S.07-30
S
?
SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
Senate Committee on University Prioriti
Memorandum
TO
Senate
?
FROM:
Jo
?
mouse
Chair
?
JP and
dent, Academic
RE:
Environmental Science Program ?
DATE: ?
F
?
ry 13, 2007
The Senate Committee on University Priorities (SCUP) has reviewed the External
Review Report on the Environmental Science Program, together with responses from
the Program and Dean of the Faculty Science, and input from the Associate Vice
President, Academic.
Motion:
That Senate approve the recommendations from the Senate Committee on
University Priorities concerning advice to the Environmental Science Program and
the Dean of Science on priority items resulting from the External Review.
The report of the External Review
Committee*
for the Environmental Science Program
was submitted in May following the review team's site visit, which took place March 2 &
3, 2006. The response from the Environmental Science Program and the response
from the Dean were received in October 2006.
The Review Team believes that the 'formation of a Department of Environmental
Science within a new Faculty of the Environment would be of significant benefit, both
internally and externally'. In addition to this major strategic issue (which is not within the
purview of the Program), a number of other recommendations were made that do fall
within the discretion of the Program and the Faculty of Science. A high level of support
for these recommendations exists within the Program and the Faculty of Science. There
was also a call for increased resources to be directed to the Program.
SCUP recommends to Senate that the Environmental Science Program and the Dean
of Science be advised to pursue the following as priority items.
S
1. Faculty
a
The
& Department
Program, the
Structure
Department
?
of Geography and the School of Resource
0
and Environmental Management should participate fully in the process
initiated by the Vice President Academic for reviewing the effectiveness of
the Faculty structure at SFU.
2.
Program Curriculum
o
Review the entire Program to ensure that it recognizes national initiatives
in terms of curriculum goals and prepares its students to become effective
environmental problem-solvers and employable professionals.
o Consider the possibility of the curriculum containing an identifiable core
which includes at least one or two courses per year with an Environmental
Science label, beginning in the first year.
o Review the high number of prescribed courses, which create scheduling
problems for students, with a view to increasing the options for both
independent study and field experience for students.
o Ensure that faculty appointed to the Steering Committee play a positive
role
interdisciplinary
as departmental
Program.
representatives and as participants in the
?
is
o Involve students in the formation of a curriculum committee.
3.
Marketing
&
Visibility
o
Consider ways of marketing the Program more aggressively as an
alternative for Science students and exposing the innovative and
interdisciplinary graduate Programs in the environmental field, both
domestically and internationally.
o Redesign the Program web site to indicate that it is a major offering at
SFU.
o Bring to the attention of the students the increasing requirements by the
profession for certification as environmental practitioners.
S
2
• ?
4. Space
o
Review the Program space requirements as space inventory becomes
available and ensure faculty and students are kept abreast of progress
being made in this regard.
* Dr. Christine Campbell, (Memorial University of Newfoundland)
Dr. Fred Michel (Canton University)
Dr. Michael Moss (Royal Roads University)
CC ?
Michael Plischke, Dean, Faculty of Science
Alton Harestad, Director, Environmental Science Program.
is
3
External Review Report:
Environmental Science Program,
Simon Fraser University.
Submitted by:
Dr. Christine Campbell,
Environmental Science Program,
Sir Wilfred GrenfeH College,
Memorial University of Newfoundland.
Dr. Fred Michel,
Institute of Environmental Science,
Carleton University.
Dr. Michael Moss,
Canadian Centre for Environmental Education,
Royal Roads University.
May, 2006.
9
4.
Executive Summary
?
1)
In its current form the undergraduate degree program in Environmental Science at
Simon Fraser University fails to meet its goals and objectives. The curriculum, of
what should be a strong interdisciplinary program, reflects the many problems of
a university that is designed with a faculty and departmental structure supporting
traditional disciplines. Due to an ongoing critical lack of resources- faculty,
financial, courses, a supportive administrative structure, and promotional
activities, the program has failed to develop onto reflect the changes taking place
in society and in professional areas related to the field. The fact that the program
has survived for a decade is largely a reflection of the work of the current and
previous Program Directors and enthusiastic involvement of the Faculty
administrative assistant. The role of these three people is fully recognized and
appreciated by the students in the program.
The External Review Committee is, however, of the opinion that given the current
move toward a restructuring of the Faculty model at SFU and the recognition of
the value to the future of the University of an Environmental Science program,
that the formation of a full Department of Environmental Science within a new
Faculty of the Environment would be of significant benefit, both internally and
externally.
1. Current Program Overview
The Environmental Science pro
g ram at SFU currently consists of a broad science-
based degree with specialization in 6 distinct streams or areas of emphasis. These
6 streams are Biology, Chemistry, Environmetrics, Physical Geography, Pollutant
Transport and Quantitative Techniques for Resource Management. An Honours
focus and a Co-op option are also associated with the program.
Division of the program into the separate streams was appropriate at the time that
the program was devised, as the strengths of the contributing university
departments were clearly represented. However, since reaching peak levels in
1999, Environmental Science at SFU has seen a continuous decline in the number
of declared Majors (from 72 in Fall 1999 to
35
in Fall 2005). There were 41
declared Majors listed in Spring 2006. Only two streams can be said to be well -
subscribed: Biology (43% of declared Majors in
2005)
and Physical Geography
(40% of declared Majors in
2005).
