Science and Research Committee on April 16th, 2024

[Fahim Quadir]

I think there are two things we are proposing.

One is to change the current distribution model, which indeed rewards various specific institutions and various specific groups of students. We want it to be widely available to students studying in all universities.

The quota system is not going to be determined by the successes achieved by faculty-led research initiatives. Instead, it will be about student excellence, academic merit and excellence to drive the entire conversation of graduate fellowship.

Students studying in all universities in Canada would have equal opportunity to apply for these funds and be able to receive these funds to support their initiatives.

The second one—

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Can I maybe just clarify that? The specific shift then is that student success would be what determines whether faculties get research funding. Is that what you're saying?

[Fahim Quadir]

No. We are separating it completely.

Our focus is exclusively on graduate student fellowships, which would not be tied to the success rates of faculty members' grant applications. That would be a separate issue.

Graduate students, regardless of their location and regardless of their affiliation, should be able to apply for fellowships based on their academic merit and excellence. That is one we are proposing. It would be based on the number of graduate students enrolled in research-based programs in universities across Canada.

[Philippe-Edwin Bélanger]

The quota would be calculated over the student population, from one university to another.

[Fahim Quadir]

The second one that we are proposing is something that Canada does not necessarily have now.

It creates a bigger challenge for students who, for many different reasons, cannot go to another location to pursue their academic degrees but have to be in their hometown. Despite the fact they are talented, they don't necessarily have the resources to go to another institution to participate in research activities or academic activities that are unavailable to them.

This Canadian version of the Erasmus program would allow students to go from one institution to another to be part of the vibrant process of research and learning.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Thank you for that overview; that's more clear to me.

What would be the ultimate impact on the research ecosystem in Canada across all the post-secondary institutions if those policy suggestions were put in place with the new framework?

Obviously, we don't have a crystal ball, but what's anticipated in terms of the outcomes?

[Philippe-Edwin Bélanger]

First, graduate scholarship distribution would be more equitable if it were based on student numbers. Quotas would be calculated according to the student population.

Second, promoting mobility in Canada would give all Canadians the chance to pursue a scholarship experience and incorporate a mobility component into their curriculum. Programs like Erasmus, in Europe, have proven the benefits of mobility during graduate studies. The effects have been positive for success rates as well as research, since it is performed collaboratively.

In my opinion, a Canadian version of Erasmus, that promotes mobility inside the country, would benefit our student population.

[Fahim Quadir]

One thing I could highlight is that graduate education is always about recruiting talent, and it has always been. For this particular program, the policy changes would really help us nurture a culture of skill and talent. This applies especially in the current context, where we are witnessing a significant skills gap, so this proposal would help us address that issue.

The second thing is the competitive edge in the Canadian economy that needs to be built and supported. Graduate students are often at the forefront of discovery and innovation. By establishing a new kind of system that rewards everyone who is talented, we can build a competitive edge for the Canadian economy and Canadian society. That would be the ultimate benefit for the entire society.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you very much.

We'll move over to Mr. Blanchette-Joncas for six minutes.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to welcome the witnesses joining us today for this study.

The U15, a network of Canada's 15 largest universities, says that Canada's funding application evaluation system is based strictly on researcher merit, and is held up as an example to the entire world.

I would like to know what you think of that statement.

[Philippe-Edwin Bélanger]

In my opinion, the research evaluation system established in Canada is certainly of high quality, although there is room for improvement. Data from the Alliance of Canadian Comprehensive Research Universities, the ACCRU, illustrating the concentration of federal funding in a few universities, point to the probability of systemic bias. That's why we are encouraging federal organizations to review their funding distribution mechanisms.

It is why we are making this proposal. We consider this an important opportunity to reflect on a funding distribution approach and mechanism that allows a more equitable distribution of federal research funds across Canada.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you for your answer and these clarifications.

We addressed the funding issue strictly from the universities' point of view. However, I'd like you to tell us how students and researchers see things.

Furthermore, the best-funded researchers belong to the U15 university network, in other words, the 15 largest universities in Canada. How does this hamper research and innovation for a majority of researchers in small and medium-sized universities?

[Philippe-Edwin Bélanger]

Moving forward, the Canadian Association for Graduate Studies proposes that scholarships be distributed on the basis of quotas calculated according to student population. We think that this would be a fairer way of distributing scholarships among Canadian universities. We also believe that it would focus scholarship distribution on academic merit. At the master's level, federal research organizations already assign scholarship quotas to universities under the Canada graduate scholarships program. Universities receive scholarship quotas, and the scholarships are awarded based on merit, subject to strict standards.

I think that, if we were to set up a grant distribution system that uses student population to calculate quotas, grant distribution would be representative of the student population and more equitable. Furthermore, it would serve all communities in Canada.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Bélanger, you say that scholarships are awarded based on merit.

The data show that 79% of universities, or the 15 largest universities, receive all research funding in Canada.

Under the current system, does "merit" depend on having access to a large university or being close to an urban centre, where Canada's 15 largest universities are concentrated?

[Philippe-Edwin Bélanger]

That's why we want to use student population as the basis for assigning scholarship quotas.

I was saying that scholarships are awarded on merit, but I should point out that Canadian universities are doing this already when they manage the master's scholarship quota, or the Canada graduate scholarships quota. Universities receive scholarship quotas and distribute them internally in keeping with strict standards of academic merit.

