« Why don't more economics students get SSHRC doctoral fellowships? | Main | Could you pass a 1950s Econ 1000 exam? »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Good post.
Greens surprised me. My *guess* is that Greens are the most skeptical about the Establishment Education System (in which Liberals are the true believers)?

Thanks Nick. I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding of the Green party in Canada. On many issues e.g. income splitting for tax purposes, it lines up with a conservative position. It's "lefty" positions e.g. carbon taxes, marijuana legalization, tend to be socially liberal but fiscally conservative and market oriented. The leader of the Green Party, Mike Schreiner, is a local small business owner - admittedly of an organic company.

Given the extent to which traditional conservative parties are becoming gerontocracies/jumping the shark/both, there is space on the political spectrum for a non-looney centre-right party. That's where the Greens are, even if the mainstream media doesn't realize it.

I wish they would ask the question the way I would want it phrased, but I guess we are probably guilty of that. he way I would phrase it is that universities should give us the skills to learn how to learn. Coming out with a specific set of skills is nice. Knowing how to teach yourself new ones as needed is even better.


The leader of the Greens has NOT been Mike Schreiner for over a decade. Elizabeth May MP for Saanich Gulf Islands is leader of the Green Party of Canada.

Another point, when one talks about "soft skills" maybe the supporters of different parties are thinking about different things when they conceptualize soft skills. For liberals it might be "schmoozing and influencing people" while for Greens maybe it's oh I dont know, emotional intelligence and student associations.

Andrew - provincially. Elizabeth May is the federal leader, Mike Schreiner is the provincial leader. This post is entirely about Ontario as it uses Ontario data only.

I agree with you about "soft skills" meaning whatever you choose it to mean - and the fact that the university educated were primed with "soft skills necessary for life-long success" whereas the non-university educated weren't means that the two groups may be interpreting "soft skills" differently in the second question, which doesn't have the "lifetime success" bit.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search this site

  • Google

Blog powered by Typepad