Few students enter the Chemistry stream (14%
of declared Majors in 2005), while Environmetrics, Pollutant Transport and
Quantitative Techniques in Resource Management are seemingly not attracting
6.
sufficient students to ensure stream viability. The majority of the students in the
program do not pursue the Honours option. Co-op is popular, even though this
option does result in longer time to completion of the degree.
• Given the decline in the numbers of students and their concentration
into only two of the six streams, despite an increasing awareness and
emphasis on Environmental Science in society at large (and in
intermediate/secondary schools), it is clearly time for a change to the
current program in Environmental Science at SFU.
2.
Program Assessment
2.1. Recruitment and Admissions
New and innovative programs introduced into university curricula need to spend
extra effort in making their programs known. This has apparently not been the
case with the Environmental Science program at SFU. The program is not well-
known within the University, either by the administration, the faculty or its
students. It does not have a high profile outside the University. Despite this,
students from across Canada have come to Simon Fraser specifically for
environmental science.
Current recruitment aids for the program include some posters and brochures, a
web site and coloured sheets outlining stream course requirements. On-campus
recruitment is hampered by the lack of an Environmental Science office. Local
off-campus recruitment is constrained by the Director's schedule. Current
recruitment efforts are not leading to the number of admissions that would be
anticipated in an interdisciplinary program of this type. It is expected that a
program in Environmental Science could increase in numbers given the
nationally-occurring demand for qualified graduates in the environmental
professions. By addressing certain critical curriculum issues (see sections below)
Environmental Science at SFU might potentially double its student numbers over
the next few years.
• The program needs to be marketed more aggressively at the high school
level, e.g. by contacting high school science heads and school counselors
directly with pertinent and easily understood information on the
attractiveness of environmental science as an alternative for science
students. Marketing as an "applied" science has proven to be a very
successful alternative to the more common "hard" sciences. The career
potentialfor program graduates should be emphasized.
• The web page needs to be redesigned and the profile of
the program ?
given far greater prominence as a major academic offering at SFU.
(.
3
2.2.
Student Feedback
The Review Committee met with six students as well as receiving some written
submissions. Students were enthusiastic about the Environmental Science
program and were unanimous in the high regard in which they held the Directors
(current and previous) and also Ms. Rosemary Hotel! (Faculty Assistant).
Students felt that the broad background of the program was its biggest strength,
with the opportunity to take a range of science courses as well as courses in
statistics, economics and REM. However, all students felt that the program could
definitely be improved. They had several concerns with the current set up. Their
major observations are:
1.
The current streams are very rigid. The lack of flexibility was thought to
impede recruitment. Many students had to get numerous waivers from the
Program Director in order to obtain courses. Required courses were often not
available nor could students fit them into their timetables at the required points.
Specific instances cited of these problems were that several students had to
obtain waivers in order to take more Earth Science courses than specified.
Students outside the Chemistry stream mentioned that CHEM 317-2
(Analytical Environmental Chemistry) was a course they viewed as having
direct relevance; they viewed it as a useful option but had difficulty entering
the course because of the pre-requisite structure and scheduling.
2.
Students felt very isolated in going through the program as there were no
common environmental science courses between second year (EVSC 200-3)
and fourth year (EVSC 401-1 and EVSC 491-3). Also, these three courses
were the only ones in the program to adequately integrate the theme of
environmental science.
3.
A fact related to the above is that there is no designated common-room space
on campus for Environmental Science students either to meet or work.
3. Some students considered there to be too much overlap in content between
EVSC 200, REM 100 and GEOG 100. The first two of these are required in the
program.
4.
Some students felt that there should be more upper-level courses identified that
specifically address the needs of senior environmental science students. They
also pointed out that a number of upper-level courses that were available
lacked content at the advanced level they sought. Examples of this situation
were GEOG 316 (Biogeochemistry) and PHYS 346 (Energy and the
Environment). Too much time in these courses was devoted to reviews of
7-.
.
4
material from earlier courses. Students saw this as a consequence of having to
address the content to students from a wide range of backgrounds and
competencies.
5.
Most students found Co-op to be very valuable both academically and
professionally. However, they noted that by taking the co-op option their time
to degree completion was lengthened well beyond the norm. This was seen
primarily as a consequence of required courses being offered only once a year,
and resultant course scheduling conflicts with Co-op semesters.
6.
There was no opportunity for students to take interdisciplinary Independent
Research projects or Honours projects in Environmental Science.
7.
Some courses could be optional, rather than required, in the program. Students
mentioned, in particular, ECON 105-3 (Macroeconomics) and PHYS 346-3
(Energy and the Environment).
8.
Students thought there could be more field courses or field experiences in the
program, instead of just the one fourth year field course (EVSC 491). They
identified the need for a course, or part of a course, that explored and outlined
career options and professional requirements in the environmental sector.
• ?
Suggestions were made that some of the REM courses could be made more
relevant to Environmental Science.
By way of summary, it is very evident from the students' comments that despite
their appreciation for the fine support given to them by the current and past
Program Directors and Ms. Hotell, they have some major concerns with the
program and the support given to the Program by the SFU Administration. They
have identified major program deficiencies and at the same time are sufficiently
cognizant of the field to have identified remedies and possible solutions. Their
specific course and program-related observations are acknowledged by the
External Review Team and are incorporated into the discussion in Section 5.2 of
this report. The student's general recommendations are:
• That the SFU Administration should enhance the support given to
students in the Program by supporting their calls for more flexibility
within the Program, increased options
for both independent study and
field
experience, more Program cohesion, and more control over
required course scheduling
by the Program Director.
• That SFU provide both a visible administrative centre for
Environmental Science with work space and meeting areas for its
students.
