With first- and second-year classes averaging 69 enrolled students—and many required classes tallying in the hundreds—McGill must create more opportunities for students to collaborate in smaller sections. The benefits of small-group learning have been widely documented; it is in McGill’s best interest to draw money from its endowment to expand teaching support instead of cutting it.

In 2013, McGill chose to cut 100 seminar-style classes in the Faculty of Arts and redirect the saved funds toward hiring more teaching assistants (TAs). The aim was to offset the cut of smaller courses by dividing larger classes into conferences managed by TAs. 

Studies consistently show that people remember information best when they link what they are learning to their own personal experiences. TA-led conferences can best facilitate this process. Often, this format of smaller class sizes and closer instructional attention allows students to engage with material in a more multifaceted and low-risk setting alongside peers. 

This year, instead of maintaining its promised expansion plan, McGill has reversed course. With the deficit expected to grow to nearly $200 million CAD by 2028, the administration chose to implement 15 to 20 per cent cuts for teaching support in the Faculty of Arts, shifting TAs into other roles and reducing their hours.

This is a lose-lose scenario. Cost-cutting is a short-term solution to a budget shortfall, but it spells demise in the long run. In ten years, will TAs who had their hours cut want to donate money to McGill? What about students who struggled to find classes where their voice was heard and valued, where they could delve deep into topics out of pure interest, not just motivated by a grade?

If McGill wants to receive donations from alumni and preserve its endowment in the long term, it must create positive experiences for its students. More importantly, if students, faced with a tough job market, see that the only programs worth maintaining are those that provide monetary value to McGill, they might apply that logic to their own lives and prioritize performance over learning.

By robbing students of a space to share their thoughts, the administration tells Arts students that their academic contributions are not worth the tuition they pay, even as McGill raises spending on external private security by the millions.

McGill is teaching the wrong lessons. It’s operating like a business and foregoing its primary goal of promoting higher-level learning. If advancing education were truly the administration’s top priority, as President Deep Saini claims, it wouldn’t cut funding for teaching support. 

As Quebec lowers funding and slashes caps on international students, fiscal prudence is wise, but McGill still has an impressive cushion. The university’s endowment sits at $2.2 billion CAD, of which the university spends 4 per cent each year. In contrast, the endowment grosses a ten-year average of 7 per cent per year, a rate that continues to rise. The fund has increased in value by a whopping 41 per cent in the last five years, an astounding number in light of this month’s frantic belt-tightening.

McGill should raise its distribution rate from 4 per cent to 4.25 per cent, freeing up an extra $5 million CAD to hire more teaching assistants. This small budget increase would allow McGill to hire 300 more teaching assistants for the whole year, expanding the number of TAs by nearly 20 per cent, while still ensuring that the endowment grows over time.

Cuts to teaching support will wind up hurting McGill’s fundraising abilities, reputation, and enrollment in the future, while worsening the experience of current students. McGill claims it can’t afford to pay for teaching assistants. In the long run, it can’t afford to cut them.