By changing the distribution formula and setting a scholarship quota based on student population, I think we would better serve the population by spreading scholarships across Canada. The granting councils and the federal government could trust the universities to award these scholarships in an exemplary manner, based on merit, within the institution.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

I've taken note of the many recommendations that you've shared with us today, and one of the things I want to return to is the funding allocation system.

First, scholarships for master's and doctoral students are currently distributed according to the funding amount that universities previously received from granting councils. In addition, the chairs allocated to each institution reflect the percentage of funding that each institution received of the total funding granted by each granting agency.

In every case, small and medium-sized universities are disadvantaged and will continue to be disadvantaged under the current research funding distribution system.

Do we need to review the way that research funding is distributed in order to fund a greater diversity of students and researchers?

[Philippe-Edwin Bélanger]

In fact, we are proposing to review this distribution and to calculate scholarship quotas not based on amounts obtained in previous scholarship competitions, but based on student population.

As we've seen, the student population outside urban centres and large universities could be under-represented from a scholarship allocation standpoint. We believe that using student population to establish scholarship quotas would achieve a better distribution of research funds for students across Canada.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Bélanger.

I would like to come back to what you mentioned about certain programs, including the Canada First Research Excellence Fund, which is a significant source of research funding. The largest universities have told us that they manage to collaborate with small and medium-sized universities. In my opinion, that's not enough. We give a little bite of the pie to small and medium-sized universities, and assume it amounts to actual research funding equity.

I'd like to hear what you have to say about that, especially about the fact that small and medium-sized universities lack sufficient internal resources.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Answer very briefly, please. We're just about out of time.

[Philippe-Edwin Bélanger]

Is it over? I'm sorry.

Do I have time to answer the question, Mr. Chair? I'm being told that I can.

As I was saying, the administrators of smaller universities have trouble meeting the requirements of the very large programs sponsored by the federal government because they lack sufficient administrative resources. Furthermore, all kinds of new compliance requirements apply to all the institutions, whether their administrative team is very large or small. Examples include compliance requirements related to equity, diversity and inclusion practices or research security requirements. These place the smaller institutions under an added strain.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

That's great. Thank you very much.

Mr. Cannings, you have the final six minutes, please.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you all for being here.

I'm going to start with you, Dr. Whitaker, if only because you're at Memorial University where I did my research many years ago. It's good to have someone here from MUN.

Memorial is one of these small to medium-sized institutions. It's big enough to have a medical faculty, but it's not part of the really big university group of research institutions in Canada.

Could you expand on the difficulties of institutions in that category in terms of attracting research funds? We've heard a lot about support for grad students. Most grad students get their support directly from their supervisors, who are getting their funding largely from the federal government. Could you speak to the difficulties of a small to medium-sized institution like Memorial in attracting those funds?

[Dr. Robin Whitaker]

Thanks so much for that question. It certainly does speak to issues affecting graduate students.

I think this points to a couple of issues. One is that we need to think about a larger amount of funding available across the board. I don't think it's helpful to set this up as a kind of competition between different institutions. We're looking at finding ways for the entire system to thrive, but that also means taking a broader approach than simply looking at research funding. We need to look at the foundation as well.

There are challenges in terms of, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, the administrative burden that often faces researchers at some institutions where there aren't as many supports on site. This affects both the ability to apply for research and the ability to make the best use we can of research funds when we get them.

It's time that we had a broad national conversation about the best way to support post-secondary education and research across the board, and that certainly includes the availability of research funding, which will benefit graduate students in terms of both fellowships and scholarships and in terms of training opportunities, but the foundation also needs to be there so that we can leverage that funding and really do our best for Canada.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you.

Now I'd like to turn to Dr. Weissman.

Thank you for bringing up the issue of housing—in this day and age when housing is one of the real critical crises of the nation as a whole—and how it affects students and thereby directly affects research across Canada.

In my riding, I have two small institutions, both colleges, Okanagan College and Selkirk College. We have a real housing crisis in our region. Housing prices are very high, and wages tend to be low. Both of those institutions are trying to tackle that problem of housing.

I'm wondering if you could expand on how those housing issues affect the students who are doing most of the research.

[Dr. Eric Weissman]

I can give you two very concrete examples from our own network.

Two of our research partners are the University of Alberta and Nova Scotia Community College. At the University of Alberta, they introduced a safe home project for students. It's an emergency-type of housing for students who are intermittently, not chronically, experiencing loss of shelter for a variety of different reasons.

In Nova Scotia, we have a great deal of students who are living very close to the poverty line or below it. For other reasons—perhaps they lose their job, they get ill or they miss a paycheque—they lose their housing, so they have to choose between school or finding another job.

They introduced, in co-operation with the city, a number of programs for subsidized units in the city to specifically house students who are in emergency shelter need. As a result, they've serviced dozens of students over the last several years who have been able to stay in school, maintain their research tracks, finish their degrees and go on to their graduate degrees.

In my own work, I've taught in five provinces and two states. Everywhere that I've been, I've worked with students who are sometimes the first in their families to go to university, especially here in Saint John. Many of them are going on to graduate school at UNB or other places, and we have a very high poverty rate here. We have an accepted narrative that it's okay to suffer through school, so you have people who have been reinventing themselves or who see their housing precarity as not a great issue, and then they get into graduate school and they're working incredible hours. They're trying to work, and then something has to go. They can't lose their housing.

In our research, 70% of students said they would leave if they faced homelessness, and that is what's happening across the board.