Fri
5
2.4. Graduate School and Career Preparation
The Program has a successful record of placing students in graduate programs
both at SFU and elsewhere. Graduates from the Program appear to have had little
difficulty in entering Master's degree programs reflecting the discipline base of
their undergraduate stream. The interdisciplinary Master's degree program
offered by the School of Resource and Environmental Management appears to be
the most popular choice. However, given the increasing demand by employers for
graduates with an interdisciplinary perspective it is difficult to see how SFU
Environmental Science graduates gain any appreciation of the number of program
offerings, at the Masters level beyond SFU, which would permit them to follow
an interdisciplinary perspective. More often than not such Masters programs are
developed in response to a recognized need and thus provide higher than normal
employment opportunities. Currently, the time the Director has to develop an
awareness of such programs is minimal. Even if the Director were sufficiently
knowledgeable about such programs there is little opportunity to transmit this
information to the students since there is no upper-level course where these
opportunities can be discussed nor is there a central administrative location from
where this information can be displayed to senior undergraduates in the Program.
Both faculty members and students seemed to be equally unaware of the changes
now taking place within the emerging environmental profession. The profession is
becoming increasingly organized in terms of its breadth, occupational standards,
and professional certification. Although not a requirement, several university
environmental science programs are adapting their curricula to provide their
graduates with a head start on professional certification as Canadian Certified
Environmental Professionals (CCEP). Obtaining the CCEP designation within
five years of graduation is becoming increasingly the professional standard.
CCEP is a nationally-recognized credential. It is incumbent on the Director and
faculty associates to be aware of such professional developments and recognizing
them in any curriculum redesign should be a major focus alongside the current
recognition given to the P.Ag, P.Bio., and P.Geo. credentials. Becoming familiar
with the role of the Environmental Careers Organization of Canada
(ECOCanada), as this relates to professional development and career options,
should be a priority for the Director or the program faculty
The Program should immediately find the means whereby
information on the breadth of innovative and interdisciplinary
graduate programs in the environmental field, both domestic
and international, can be made available.
I/ -.
.
The Program should bring to the attention
of
its students the
increasing requirements by the profession for certification as
environmental practitioners.
3. Resources
3.1 Faculty
The program is run by the Director, who is a cross-appointed faculty member for
the duration of his term as Director. The current Director and the previous
Director appear to be responsible for the teaching of all Environmental Science
labeled courses. Since few students are enrolled in the Honours program, which
requires thesis research, few other faculty are directly involved in teaching
Environmental Science students.
A Steering Committee, composed of one representative from each participating
. department (Biological Sciences, Chemistry, Earth Sciences, Geography, Physics,
Statistics and Actuarial Sciences) provide guidance to the Director on curriculum
issues, and provide advice to students within their respective streams. The
Steering Committee members are responsible first to their home departments and
therefore act on behalf of their home departments for the benefit of their home
departments, rather than for the Environmental Science program. It is this
territorial attitude that has led to the development of a highly rigid, over-regulated
curriculum, with little room for maneuverability due to long lists of required pre-
requisite courses. Several Steering Committee members saw membership on the
Committee as a relatively unimportant task and were unaware of the requirements
and intended scope of the Program as a whole.
3.2 Budget
The Program was created with zero cost and currently operates with a limited
budget that is targeted primarily for the hiring of sessional lecturers to replace the
teaching of the Director by their home department. Funding for other initiatives is
at the discretion of the Dean of Science, who is supportive of the program.
However, budget limitations (real or perceived) clearly have affected the level of
activity for program enhancement and student recruitment.
3.3 Support Staff
The support staff for the Environmental Science program consists of a portion of
the time (<25%) of Rosemary Hotell, a Faculty Assistant based in the office of the
Dean of Science. We understand from all program participants that her role is
JO.
VA
vital to the operation of the Program. In addition to providing office support to
the Director, Ms. Hotell provides student counseling and is a point of contact for
enquiries regarding the Program.
3.4 Space
At present the Environmental Science program lacks any identifiable space and is
dependent on the good will of participating departments for some limited storage
space. The students have no place at the University to call their own, which
together with the lack of a sequence of definitive Environmental Science courses
prevents any degree of bonding between students, faculty, or their program of
study.
3.5 Library Resources
The review committee received a report from the SFU Library concerning library
resources specifically for the Environmental Science program. As noted in their
report, the Library is aware of the Environmental Science program and is
attempting to address the program needs through acquisitions in related subject
areas and by providing a library research class session for the Environmental
Science students. The Library report also notes that the Environmental Science
program does not have a dedicated allocation in the collections budget or a library
representative to inform the liaison librarian of program issues. As a result, the
Environmental Science program has little if any direct input over acquisitions (or
deletions) that could affect the Program. This is apparent in that the report makes
a direct link between library acquisition expenditures for Biological Sciences and
Environmental Science. Although there is overlap between the two subject areas,
they are distinct.
Recommendations relatin
tD
g to Section 3 are as follows:
•
The resources provided for the Program are totally inadequate. Even
if
the Program were to remain in its current form increased
resources must be made available to support an adequate level
of
faculty involvement and administrative support.
• Participating departments should ensure that faculty appointed to
the Steering Committee play a positive role as both a departmental
representative and as an active participant in an interdisciplinary
program.
• A dedicated area within the University must be made available to
students in the Program.
ii.
8
.
4. The External Context
for
Environmental Science.
