Humanities and Learning Outcomes in Ontario Higher Education

Abstract

Governments in western liberal economies, such as Ontario, are shifting to outcomes-based systems that ‘tune’ higher education curriculum to stakeholder interests. Globally, governments are using learning outcomes for quality assurance, to modernize curriculum for societal interests, and to apply government and market influence upon the curriculum. This thesis applies new institutionalism and the capability approach to examine how humanities leaders in Ontario higher education perceive and react to the new administrative layer of learning outcomes. According to institutional theory, responses may include superficial strategies for compliance, non-compliance, or the layering of new policies among existing traditions. The research asks, “How do Ontario university leaders in the humanities perceive and implement the shift to learning outcomes?” The study aims to understand to what extent an outcomes-based system aligns with the curricular priorities of the humanities in higher education. Narratives of 19 university humanities leaders were analyzed through qualitative interviews within 10 Ontario universities. The data was reviewed using thematic analysis, inductive and deductive analysis, and compared within the context of the outcomes-based education literature. The overarching narrative of participants indicated that learning outcomes were both an innovative opportunity for pedagogical reflection and a new burdensome administrative layer. The process of tuning the humanities curriculum with administrative pursuits, targeted government funding, and specified career outcomes was not widely accepted by the participants in the study. The approach of passive compliance with learning outcomes became more evident when asking about the consistency, and verifiability of outcomes achieved. Participants shared political challenges and chronological alignments with program restructuring, displaced curriculum, and in some cases program cancellations. Participants said that students were generally unfamiliar with learning outcomes. When discussing opportunities of learning outcomes, participants said that they were an effective discussion tool to envision curricular strategies for enrolment management, experiential learning, interdisciplinary programs, and large elective courses. The study adds to the literature by providing an in-depth view of the agency of department heads to manage the curriculum in the humanities, an understanding of the implementation of Ontario’s learning outcomes policy, and the political positioning of the humanities in Ontario’s higher education system. Key Words: Learning Outcomes, Ontario, Higher Education, New Institutionalism, New Public Management, Neoliberalism, Humanities, Capability Approach, High Participation System.