Do you see UBC as different from other research intensive universities (e.g. Toronto, McGill)?
Week 9 Results
Week 9 Comments
I actually see UBC standing in the shadow of these two institutions. There appears to be much less of a history associated with UBC, and it seems to be constantly seeking to establish an identity. I think one of the major flaws is that UBC somehow does not (or cannot) communicate the centrality of people and without that, I doubt there will be the kind of buy-in that is necessary to achieve greatness. And, the notion of the centrality of people needs to go way beyond PR events, proclamations, and mission statements.
I believe that we have been much less conventional in our intellectual/academic development – supporting a wider range of scholarship and leading in initiatives relating to teaching excellence, community engagement, social relevance and global citizenship — while being every bit as competitive from a research perspective.
I feel a spirit of activism at UBC that I think dates back to its roots and still pervades the university atmosphere.
It is not in the same league as genuine research universities (Cambridge, Oxford, Harvard etc.) and struggling to keep up with minor-league players such as Toronto and McGill. UBC is ideally positioned to become a major player in the Pacific Rim, which is likely to eclipse the current research-intensive universities this century. However, to do so, it will need a good international policy.
All PhD level universities are essentially the same.
UBC can forge a broader and deeper multi-dimensional identity than most other universities, including Toronto or McGill.
I am a relatively new faculty member and it has been difficult, so far, to identify the characteristics that distinguish UBC from UofT or McGill. There are very strong research groups at UBC and I am happy to note the emphasis on sustainability but it appears that there is little that is tangible, yet. In the article _The UBC Advantage_, there is surprisingly little mention of engineering and the applied sciences, although these fields should be at the forefront of some of the discussion on clean energy and efficiency.
We, especially faculty members, should embrace the “we” and part from the “me” and attitudes of “entitlement” to a greater extent than currently. We need to more truly embrace change and find ways to implement programs and activities that reflect our core values and mission more rapidly and effectively. We should strive to develop a “big university” culture where “administration” is not perceived as “standing in the way” of research development and discovery and where “teaching” becomes more truly viewed as a privilege rather than a “load” while remaining a genuine component of the research mission and vision of UBC.
No. Fundamentally, Toronto, McGill and UBC all share the same goal of producing high quality research. They are all largely government funded an about the same size. There are small differences on the physical level of the institutions. For example, UBC is on the west coast and so the people that work at UBC have a different culture and approach to their work. UBC has a nicer climate with many recreational options. It also has a better defined campus area. It should continue to strive to better Toronto and McGill in areas of research.
UBC has the ability to address sustainability in ways these other institutions cannot. Specifically, UBC can lead the field in food system sustainability and its integration into a sustainable/livable community.