It is not uncommon for a university's academic programs to develop entirely
within the framework of the home institution. Increasingly, however, off-campus
initiatives can provide considerable benefit and direction for program
development. This is particularly so in the case of applied programs and where a
connection can be made to a professional body or bodies. This can be of mutual
benefit to all concerned. It is increasingly the case in the field of the environment.
Over the past few years heads of university environmental science programs have
formed a national council to organize and promote programs and to give some
external recognition to the meaning of 'environmental science'. This organization
is the Canadian Council of University Environmental Science Program Heads
(CCUESPH).
On the professional side the Environmental Careers Organization of Canada
(ECOCanada), formerly CCHREI (Canadian Council for Human Resources in the
Environment Industry), was established by the federal government as a Sector
Council of Human Resources and Skills Development, Canada (HRSDC). Its
major achievements have been to define the scope for employment in the
environmental sector, to develop a system of national occupational standards, and
based on these has developed a system of professional certification.
CCUESPH works closely with ECOCanada and in particular is developing a
system for environmental science program accreditation. CCUESPH has
produced a description of the field of environmental science and has outlined the
characteristics of an environmental science degree program. This is very much for
external recognition. Several universities are now restructuring their curricula to
provide their undergraduates with the necessary academic background to support
their passage to professional certification as Certified Canadian Environmental
Practitioners (CCEP). Such a credential is increasingly becoming an optional
requirement in the allocation of government contracts and for employment in
industry and the consulting field. Many of the faculty at SFU who are involved in
the environmental field seemed to be unaware of these developments or of their
growing professional significance and potential importance to their students.
Whereas the statements developed by CCUESPH are by no means prescriptive, it
is quite evident that the SFU environmental science program meets ver
y
few of
the criteria outlined. Since the issue of program accreditation will become
important in the near future and this is likely to contain many elements as
requirements from both the academic and professional sides, much greater
attention should be paid by SFU to these ongoing initiatives.
. ?
CCUESPH has reached consensus on outlining environmental science. Its
definition is:
Id.
Environmental Science is the interdisciplinary study of the environment,
its functioning and its relationship to human activity. It extends beyond
the traditional science disciplines to terrestrial, aquatic and atmospheric
systems and their interactions. An environmental science graduate will
have an in-depth knowledge
of
environmental systems and of the breadth
and context in which these systems operate. Students will develop a
diversity of expertise necessary to address present, future and
unanticipated environmental problems.
In terms of the "normal". content of an environmental science program,
CCUESPH has outlined the following:
• Introductory basic science courses: mathematics, physics,
chemistry, biology
• Foundation courses for environmental science related to
atmospheric, terrestrial and aquatic systems (e.g. earth sciences,
physical geography, ecology)
• Courses relating socio-economic and political factors to
environmental policy and decision-making (e.g. environmental
economics, environmental law, environmental policy, compliance,
environmental ethics, management)
• An in-depth concentration on an environmentally-focused scientific
discipline or interdisciplinary field to an upper level that
emphasizes theoretical concepts and practical skills
(field
and
laboratory)
• Exposure to another environmentally relevant discipline or field at
an upper level
• Written and oral communication skills, quantitative literacy and
computer skills
• Statistics, spatial and temporal analyses: analysis and prediction
using computational methods
• Experience in environmental research and problem solving as part
of an interdisciplinary team approach andlor on an individual
basis, to gain exposure to environmental issues. This may be
attained through a thesis, fieldwork, co-op experience, internships,
seminars, or community-based research.
It is quite evident from the above descriptions that the SFU Environmental
Science program needs to meet more of these criteria.
•
Whether the existing program is moderately restructured, or
whether there is a major restructuring of
environmental
programming at SFU, there is considerable benefit to its
students, and a responsibility
of
its administrators to develop a
program that recognizes national initiatives in terms
of
curriculum goals, and which prepares its students with the
10
resources to become effective environmental problem-solvers and
employable professionals.
?
5. ?
Restructuring the Environmental Science Program
This section examines the restructuring of the undergraduate Environmental
Science program, while Section 6 looks at the position of Environmental
Science within the University as a whole.
?
5.1 ?
Current Deficiencies
Although the Environmental Science program has some strong points, such as
the co-op placements, the program suffers in four major ways. Despite these
problems, the program continues to attract some students.
1.
The current program is handcuffed by rigidity, which is primarily the
result of too many pre-requisites for various courses at the University and
the territorial nature of other Science departments and their representatives
. ?
on the Steering Committee. This is most evident in the Chemistry stream,
which requires more than 120 semester hours for graduation.
2.
Rigidity in the program prevents students from accessing courses which
address environmental issues outside the Faculty of Science. Two
examples of these are SA371-4 (Environment and Society) and
GE0G389-4 (Human Ecology). Such broadly-focused offerings need to
be balanced by courses directly relevant to an Environmental Science
degree. Examples of such courses would be in environmental policy and
law and environmental impact assessment. Such courses could be the
responsibility of new faculty hired by a new structure. They should be
courses needed by a revised program structure. They could very
effectively serve a need in a range of other University programs thus
adding to the resource base of Environmental Science, strengthening the
interdisciplinary profile of a restructured unit whist providing students
with very relevant employment and career-related knowledge.
3.
Each of the departments participating in the Environmental Science
program has developed their own "environmental stream". This in turn has
led to a view by some faculty that the Environmental Science program is
not unique and is simply duplicating efforts and therefore taking students
away from the departmental environmental streams. However, these
environmental streams do not provide the multi-disciplinary view that is
required for truly comprehending understanding and dealing with
complex Environmental Science issues.
