The faculty of science at Dalhousie University has recently cut a deal with a private, for-profit educational institution that smacks of little more than a back door for enrolment to the university -- and an expensive one for the university at that.

Known as Knowledge House, the Nova Scotia company has a background in distance continuing medical education and some experience with linking rural high schools by computer technology. Knowledge House shares are publicly traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange.

Knowledge House and the Dalhousie administration drew up a memorandum of understanding for what the company termed a "global baccalaureate." This program would permit students to complete their first year of university through online studies, perhaps while being employed by a participating company.

Knowledge House enters the corridors of higher education via a convoluted process of signing up individual faculties as "participating faculties" and hiring faculty members as consultants to assist in developing the curriculum. The hiring is co-ordinated by the dean of the faculty.

The council of the faculty of science at Dalhousie approved the development of the global baccalaureate on Apr. 6, 2000, pending final acceptance of the curriculum by the faculty. It is not clear that the faculty council actually has the authority to make science a participating faculty. The council only has the authority to act for the faculty on urgent business, when the faculty is not in session. But the faculty was still "in session" on Apr. 6. This raises questions about the status of the deal. There are others. The memorandum of understanding is poorly drafted and not always clear. That may explain why different administrators have offered different explanations of it.

Problems with interpreting the memorandum were compounded by at least one campus presentation by Knowledge House staff. The baccalaureate was characterized as an accessibility program for students needing "to upgrade/complete missing credits." It was stressed that the baccalaureate was for students who would not otherwise be eligible to attend university. The program was also described as one which "provides strong academic experience plus work experience plus industry certifications."

The memorandum, on the other hand, is silent on the qualifications of students and it does not mention work experience or industry certifications. Dalhousie, apparently, has waived any input over student admissions and the conditions under which study will take place.

The legal statement on these matters presumably becomes a Material Change Report filed under the Securities Acts of Nova Scotia and Ontario. Knowledge House filed this report shortly after the memorandum with Dalhousie was drawn up. It describes the baccalaureate simply as a "post-secondary program ... intended to equip high school graduates with enhanced foundation for advanced study and/ or employment in the knowledge economy." There is nothing about the admission requirements and the work component is now simply tacked on as, "A co-op stream will also be offered."

This is no mere semantic matter. The nature of the program has shifted dramatically. It was described as a work-based, upgrading course for those who would not otherwise come to Dalhousie. Now it has become open-ended: students may or may not be working; they may or may not be qualified to enter university through normal channels; they may be studying full-time or part-time; they may be studying on a work site, the original description -- but then they may not.

The loose wording of the memorandum and the Material Change Report frees Knowledge House to become, in essence, a truncated university and to trade on Dalhousie's name and reputation while doing so.

The memorandum also has serious and perhaps deleterious implications for faculty members in several ways.

One is the impact on academic standards and self-government. The agreement says that when a participating faculty has approved the curriculum, a student who completes the global baccalaureate "according to the evaluation standards mutually agreed upon between the parties" will be granted five Dalhousie credits.

These are described as "transfer credits" and Dalhousie is obligated to issue a transcript for these credits, and to admit the student to "advanced standing" in a participating faculty.

The "parties," according to the vice-president academic, are Knowledge House and Dalhousie, which will represent the interests of the participating faculties. But the evaluation standards, apparently, will be established by the participating faculties and Knowledge House at the time the curriculum is approved. The memorandum says, again, that Dalhousie will issue a transcript for the credits earned. However, the vice-president academic says these are not Dalhousie credits, they are transfer credits, to be treated like other transfer credits.

Dalhousie does not ordinarily accept transfer credits from private corporations. In this case, it is not only agreeing to consider transfer credits from a company, it is committing itself to accept them under the agreement. Consider the possibilities. A transfer credit request arrives from Knowledge House for a credit in surfboard studies. The department of surfboard studies does not think the class is up to its standards. However, the participating faculty has agreed to accept the credit. So much for surfboarding standards and departmental self-government.

Another area of interest is that of intellectual property. Our collective agreement provides protection for the intellectual property of members. The memorandum, in contrast, says "all intellectual property rights developed for the Courseware and/or Global Baccalaureate shall belong to" Knowledge House. The way that the collective agreement is circumvented is to have Dalhousie faculty members, who are working on the courses, hired as consultants.

Dalhousie will get a lump sum of $10,000 per year, along with $1,300 per student enrolled in year two of the baccalaureate. That is far less than we would receive if the students registered for regular first-year classes at Dalhousie. We are cooperating with a private institution which will teach the more cost-effective first-year classes. We then will accept the students into our upper year classes which cost us more per student.

Any student who would ordinarily enrol in first year at Dalhousie, but instead goes to Knowledge House, costs us a great deal of money -- the difference between $1,300 and what we would otherwise receive from their tuition and government grant.

The argument from the administration is that the students enrolled in the baccalaureate are high risk students, ones who ordinarily would not come to our university. So we lose nothing, because they would not take our first-year classes at any rate.

But there is nothing in the memorandum which talks about the sorts of students who will be enrolled. Might not a clever young person see this is an easy and cheap way to enter university? According to a Knowledge House presentation, students get a job along with their upgrading and first year of university, and guaranteed admission to second year at Dalhousie.

Is it likely Knowledge House will adopt some self-denying ordinance by which it would reject students who would be admissible to university under normal circumstances?

This agreement extends until Dec. 31, 2004, and cannot be terminated before that date unless either party is declared bankrupt or commits "a material breach" of the memorandum.

The Dalhousie Faculty Association will explore those aspects which fall within its jurisdiction. Most of the issues have to be addressed elsewhere, however, in faculties and in the senate. The Knowledge House agreement has to be reviewed carefully, meticulously, to ensure our academic standards, our intellectual property rights, our self-government, and our economic interests are all safeguarded.

Michael S. Cross is president-elect of Dalhousie Faculty Association.

The views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of CAUT.