars and buildings? The irony is that even in business terms this administration’s strategy seems to have failed miserably, regardless of the spit and shine the communications department manages to pump out.

Trent's academic vice president Susan Apostle-Clark appears satisfied to blame Trent's falling rank on the double cohort. But that too is disingenuous and misleading. The coming of the double cohort was foreseen. In spite of that it was in fact Trent management that last year had to admit that it miscalculated student numbers. This miscalculation resulted in a budgetary shortfall of $1.75 million.

Trent's current administration seems inexorably bent on shedding the very features that have consistently won recognition for Trent. Large development plans (some without business plans), growing commercialization and corporatization, and dropping the slogan "Canada's outstanding small university" are but a few examples.

Indeed, Macleans Guide to Canadian Universities 2005 cited Sadleir House in the "What's Hot" section. Sadleir House, now operated by the Peter Robinson Community and Student Association (PRCSA), was purchased by students and community members after president Bonnie Patterson closed Peter Robinson College against the wishes of senate. While funded in part by students voting to levy themselves in perpetuity, Sadleir House and the PRCSA are completely independent and free from control of Trent administrators.

Conversely, in the "What's Not" section is topped by three entries critical of the current administrations' favoured accomplishments [sic]: the yellow blight on the landscape known as Enweyin or Gzowski College, the Gzowski College corporate dining hall, and centralized administration of colleges.

It is ironic that the Trent administration chooses to highlight Macleans rankings for small class size and other intimacies once unique to Trent, features this administration has been criticised for systematically destroying.

For several years now Re$earch Infosource, who claim to be “Canada’s Source of R&D Intelligence”, has produced a ranking of Canada’s Top 50 Research Universities. In response to this year’s rankings based upon 2004 research figures Trent issued a media release entitled Trent University Tops Again, "Research University of the Year" (October 25, 2005).

In the first sentence of Trent claimed;

Trent University has once again landed the number one spot as Research University of the Year for 2005, in a national survey ranking Canada's innovation leaders.

And in the second sentence that was toned down somewhat to claim top spot in the primary undergraduate category;

It is the third consecutive year Trent has held the number one spot in comparison with other primarily undergraduate universities across Canada.

But the real story is that in the fiscal year 2004 the top undergraduate institution was the Nova Scotia Agricultural College(NSAC), not Trent University. But in the fiscal years 2002 and 2003 Trent did indeed rank first in the undergraduate scorecard.

It seems that Trent media meisters were not at all pleased with having fallen in rank. What did Trent do? It simply removed NSAC from the top spot and assigned it to itself! That's akin to the current administration dealing with the recommendations of the 1997 Arthurs-Lorimer report by removing the report from its website. Raise the acceptable level of e-coli in the water and voila! - no more pollution.

We’re not aware of Trent’s reasoning for having booted NSAC off the scorecard. We invite Trent's representatives to post that in one of the OurTrent public discussion forums.

There is a footnote beside NSAC in undergraduate scorecard indicating it is “not a full service university”. It remains unclear what this means – perhaps they don’t have a sports complex or lack some other minor service?

Regardless, Re$earch Infosource sees fit to include NSAC in its rankings, something Trent needs to respect. To remove the top ranked undergraduate institution and claim the position for itself invalidates the very ranking system Trent seeks to exploit to its own advantage. Trent should accept that it fell to second place and develop legitimate measures to improve in this area.

Historical analysis of Re$earch Infosource’s rankings of the top 50 research university lists reveals Trent is falling behind by various indicators;

• Trent’s highest rank was 30, in the fiscal year of 2000 and has since steadily fallen and is now 36 out of 50,
• Trent’s highest research income peaked in the fiscal year of 2002 and since fallen and remains 10.6% below 2002,
• Trent’s highest research income per faculty peaked in the fiscal year of 2002 and has since fallen and remains 20% below 2002.

• Mcleans Overall Ranksings - Primarily Undergraduate
  blah
• Historical Ranking in Maclean's Magazine
  blah
• Trent slips in Macleans rankings but still does well
  Peteberborough This Week - November 9, 2005
• Trent nation’s best in research work
  Peterborough Examiner - October 26, 2005