11
4. The Environmental Science program has very few courses to call its own.
Students do not enroll in an Environmental Science course until second
year with EVSC 200-3. As a group, the Environmental Science students
only get together again in
4th
year with the seminar course (EVSC 401-1).
The only other Environmental Science course (EVSC 491-3) is an optional
4th year field course. This does not permit the students to develop any
identity with their program or with one another and thus there is no sense
of belonging.
5.
The Environmental Science program exists in a vacuum, with no
department and no space to call home. Throughout our visit, the Review
Committee heard comments about attaching the Environmental Science
program to various existing departments and then heard reasons why these
various potential unions would not work. The one common theme heard
was that the status quo was not acceptable and that the Environmental
Science program needed a home.
5.2
A Proposal for Restructuring
It is clear that the status quo is not an option. At this point in time, the
University has two choices with regard to the Environmental Science
program. It can either decide to scrap it altogether and delete the program, or,
it can commit to the expenditure of the necessary resources (financial, human,
and space) to revitalize and build on the vast potential that this program has to
offer. The remainder of this section, and its recommendations, deals only
with the second option.
1.
The Environmental Science program needs a home. Placing the Program
within an existing department is not considered to be viable and does not
take into account the multi-disciplinary nature of the program. At the
same time we see no reason to split existing departments, particularly, as
in the case of Geography, for whom a realignment of its physical
geography courses with Earth Science has been proposed. (The value of
Geography lies in it retaining the link between both the physical and the
human environments. It is a strong department with well-recognized
programs at all levels).
2.
The new Department of Environmental Science should contain faculty
members who are primarily interested in environmental issues. They can
come from new hires or through transfers from other departments. The
potential for cross-appointments should also be available in some
instances.
3 The new department will require space for offices, teaching, research, and
students.
12
.
4.
The program curriculum needs to be completely overhauled and the current
six streams need to be scrapped. Furthermore, the development of any
new thematic streams (not duplicates of departmental streams as is
currently the norm) should be based on a common core curriculum. In the
second year of the program, a field-based course should be established that
will provide students in the program with an opportunity to gain hands-on
experience as to the complexity of issues that face environmental
scientists.
5.
It is recognized that many of the non-core courses will still be taught by
other departments, especially in Science Faculty. However, in the
development of the new curriculum, special attention must be paid to the
pre-requisite requirements and sufficient flexibility must be maintained in
the program structure. Where required, new courses (using EVSC or other
department codes) should be developed with the environment as the major
focus.
6.
Since students are the only group that actually participates in every course
contained in the curriculum, they often bring a unique perspective to the
discussion table (see Section 2.2).
7.
Some resources for a major restructuring of the Environmental Science
program into a department could be from transfers from those now
expended in the "environmental streams" of existing departments.
We recommend that:
A separate Department of Environmental Science be created
• Existing faculty members at the University be given the opportunity
to consider transferring to the new Department
of
Environmental
Science, and that priority be given to new hires as required.
• There must be the allocation of an identifiable space for the new
Department of Environmental Science that will permit its faculty,
staff, and students to function as a coherent unit. As a department,
Environmental Science should also obtain a library representative
and a separate allocation budget to ensure adequate material and
resources are available.
• The new curriculum should contain an identifiable core, which
• ?
includes at least one or two courses per year with an EVSC label,
beginning in the first year
13
• Student participation should be included in the formulation
of
a
curriculum committee. This committee should involve also the new
faculty members
of
the new Department
of Environmental Science
whether they be full time or cross-appointed
6. Strengthening the SFU Environmental Profile.
When the current condition of the Environmental Science program, as discussed
above, is viewed within the context of other activities and initiatives currently
underway at SFU, it is evident that any proposals for the enhancement of
Environmental Science will be greatly improved if some broad thinking about the
profile of SFU environmental programs overall takes place. Two critical
initiatives that should provide a positive context for such environmental
programming are (1) the Task Force on Faculty Restructuring and (2) the support
being given to an environmental focus in the University's 'Strategic Research
Plan, 2005-2010'. Outlined below is a rationale for establishing a Faculty of the
Environment at SFU. The University clearly has an academic strength in the
environmental field but this strength is dispersed across several faculties and
many departments. There is also a significant external opportunity. West of the
University of Manitoba no Canadian university has a focused strength in the
environment. East of Manitoba there would be few rivals to match the scale of a
Faculty of the Environment that could be established at SFU.
The proposal outlined here is for a new Faculty to be established with three
founding departments. One department would be the new Department of
Environmental Science (as outlined in section 5). The School of Resource and
Environmental Management would move to the new Faculty and assume a
responsibility for initiating undergraduate programs. These should build from the
existing strength and (inter)national profile of its existing, highly-regarded
Master's program. The Department of Geography would move to the new Faculty
in its entirety bringing all its existing undergraduate and graduate degree
programs and certificates.
Several of the existing, and proposed, environmental research centres, in
particular those which are evidently interdisciplinary in focus should be housed
administratively within the new Faculty thus enhancing their respective profiles
both on and off campus. ?
40
p.
14
As such, the breadth of the new Faculty could provide a teaching and research
focus, central to the University's mission, with REM and the socio-economic side
of Geography developing courses and programs at both the undergraduate and
graduate levels that promote further the University's strength in environmental
resource management and in sustainability. Such a broad theme would be
consistent with two of the three employment sectors outlined by ECO Canada (i.e.
'Environmental Sustainability' and 'Conservation and Preservation of Natural
Resources').
