Trent's recent list of honourary degree recipients includes Charlie Coffey, an RBC executive who promotes the corporatization of Trent and other Canadian universities. In an interview with Coffey on the heels of Trent's board over-riding Senate's objection to closing the downtown colleges, he applauded Patterson's role by supporting her view that universities need to "rationalize facilities" and "become more competitive". On the role of senate and the board in bicameral governance he said "I would argue it needs to be re-examined. The bottom line drives a lot of what universities are doing today," with the board clearly having superiority. At a time when Trent's board actively promotes public and corporate partnerships (although there appears to be no example of one) it should come as no surprise that those with views similar to Coffey are rewarded and celebrated by this administration.

Play the video clip from the film Whose University Is It? and see for yourself what Coffey and Patterson said.

The increasing role and influence of corporate interests in post-secondary education seems to go hand in hand with the recent trend of university administrators adopting corporate styles of management. When this happens it removes the very core of what a university is. As astutely observed in the film by Jim Turk, the Executive Director of the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT);

When the role of senate is reduced or disregarded, "you have something but you don't have a university."

In his article Private Pretensions: The Battle for Canada’s Universities, David Noble looks at the "privatization" trend in higher education:

In recent years, the executives of Canada’s universities have been reimagining and representing themselves as private actors, while repositioning the institutions they run from the public to the private sector. Although acknowledging that they derive their authority from public statute and rely primarily upon public funds, in the name of academic freedom these managers have increasingly insisted upon the so-called “autonomy” of their institutions, thereby legitimating and accelerating their incremental shift from the public to the private interest.

Noble also raises the connection between the "privatization/corporatization" trend and the fact that Ontario universities have been able to avoid public disclosure and accountability because they have been exempt from the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIPPA). It will be interesting to see what happens when Ontario universities become subject to FOIPPA on June 10, 2006.

The trend towards privatization and corporatization is quite apparent at Trent. Reid Morden, chair of Trent's board, makes a point of highlighting Trent's move towards public and corporate partnerships on Trent's website.

Perhaps Morden is referring to Trent's troubled DNA cluster which the administration portrays as a gleaming example of its private partnership efforts? There's just one persistent little problem with that - no private partner exists, and none have come forward! (Or might Morden be speaking of corporate monopolies on campus, like the Aramark's in the food services sector?)

While we're not aware of any actual "public and corporate partnerships" at Trent, Morden's message is clear - Trent is "open for business" (a favourite phrase of Mike Harris and his recent conservative government that so devastated education in Ontario).

References:

• Charles Coffey Interview
  From Whose University Is It?
• Trent University Announces Honourary Degree Recipients
  Press Release - January 12, 2006
• Whose University Is It?
  A film by James Motluk & Mark Wright