Thirty Years of Scholarly Literature on University Governance in Canada (1988-2016) - Article

Oct 15, 2026

This article examines 30 years of scholarly literature on university governance in Canada, from 1988 to 2016, identifying research methods used to compile and analyze the literature’s components. It reconstructs the main approaches, angles, and recurring discussion features scholars use to evaluate the state of university governance. The discussion is grounded in prominent case episodes and highlights how governance arrangements, transparency, collegial participation, and academic freedom are assessed within Canadian higher education.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages12

Reading Time30 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

University governance and public controversies

Tension in governance practices

Literature base and research methods

Key themes and evaluation of governance

Thirty Years of Scholarly Literature on University Governance in Canada (1988-2016) Denis Hurtubise Laurentian University Abstract This article focuses on the scholarly literature of the last 30 years on university governance in Canada. After describing the research methods that I used to compile that body of literature and to analyze its individual components, I reconstruct the general approaches, or angles, from which scholars address that topic. A discussion of several features of that literature taken as a whole follows, with a focus on the evaluation that is made by scholars of the state of university governance in Canada. keywords: governance, universities, Canada, scholarly literature (1988-2016) main issues, trends Every now and then, universities in Canada and elsewhere make the headlines when situations they would rather keep internal attract the media’s attention. In early 2017, for example, the sudden resignation of Mr. Andrew Potter from his position as director of McGill University’s Institute for the Study of Canada was followed by what can be reasonably labelled a “media storm.” Bloggers and commentators saw, in that event, a cause for concern regarding the state of free speech in Canada.1 Academics expressed misgivings about the perceived manner the Principal of McGill University acted vis-à-vis Potter, a manner academic critics deemed both punishing for the individual in question and threatening for academic freedom.2 That event bears a certain resemblance to another that took place about a year and a half before. During the summer of 2015, just one year after being hired, Mr. Arvin Gupta resigned from his position as President of the University of British Columbia. As sudden as it was unexpected, Gupta’s departure took place in the wake of strained relations between him and the university’s Board of Governors. A few months after the initial stupor subsided, and in light of un-redacted documents that became available at that time, it became clear for the UBC Faculty Association that a secret process (that involved several members of the board) led to Gupta’s resignation. As the president of the university’s Faculty Association pointed out, neither the university’s faculty, nor its association, was part of the conversation that pushed Gupta out. Labelling that episode a “governance failure,” he signalled that the Faculty Association was hoping for an external review of the board structure at the university that would engage the entire university community.3 When university administrators either act, or are perceived as acting in a unilateral fashion faculty tend to see, in such actions, impingements upon their role in the governance of the institution they belong to. The 2016-2017 annual report of the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) is a reflection of actions taken by faculty to defend collegial governance as well as the shared role of faculty and university administrations in decision-making within universities (CAUT, 2017a) . The report also confirms the importance of university governance as a sector of concern in Canada, in particular when 1 In the Huffington Post, Suzanne Wexler (2017) wrote that in the aftermath of Mr. Potter’s resignation “many in the journalistic community are left horrified about the state of free speech in Canada-as they ought to be.” 2 See Chiose (2017) . 3 See CBC News British Columbia (2016) . the aforementioned report is read in conjunction with an article also published by CAUT in March 2017 (CAUT, 2017b). Over and above the McGill and the University of British Columbia cases outlined above, issues regarding university governance were either addressed or considered as concerning by CAUT in at least four more universities since the beginning of 2016. Those universities are Carleton University, Université de Montréal, Laurentian University, and the University of Manitoba. Unsurprisingly, university governance in Canada has become a subjec

FAQs

What period of scholarship does the article cover on university governance in Canada?

The article focuses on scholarly literature published over the last 30 years, spanning 1988 to 2016.

How does the author analyze and interpret the scholarly literature?

The author describes research methods used to compile the literature and to analyze its individual components, then reconstructs the general approaches scholars use to address the topic.

Which governance issues are highlighted as central in the literature?

The article emphasizes how scholars evaluate university governance in Canada, with attention to governance arrangements, transparency, faculty participation, collegial governance, and academic freedom.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Danger Angel