The GeographyDepartment' s existing strengths in bridging the gap between the
social and physical sciences would be pivotal to the new Faculty.
The new Department of Environmental Science, with its new status and faculty
complement (see
5.2
above), will be in a unique position to develop up-to-date,
interdisciplinary programs at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. For
example, a potential focus for interdisciplinary options in the Department could
relate to two of the three major employment sectors; these are 'Environmental
Protection' and 'Conservation and Preservation of Natural Resources'. In the case
of the latter, the conservation/management theme could incorporate several of the
environmetric and quantitative technique objectives, poorly taken up in the
existing program. Such an emphasis would be supported by a breadth of
discussion of the ecological and scientific bases of resource management. There is
a tremendous potential for professionally-oriented, coursework—based Master's
de
tD
g
ree programs to be offered by this new Department, particularly if these were
built upon collaboration with the more environmentally-focused faculty in related
science departments.
Given the full support of the SFU Administration and the willingness of faculty
members in REM, Geography, and a new Environmental Science department to
cooperate in innovative program development, Simon Fraser University is in the
position of staking out a position as a national leader in the environmental field.
There is a fully documented need of employment opportunities for both
baccalaureate and Masters graduates, particularly from interdisciplinary
programs. This need exists both nationally and internationally.
Outlined in the diagram below is this proposed structure for a Faculty of the
Environment.
Our recommendation is:
• That Simon Fraser University seek to achieve its potential as a national
leader in environmental education and research at the university level by
establishing a Faculty of the Environment based initially on three
departments - REM, Geography, and a new Department
of
Environmental Science.
/,
15
?
I
?
Faculty of the Environment ?
I
REM ?
I ?
I
Geography
?
Environmental
S
c''.nrp.
Other
?
Other science
ArtfSoc.Sci
?
courses
courses.
?
Engineering
Business
• Resource
?
• Human and Physical
Management ?
Geography
•
?
Sussainability ?
• GIS
•
?
Policy
?
etc
,legislation
ptc
• Optional stream
possibilities e.g.
- water, land, air
quality and protection
- Natural resource
managernent/wildlfe/
environmetrics
etc...
.
7.
Summar
y
of Recommendations
Given the decline in the numbers
of
students and their concentration
into only two of
the six streams, despite an increasing awareness and emphasis
on Environmental Science in society at large (and in intermediate/secondary
schools), it is clearly time for a change to the current program in
Environmental Science at SFU.
The program needs to be marketed more aggressively at the high school
level, e.g. by contacting high school science heads and school counselors
directly with pertinent and easily understood information on the attractiveness
of
environmental science as an a/tern ative for science students. Marketing as
an "applied" science has proven to be very successful alternative to the more
common "hard" sciences. The career potential for program graduates should
be emphasized.
The web page needs to be redesigned and the profile
of
the program
given far greater prominence as a major academic offering at SFU
q.
16
That the SFUAdministration should enhance the support given to
students in the Program by supporting their calls for more flexibility within the
Program, increased options for both independent study and field experience,
more Program cohesion, and more control over required course scheduling by
the Program Director.
That SFU provide both a visible administrative centre for
Environmental Science with work space and meeting areas for its students.
The Program should immediately find the means whereby information
on the breadth of innovative and interdisciplinary graduate programs in the
environmentalfield, both domestic and international, can be made available.
The Program should bring to the attention of its students the increasing
requirements by the profession for certification as environmental practitioners.
The resources providedfor the Program are totally inadequate. Even if
the Program were to remain in its current form increased resources must be
made available to support an adequate level offaculty involvement and
administrative support.
Participating departments should ensure that faculty appointed to the
Steering Committee play a positive role as both a departmental representative
and as an active participant in an interdisciplinary program.
A dedicated area within the University must be made available to
students in the Program.
Whether the existing program is moderately restructured, or whether
there is a major restructuring of environmental programming at SFU, there is
considerable benefit to its students, and a responsibility of its administrators to
develop a program that recognizes national initiatives in terms of curriculum
goals, and which prepares its students with the resources to become effective
environmental problem-solvers and employable professionals.
A separate Department-of Environmental Science be created
Existing faculty members at the University be given the opportunity to
consider transferring to the new Department of Environmental Science, and
that priority be given to new hires as required.
There must be the allocation of an identifiable space for the new
•
?
Department of Environmental Science that will permit its faculty, staff, and
students to function as a coherent unit. As a department, Environmental
Science should also obtain a library representative and a separate allocation
budget to ensure adequate material and resources are available.
070
17
The new curriculum should contain an identifiable core, which includes
at least one or two courses per year with an EVSC label, beginning in the first
year
Student participation should be included in the formulation of a
curriculum committee. This committee should involve also the new faculty
members of the new Department of Environmental Science whether they be full
time or cross-appointed.
That Simon Fraser University seek to achieve its potential as a national
leader in environmental education and research at the university level by
establishing a Faculty of the Environment based initially on three departments
- REM, Geography, and a new Department of Environmental Science.
L
C
.
18
Response to the External Review Report
of the Environmental Science Program
at Simon Fraser University
Alton Harestad, Director
?
Environmental Science Program
?
Simon Fraser University
.
?
October 22, 2006.
The External Review Team provided a summary that listed their major recommendations
for the Environmental Science Program at Simon Fraser University. In their report, there
are also more minor, but frequently important recommendations that have to do with
specific curriculum issues. I have not responded individually to these minor
recommendations because they would be largely addressed through broad changes to the
curriculum.
I present the major recommendations in bold italics followed by m y responses in regular
text. At times, there is some duplication in specific responses, but this occurs to ensure all
recommendations are addressed directly.
There are several recommendations that deal with administrative level and university
restructuring. I respond to these recommendations collectively because they are
interdependent and rely on major re-alignments of related environmental science and
management units at SFU.
Recommendation: Given the decline in the numbers
of
students and
their
concentration into only two oJthe six
streams, despite an increasing awareness and
emphasis on Environmental Science in society at large ('and in intermediate/secondary
Schools), it
is clearly time for
a change to the current program in Environmental
Science
Enrollment
at
SFU.
may not
?
have declined as the review committee thinks (72 in fall 1999 to 35
0
(sic) in fall 2005). As explained on page 5 of the self study report. the high number of
majors in 1999 and 2000 may be an artifact because at that time "intended majors" may
have formed the database used by Analytical Studies. If there were high numbers of
majors in 1999-2000 and 2000-2001. then 2-4 years later when these majors finished
their degrees, there should be a pulse of graduates. Our statistics do not reveal this
expected pulse of graduates. This fall 2006, there are
64
declared majors in the program.
This apparent recent increase in majors is partly due to increased numbers of students
joining the program after being at SFU for several semesters (like has happened in the
past), but also likely partly due to direct entry. There is variation in numbers of majors
and graduates since Fall 1999, but not a substantial decline.
There is strong public concern about environmental issues. As well, both Federal and
Provincial agencies with environmental mandates are facing loss olcapacity because of'
earlier staff cuts and hiring freezes combined with current retirements. There is
increasing demand for environmental scientists. Our students are poised to help till this
demand and are competitive for entry level positions. The Environmental Science
program can be redesigned to provide students with the skills they need, while
distinguishing it from technical institutions. However, it also must maintain a high qua]*ty
academic curriculum that promotes the professional standards sought by employers and
prepares students for graduate level research.
cZ.
Recommendation: The program needs to be marketed more aggressively at the high
school level, e.g. by contacting high school science heads and school counselors
directly with pertinent and easily understood information on the attractiveness of
environmental science as an alternative for science students. Marketing as an
"applied" science has proven to be very successful alternative to the more common
"hard" sciences. Time career potential for program graduates should be emphasized.
Marketing at hi
g
h school level is helpful but it is not clear
if
this needs to be direct effort
by the Environmental Science program or whether awareness about the program could he
achieved by existing recruitment initiatives. Students do not always know what the
y
are
going to do for a career when they enter university and many have not even declared their
majors by third year. Some change programs after several semesters at university.
Although some contact is merited at high schools, it can not be our whole effort to attract
students-to Environmental Science. Students who have alread
y
come to Simon Fraser
University should be included in recruitment efforts and be informed about the program.
The Environmental Science Program could create better promotional material that
recruiters could distribute during school visits. Also, given the proficient web skills of
most high school students, a redesigned web site for the Environmental Science Program
could help raise awareness and interest in the Program.
Guidance from the professional recruiters at Simon Fraser University could help design
• ?
an efficient approach that targets students most likely to be attracted to Environmental
Science.
Recommendation:
The
web page needs to be redesigned and the
profile of
the program
given far greater prominence as a major academic offering atSF'U.
The web page needs to he redesigned and a new site could be created at a modest cost.
The Master of Pest Management Program has a web page format and content that could
he used as a model for the Environmental Science Program. When I was actin
g director
of that program in Biological Sciences it cost about $500 to design and construct that web
site.
Recommendation: That the SF1] A dministraf ion should enhance the support give!: to
students in the Program b
y
supporting their calls
for more flexibility
within the
Program, increased optioiisJôr both independent stud
y
and
field
experience, more
Program cohesion, and more control over required course scheduling by the Program
Director.
Students expressed to the review committee that a big strength of the Environmental
Science program is the broad background that it provided them. This is echoed by the co-
op coordinator. Paul l)egrace. This breadth includes disciplines in science but also
courses in resource management and economics. The students foce challenges in meeting
program requirements and suggested changes
to the curricula for the various streams in
Environmental Science. Greater flexibilit
y
is required, but we must not introduce so
much flexibility that the assuredness of breadth is compromised.
The lack of flexibility is due to the high number of prescribed courses and scheduling.
Departments make efforts to accommodate needs of all students when scheduling courses
but they also must meet the needs of their own majors. The rigidity of the Environmental
Science program likely exacerbates scheduling issues. The scheduling conflicts become
most strongly expressed when the number of prescribed courses form the bulk of a
student's program. Adding even a modest amount of flexibility to the. program would
reduce a substantial number of scheduling problems faced by students.
The concern from some students that some upper level courses lacked the advanced level
that they sought is a difficult issue to address within the context of an Environmental
Science program where breadth is a guiding principle and a recognized strength. This is a
B.Sc. requiring 120 credits of which 44 must he upper division.
In
the Environmental
Science program, there will always be tension between breadth and depth outside of the
student's specialization (i.e., stream). If we ensure there is breadth then there will he less
depth in some portions of their individual programs. The stream approach is a one way
that students can get breadth but also achieve depth within a particular discipline of
interest. Providing flexibility (e.g., reducing the number of prescribed courses) with or
without streams would allow students to seek depth without extending their B.Sc.
program
The current
beyond
stream
the
approach
standards
for
within
Environmental
the Faculty
Science
of Science.at
Simon
?
