Recent policy changes in Canada highlight the strategic role International Students (IS) in the country’s economic development and future prosperity. With the release of Canada’s first international education strategy, the federal government has intimately tied international education to the domestic economy by attracting and retaining skilled workers to prepare Canada for the global market place. IS are particularly desirable candidates for permanent residency because their Canadian credentials, proficiency in at least one official language, and their relevant Canadian work experience is assumed to allow them to integrate more easily into the labour force upon graduation. Through 11 focus groups with 48 IS from two post-secondary institutions in the province of Ontario, we explored the adjustment of IS as they adapt to Canada and transition from student to worker. Thematic analysis suggests a disconnect between policy makers’ assumptions and the lived experiences of IS in Canada. Specifically, we find that IS’ integration into Canadian society into the domestic labour market is hindered by adjustment difficulties pertaining to language abilities, poor connectedness to host communities, and perceived employer discrimination against IS. We offer policy recommendations for how international education can better prepare IS for the Canadian labour market.

This paper examines policy responses in higher education in the months of March and April 2020 during the rapid unfolding of the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose is to map responses and compare levels of coordination between three actors-the Canadian federal government, the Ontario provincial government, and Ontario's publicly funded colleges and universities-and to consider the policy implications of these initial responses for higher education's future recovery from the pandemic. Conceptualizing COVID-19 as both a wicked problem and, in the Canadian context, a complex intergovernmental problem, the paper draws on over 200 data points from public announcements made by these three actors. It uses an emergency management framework to present a chronological comparison of actors' actions during the response and mitigation phases focusing on four areas: academic mobility, teaching and learning, research initiatives, and student support. Actions to support higher education were largely dispersed and uncoordinated in the two key months of March and April 2020. Colleges and universities were proactive in restricting academic mobility, adapting teaching and learning, and providing student support. There was some alignment with the federal government's responses, although federal announcements focused more on research initiatives and, latterly, student support. The Ontario government did not appear to play a significant role in shaping the initial higher education responses to the pandemic. Despite the disconnect between responses, we argue that all three actors will play an equally critical role in the future recovery and necessary rethinking of the functions and purpose of higher education.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract