Talk:University Canada West

Review

@BrandDude: I did some major cleanup, but it's all I have time for, for now.

What I noticed was that the page was filled with primary sources and original research. For most articles about minor organizations, the sources we're looking for are almost always bylined press articles from established news organizations, written by staff journalists for the News section (no op-eds, guest blogs, press release reposts, short blurbs, etc.)

Here is an example of press article that has a byline from Kathy Tomlinson and is from a major news organization; that's a good source. Well, in truth, press articles are some our weaker sources, compared to academics and expert-written books, but it's almost always the best sources available for these types of subjects. You may also want to look for any trade press that covers academics or well-established industry reports that are considered the authority on education.

At-a-glance, based on the current sources that are salvageable, this doesn't look like the type of organization that would stand to benefit from a Wiki-compliant article. I did not find any allegations in the sources of actual corruption and poor educational standards as was alleged, but by all accounts the school has done poorly; both students and investors feel they have gotten the short end of the stick as the school went broke.

My suggestion would be to do some due diligence to research other press clippings of comparable quality to the BBC story, but I would lean towards this being one of those cases, where there is no possible way for both the article-subject and Wikipedia to both leave happy.

CorporateM (Talk) 22:27, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Nice work overall.

I think it's notable as the very first private university, and the Cautbulletin.ca source needs to be retained as the only commentary (that I recall) about the problems as being the first. These problems continued (to this day?) in the form of lack of MBA accreditation.

I think we need to identify all removed sources and be sure we're not overlooking anything else of obvious importance. --Ronz (talk) 23:52, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

According to CBC News they were "one of" the first for-profit universities, as oppose to the first. CorporateM (Talk) 17:24, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Yep. Doesn't change a thing other than specific wording. --Ronz (talk) 14:47, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

@Ronz: Sorry for the belated response. I don't have this page on my watchlist. I think there are quite a few reasons to question this source's reliability. First, it made a factual error about this university being "the first", which suggests a lack of fact-checking. It's a "Bulletin" which is usually a name given to newsletters for small communities, as oppose to serious reporting. It says they accept crowd-sourced Commentary submissions and the source in question has no author listed. When a source is the only one to covered an alleged controversy, this does not seem like a good rationale for inclusion, but another indication of questionable reliability. No source has an exclusive on accurate information and any legitimate controversy of a national level scope about private education would surely be covered in better sources, if it existed.

Finally, I see that this bulletin is published by the Canadian Association of of University Teachers, which appears to be an advocacy organization, that, among other things, advocates against the involvement of commercial interests in education. CorporateM (Talk) 04:06, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't see that as an indication of lack of fact checking. Most importantly, I don't see any reason to remove the source completely. --Ronz (talk) 16:52, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

History Section?

@CorporateM: @Ronz: hope you’re both well.

In line with the WP:UNIGUIDE, I believe this article would benefit from a section about the university’s history. I’ve gathered as much information as I could find and drafted a few paragraphs. I kept it as factual and neutral as I could. Could you please take a look when you have some time? I’d be grateful for your feedback.

UCW was established in 2005 by Dr David F. Strong as the country’s first self-funded university to degree-level courses. The university’s first campus was located at 950 Kings Road, in Victoria, British Columbia in a site formerly occupied by Blanshard Elementary School. The first degree classes began in September 2005, with active student recruitment throughout Canada and internationally.

Late in 2005, thanks to a partnership with Sage Hills the University announced plans to expand operations with a new campus in Comox Valley, in Vancouver Island. In 2006, UCW merged with 32-year-old Victoria College of Art and Design and with the Canadian College of Business and Language, one of Victoria’s oldest English language schools. Both mergers enabled UCW to add language courses and fine arts diplomas to its program portfolio. In 2008, UCW started offering MBA and BCom programs in Singapore in co-operation with Kaplan Asia Pacific Management Institute.

Although the institution was valued at $30 million in 2006, due to financial difficulties and a high amount of debt which almost drove the university to bankruptcy, UCW was sold to the Eminata Group in 2008. During the years in which UCW was under the Eminata Group’s ownership, the institution was involved in a number of controversies related to course cancellations, office and campus closures, student satisfaction and quality standards.

In March 2011, the University ended operations in its Victoria campus. In February 2014, UCW announced a relocation from its Vancouver campus in Melville Street, to the larger London Building on 626 West Pender Street.

In 2014, Alfred Morris CBE, a former vice-chancellor for a number of British universities, was appointed chairman of the board at UCW.

In 2015, it was announced that UCW had been acquired by the Global University Systems group. The new affiliation is aimed at strengthening student support and academic development at UCW.

Thanks, BrandDude (talk) 12:50, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

References

Are there any page watchers willing to review the edit request above? Any feedback will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks! BrandDude (talk) 15:04, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

BrandDude - I'm happy to make this edit, however, many of the sources you've referenced do not meet WP:RS guidelines. Usually any large-circulation daily newspaper, peer-reviewed journal, major news website or broadcast media outlet (e.g. you used cbc.ca and canada.com which are great), is a RS. Government websites are often okay, too. For non-controversial, self-evident statements, an organization's own website or press releases posted to MarketWired or PRNewswire are (sometimes) okay if qualified (for instance, adding prefix "according to XYZ organization ..."). Social media (LinkedIn), blogs, business directories (n49.com), user-edited sites (e.g. yelp), commercial websites, etc. are rarely or never allowed as RS. If you can edit this so it only references RS sources and then ping me, I'd be happy to make the change to the article. LavaBaron (talk) 17:47, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

LavaBaron - Thank you. I will make those changes and ping you as soon as I can. - BrandDude (talk) 20:50, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Latest edits

@Ronz: Hi,

An entire factual paragraph about the university’s accreditation has been deleted and I’m struggling to understand why since the information contained in it was correct, relevant and adequately referenced. If you have suggestions to improve it please let me know, but simply deleting it only contributes to reducing the overall quality of the article.

“Since its founding, it has struggled to attract enough students to stay in business.” – I can't see any references to this statement. It is also a very subjective claim since there are no references to student recruitment targets to rely upon.

Could you please reconsider or explain your views?

I will be grateful for your feedback. Thanks, - BrandDude (talk) 09:27, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Why does it belong? What makes it noteworthy in an encyclopedia article? Certainly, with all the controversies and problems, the university wants to promote the information loudly and repeatedly, but that doesn't mean we do it here. I found it to be rather blatant WP:SOAP, hence my edit summary.

“Since its founding, it has struggled to attract enough students to stay in business.” Seems to summarize the main (highly noteworthy) problems well. --Ronz (talk) 14:59, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

@Ronz:

Accreditation information belongs to the page because UCW is a university. Yes, it is owned by a profitable business, but UCW is a university and academic information is relevant.

Please take a look at the WP:UNIGUIDE’s recommendation for article structure. It says that editors are recommended to “try to include information about the institution's accreditation, tuition and financial aid, number of degrees/programs offered, number of degrees awarded annually, academic honors, academic calendar, and admissions statistics.” – I don’t have all this data available yet, but I see no reason to assume that accreditation details are not relevant to this university’s article.

I know that due to my professional connection to the university most people assume that I’m here for the wrong reasons, but I’m serious about working with the community, respecting the WP policies and helping this entry to become a GA. I think adopting the WP:UNIGUIDE as a guideline here will definitely help us to improve the quality of this entry as a whole.

Views? - BrandDude (talk) 16:28, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

"The school is accredited by the British Columbian government." --Ronz (talk) 17:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

@Ronz: I completely understand your point, but, given that UCW is the first for-profit university, readers expect to see further information related to credit transfer and the licenses and affiliations under which the university operates. In fact, credit transfer has been a topic of a major discussion here on this talk page in the past and there are good resources available to cite, so I see no reason to believe that such data is irrelevant to a university.

It will be helpful to have other points of view here, otherwise we might end up going round in circles – @LavaBaron:, @EmeraldM78:, would you care to share some thoughts?

Thanks. – BrandDude (talk) 11:27, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

"readers expect to see " Says who?

"credit transfer has been a topic" I agree that credit transfer problems need to be restored to the article. --Ronz (talk) 14:03, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

I made the following changes:

• Renamed section "educational services" to "academics" and added accreditation information ("educational services" is not a section recommended by WP:UNIGUIDE, nor is it present in a sample of other BC universities I checked (Simon Fraser, UBC, UVic, etc.) ... however, "academics" recommends including information about the institution's accreditation, tuition and financial aid.
• Deleted the section "reception" (not included in the model template of WP:UNIGUIDE) but retained the content that was in that section, moving it to "History"
• Edited According to the Student Aid BC website, 30 per cent of UCW students defaulted on their government-backed loans in 2009 to Thirty per-cent of UCW students defaulted on their government-backed loans in 2009 - the source in this case is CBC. While CBC, in turn, cites the Student Aid BC website, since CBC is a RS source we don't need to qualify where they got the info from, but can simply state it as a fact.
• Deleted Tuition for a full undergraduate degree program at UCAN is higher than similar programs at public universities due to the fact that it is not publicly subsidized. as it's not supported by a RS and appears to be WP:OR. I will look for a RS for this to see if it can be reintegrated.
• Added additional info to "History" sourced to Study Magazine.
• Added section called "campus" between "history" and "academics" as per UNIGUIDE.
• Much of the content in the lede was not included in the body, so I moved most detail from the lede into the body as per the MOS. While I am cognizant that there is a recent desire to include controversial information in ledes to mute the advertising benefit created by the sudden reliance of Google Knowledge Graph on WP articles, until the MOS is updated allowing us to address this, the lede needs to remain a succinct and standalone summary of the article and we should not be engaging in individually-inspired crusades for truth and justice, regardless of how noble they may be.

Please LMK if anyone disagrees. LavaBaron (talk) 16:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Nice work.

Why remove the $300,000 mention?

The closing of the Victoria site happened during school session, and was announced after students were able to withdraw without financial penalty. Seems rather noteworthy.

The article makes no mention that the university was one of the very first private Canadian universities, and that the acceptance of such schools was controversial. Seems rather noteworthy.

This source was removed as "unreliable", but seems to be reliable and is by far the most detailed information available on the controversy of the acceptance of the private school as a university: "B.C. Accepts Private University". Cautbulletin.ca. 2004-01-09. Retrieved 2011-03-29.

Great job. Too bad there's so little to work from. There are some reports on the debates about accepting private universities that might be used. If Strong was involved in lobbying for acceptance, then they should be included. I cannot recall the details and am having a hard time tracking them down. --Ronz (talk) 18:24, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

(1) I don't have a problem reinserting the $300K thing, I only removed it for readability as there was only so much that could be crammed in and "teetering on bankruptcy" seemed to be, holistically, the more significant fact than it was losing X$ per month, which is meaningless without context. (2) UCW was not one of the very first private Canadian universities, as there have been a not-insignificant number of Evangelical Christian universities with varying degrees of accreditation since at least the 1970s; we would need a RS that says it was "one of the very first private Canadian universities" (3) I did not remove CAUT Bulletin so can't address that. Ultimately, we need to try to make a readable article, not cram in every piece of salacious scandal at the expense of a concise and encyclopedic entry. The job of this entry is to communicate basic facts about UCW, not warn potential students away (though I agree that's probably a good idea, but WP isn't the correct venue). Besides, the article, as it now reads, is not exactly a glowing testament to UCW. To your point about the debates, that might be better in a standalone article, similar to For-profit higher education in the United States. Such an article would be appropriate to link to this in a "See also" section. LavaBaron (talk) 18:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

I've added a sentence of info from the CAUT Bulletin. In reviewing the CAUT Bulletin, however, I think it is only marginally RS as it's the house organ of a labor union that had a vested financial interest against UCW. In that sense, I think we need to be careful of sourcing criticism of UCW from it as it will, necessarily, only present one perspective. It does seem RS for basic Who / What / Why facts, though. LavaBaron (talk) 19:01, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Really good work, thank you.

At the end of the reference to the Hindustan Times article, can we possibly add something along the following lines: “At the time of publication, the university denied the allegations saying that it had many students who secured positions in industry and government, both in Canada and abroad”.

I took that quote from the HT article itself. Correct me if I’m wrong, but since the allegation that students were “duped” is based on opinion, it would be reasonable to also include the university’s point of view on the matter, right?

Feel free to adapt the statement as you see fit.

Thanks a lot! -- BrandDude (talk) 13:22, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Seems reasonable to me - added. LavaBaron (talk) 15:36, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Updates

@LavaBaron: Hello! If you have some free time, could you please help me with a few updates?

1 – Default rate info (under Academics): The article currently refers to a 30% default rate, but the most recent figure from the Student Aid BC website is 16%, which is just below the average reporting default in the private and the public sectors in BC. See here: https://studentaidbc.ca/apply/designated (you’ll need to scroll down)

2 – Location: “As of 2012, the university occupies the floor of an office building in downtown Vancouver, British Columbia”. The UCW campus actually occupies five levels in the historic London Building at 626 West Pender Street since 2014. Source here (p.13): https://ucanwest.ca/media/203010/ucw-calendar-2015-2016.pdf

3 – Chairman: I know for sure that Skip Triplett has not been the university’s chairman for a while. Alfred Morris (accountant) CBE has replaced him and has been the chairman of UCW for nearly a year now. There aren’t many RS available on that – but that’s the correct information. I’m listing a few sources for your consideration:

• Alfred’s Linkedin: https://uk.linkedin.com/in/alfredmorris
• This company directory: https://www.aihitdata.com/company/010724E4/GLOBAL-UNIVERSITY-SYSTEMS/people
• This article: http://education.tdprofiti.com/private-providers-maligned-and-misunderstood.html
• The article below from Times Higher Education used to have details about his role at UCW, but unfortunately the author’s bio is no longer available: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/comment/opinion/private-providers-maligned-and-misunderstood/2017473.article

I know this is not ideal, but could you consider the pros and cons of updating this information based on the sources currently available?

Thanks a lot for your help! - BrandDude (talk) 17:24, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

BrandDude - this seems fine at first glance but I need to look at the sources more closely and I'm just stepping out. Can you leave a reminder on my Talk page and I'll get to this in the next 48 hours? I'm afraid I'll forget about your ping if you don't. LavaBaron (talk) 17:34, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

LavaBaron - Of course. No problems at all. I'll leave you a note over the weekend. Thanks a lot for your help. - BrandDude (talk) 17:38, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

BrandDude - I've made the first two changes. I can't make the third change as it would have to meet WP:BLP which has a high-standard for veracity of sources. Social media is almost impossible to use for references to living people since anyone can make an account in anyone's name. The company directory is self-published and tdprofiti.com appears to be a blog. If the University itself published his name on its website that would probably work since UCW has a legal character and can be held liable for errors and misstatements, therefore we can probably presume it will be accurate about the identity of its own chair. LavaBaron (talk) 18:23, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

LavaBaron – Thank you very much for your help. I’ve raised this issue with the University and I believe they are in the process of updating the board information on their website. I’ll ping you again when the information is available. Thank you again and all the best, - BrandDude (talk) 10:25, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

@LavaBaron: Hello! I just wanted to let you know that the information about Alfred Morris CBE has been added to the UCW website:

• https://ucanwest.ca/about-ucw/interim-chair;
• https://ucanwest.ca/about-ucw/governance;

Do you mind taking a look at the source and update the article whenever you have a chance?

Also, do you think it might be worth adding details about the university’s board and governance to the main text? I noticed that the University of British Columbia article has a section on governance and academics, which is also in line with WP: UNIGUIDE. Do you think we have enough RS to build on the governance topic?

Thanks very much in advance, - BrandDude (talk) 18:26, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Governance

BrandDude - I've updated the chair to Alfred Morris. To your question about governance, that sounds fine. It would probably work best if you drafted proposed text and post it here for a week or so (along with sources; though, in the case of governance for any corporation or association, the organization's website itself is usually sufficient unless there is some obvious controversy as to why it would not be reliable). If no one has objected or suggested alterations after that, ping me and I'll be happy to add it. LavaBaron (talk) 02:00, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

LavaBaron – Thanks for the edit and for the advice. I’ll be in touch soon. All the best, - BrandDude (talk) 09:19, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

To all page watchers, may I suggest the content below to be included under this article’s Academic section? For background, please refer to my previous conversation above with LavaBaron. Let me know if you have any objections or suggestions on the proposed draft below:

The governance structure of UCW is composed of an academic council and a board of governance, in line with the bicameral system in place at many other Canadian universities. Under this structure, the board oversees the strategic direction of the university including fiduciary, legal and financial responsibility, while the academic council – which represents staff, faculty, students and alumni – presides over the university’s academic programs and policies.

Although UCW doesn’t receive public funds, the British Columbia Ministry of Advanced Education requires the institution to file audited financial statements. The institution also undergoes an annual quality review by the Degree Quality Assessment Board.

In September 2015, Dr Brad O’Hara was appointed as Vice-President of Academic and Students. As of 2015, the board of governance is chaired by British academic Alfred Cosier Morris CBE DL

References

Many thanks in advance for your feedback! -BrandDude (talk) 14:22, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

@LavaBaron: – Hello! There have been no objections to my edit request posted here on 29 October. Do you think you can implement them when you have some time? Feel free to make any amendments as you see appropriate. Thanks a lot in advance for your help! - BrandDude (talk) 08:39, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

@BrandDude: - looks good! I'm traveling at the moment but will be able to make these before the end of the week, though probably sooner, if that's okay. LavaBaron (talk) 21:30, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

@LavaBaron: - Thanks for letting me know! Feel free to ping me if you have any questions or concerns. All the best, BrandDude (talk) 12:22, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

@BrandDude: I've made these changes with two modifications - I removed the word "Dr" per the manual of style for WP:CREDENTIAL and removed Morrris' post-nominal letters as they've already been used in the first instance (the infobox) and, IIRC, the standard for post-nominals was they are included in the first instance and dropped in subsequent references. LavaBaron (talk) 05:36, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

@LavaBaron: Thank you very much for your help and advice as always. All the best, BrandDude (talk) 11:38, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Edit Request - Scholarships

Hello pagewatchers - may I suggest the edit below to be added under the ‘Academics’ session? While I understand that some primary sources have been used in the draft, I believe there are no obvious reasons as to why the university’s website would not be a reliable source of information about its own scholarship programmes. This doesn’t seem to be unusual - the McGill University article, for example, follows a similar pattern. Please let me know your thoughts on the below. I’m very happy to take your suggestions on board.

Scholarships at UCW are available to Canadian and international applicants for both undergraduate and graduate courses. Similarly to other Canadian universities, many of the scholarships available are merit-based, relying upon applicants’ high school (or international equivalent) grades. For example, domestic and foreign students applying for UCW’s Academic Excellence need a minimum 3.20 GPA out of 4.33 to qualify for the minimum scholarship award. The amount offered as scholarship grows proportionately to the applicant’s GPA, going up to $20,000 (undergraduate) and $15,000 (graduate) for those with a minimum GPA of 3.80 and above.

The university also offers one annual full scholarship exclusively for First Nations applicants. In total, according to an announcement made in November 2015, UCW’s scholarship programs for 2016 are, together, valued at more than $800,000.

References

Thanks! - BrandDude (talk) 16:28, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

@LavaBaron: Hello! I’m wondering if you could give me a hand again. I posted the above edit request 10 days ago and I was hoping to receive for some feedback, but had no response so far. When you have some free time, do you think you can take a look and let me know if the content is acceptable? Thanks a lot! - BrandDude (talk) 11:02, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

BrandDude this seems fine to me. I'm not familiar enough with the treatment of scholarships on higher education sites, however, to know if this is WP:PROMOTIONAL or not. I don't think it is, however, out of a preponderance of caution let me get some advice and I'll circle right back. LavaBaron (talk) 13:41, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Seems to be outright promotion without any encyclopedic value as sourced. --Ronz (talk) 16:30, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I don’t think the wording itself is promotional, but I completely understand that the lack of RS might be an issue here. I’ll try and find some better references and get in touch again. Thanks a lot! -- BrandDude (talk) 11:23, 22 December 2015 (UTC)