April 14, 2009 Opinions

In support of Denis Rancourt

Concordia report validates dissident prof

by Matthew Brett

Former University of ottawa physics prof Denis Rancourt

Ottawa University physics professor Denis Rancourt was escorted off campus by university security and banned from the premise this past December. His laboratory locked and equipment seized, Rancourt’s nanoparticle research came to an abrupt end.

His crime was giving all 24 of his advanced physics students an A+. Rancourt’s story has direct bearing on Concordia, which is in the process of digesting its own set of bold proposals that will directly affect our education.

This Friday, April 17, a working group on teaching and learning will submit a report to the Senate, Concordia University’s highest academic body. The report has an impressive 46 recommendations, and while students will sigh that a universal A+ grade is not one of them, the report is quite possibly one of the most exciting documents to reach the Senate this academic year. It is to Concordia what Rancourt is to Canada.

The report opens with a well-researched truism: “For today’s students, society is not a hierarchy-based structure, but a flat, non-linear, constantly changing system of exchanges [...] Many of them are thus extremely sensitive to notions of social justice and acutely conscious of the need for transparency and validation.”

All 46 recommendations pivot around this statement and it is precisely this reality that Rancourt has responded to for the past five years. Rancourt is a vocal proponent of “critical pedagogy,” a method of democratizing education by giving students a strong say in curriculum and class discussions without grading them. He compellingly argues that the current academic system is a failed model, and his dismissal from Ottawa University was an abrupt end to five years’ work creating a new academic model within his classroom.

To the credit of the authors of Concordia’s report, many of Rancourt’s pedagogical ideas are reflected to a degree in the report itself.

“The goal of teaching is not to ‘cover’ content ‘for’ the students, but rather to help students learn how to ‘uncover’ content for themselves,” the report reads.

The circumstances that led to Rancourt’s dismissal are relevant, and it’s a shame he lost his job fighting for the same goals espoused in Concordia’s proposals.

“Flexibility in methods of measurement should be encouraged,” the report continues. Rancourt was aiming for more than “flexibility,” but this revised approach to measurement should give Rancourt some sense of validation. Educational achievements will not be the only component to be measured in a new way, if the report gets implemented. Teaching evaluations will also be revised to understand not how “receptive” students are but how “effective” the teaching methods are.

These are all incremental steps toward Rancourt’s ideal, and fortunately, some of the proposals are a complete reversal of current trends. It will be interesting to see how the recommendations are received and implemented, particularly by overly-rigid and often backward social science sectors.

There is some reason for concern with the report’s emphasis on devolution of learning objectives and core competencies to the departments themselves. This will invariably revert to or even intensify the push to ‘cover’ content and limit academic flexibility, but the report is really an exciting prospect nonetheless.

Students should be clamouring to get onto any future task forces or committees established to implement the report’s recommendations. A strong student voice will bring us closer to the ideals which Rancourt continues to strive for, ideals that seem entirely sensible and perhaps necessary.

Rancourt is treated as a martyr or a moron, depending on which daily paper you read, but all can agree that this professor has decimated tradition and fostered some desperately needed debate on what education really is. The timing could not be better for Concordia.

Pullquote: Rancourt is treated as a martyr or a moron, depending on which daily paper you read, but all can agree that this professor has decimated tradition and fostered some desperately needed debate on what education really is.