Fraser University helps
0
provide the depth required by graduate from our program, but it is rigid. The prescribed
approaches to streams could he dropped and in their place students could build their own
area(s) of strength. Students would be guided by a written set of principles that form the
basis upon which to maintain breath and ensure sufficient specialization. As Nvell,
students could be directed to the Canadian Certified Environmental Professionals and
College of Applied Biology of British Columbia so they can ensure their course choices
contribute towards requirements for professional certification. Current curricula for
streams could be modified to give more choices and provided as examples of courses that
could be taken to fulfill the requirements for the B.Sc. in Environmental Science.
The Review Team thought our students should have greater experience in environmental
research and problem solving. They suggested that this ma
y
be attained through a thesis.
fieldwork, co-op experience. internships, seminars, or community-based research. Several
courses could he developed to provide this experience. A field course at the end of
second year or beginning ot'3rd year could be designed that would provide field
experience use opportunities in the Lower Mainland. For example. the Lower Seymour
Conservation Reserve is within
V2
hour of the Burnab
y
Campus and we have established a
relationship with the LSCR through the EVSC 491 field course. iiiis second/third year
field course could be 1-3 credit hours depending on its content. The convenience and
proximity to the Burnaby campus would mean that all Environmental Science students
could participate. Activities for the course should he concentrated so benefits of field
studies are achieved. ?
(
The Review Team noted that the co-op program extended the duration of the
Environmental Science student's degree. This is a voluntary program and students are
fully aware of the costs and benefits ofjoining co-op: The co-op program. should
students choose this option, provides experiential education and it means that students
spend several semesters beyond those needed to simply meet the course requirements for
their degree. Students benefit in a number of ways and they choose to take extra time to
obtain not only the skills, but also the personal and professional growth that the co-op
program offers.
If flexibility was provided in the Environmental Science program then students could
take the opportunities for research courses that exist in participation departments. As well
the Environmental Science program could add two research courses to its curriculum
perhaps one at 300 level and one at 400 level. If these course were added theo there
would have to be Faculty available to offer them.
The Review Team thought the Environmental Science Program needs more cohesion and
that the Director should have more control ovef required course scheduling. Although
more program cohesion, and more control over required course scheduling by the
Program Director would be desirable. Greater cohesion can be achieved by working
closely with students and modest reorganization of the curriculum. Environmental
. ?
Science at Simon Fraser University is an interdisciplinary program; hence, a substantial
portion of its curriculum is drawn from other disciplines in Science as well as other
Faculties and Departments. These courses serve more than Environmental Science
students and although more control is desirable, it is not possible given the mandates of
the departments upon which Environmental Science draws. An active steering committee
whose mandate is the interests of the Environmental Science program could bring
scheduling concerns to the respective departments. Departments are typically helpful with
regards to curricula where they can, but the complexity of interdepartmental scheduling
means there will always be some conflicts and issues with scheduling. Program
flexibility regarding required courses taken, by Environmental Science students would
achieve greater success faster and would provide students
with
the on-going capacity to
seek solutions as the various departmental curricula change overtime.
Recommendation: That
SFU
provide both
it
visible
administrative centre
for
Environmental Science with work space and meeting areas for its students.
An administrative centre would be welcomed by the students and go a long way to help
promote identity and cohesiveness to the Environmental Science program. Space is an
on going issue across Simon Fraser University including the Faculty of Science. \Vhe.n
resources are in short suppl
y
allocation of space is a matter of priority. Initially the space
requirements for the Environmental Science program are small hut still significant to the
. ?
Faculty
f
o
Science. Should the program grow
and become a department then its need for
space will increase commensurate with that growth.
Recommendation: The
Program should immediately find the means H'hereby
information on the breadth of innovative and interdisciplinary graduate programs in
the en vironmental field, both domestic and international, can be made available.
The Directory of Canadian Graduate Programs in Environmental Studies (COPES) was
acquired shortly after the visit by the Review Team and is available for loan from the
program assistant's office of the Environmental Science program. The Directory is
published by the School of Environmental Studies at Queen's University in Kingston and
is a not-for-profit publication that aims to ease the search for graduate schools and
graduate programs. It provides a comprehensive overview of the many programs offered
by Canadian universities and colleges in the multidisciplinary field of Environmental
Studies. The CGPES Director
y
contains:
• Over 400 listings from more than 150 Canadian universities and colleges
• Comprehensive indexes
• 35 subject headings over the disciplines of Engineering, Health Sciences. Natural
Sciences, Social Sciences and Law
• College diploma program information
• French program listings
• Research stations affiliated with Canadian universities.
Each listing includes the name of university, school, department and program: degrees
offered and years to complete the programs; program contact information including web
and email addresses; and research areas of faculty.
Information and advice about graduate studies is provided on an individual basis by the
Director as well as other professors among the Departments that participate in the
Environmental Science program. To support these efforts an annual workshop could he
developed that gives students advice about graduate studies, scholarships and other
research opportunities. This workshop would have to given in the latter part of third year
so students could have time to consider graduate studies and apply for NSERC
scholarships in the fall semester of their fourth year.
Recommendation:
The
Program should bring to the attention
of its
students the
increasing requirements by the profession for certification as en i'ironnzenIai
practitioners.
The Director is Member 9-60 of the 1500+ member College of Applied Biology or British
Columbia (CAB). As an active member who has served as Chair of the Board of
Examiners and on the Disciplinary Committee. I am fully aware of the requirements and
benefits of professional certification. Simon Fraser University's Environmental Science
graduates, with a biology stream, meet the eligibility requirements of the College Applied
Biologists of British Columbia if they choose biology courses in their upper levels
optional courses and if they take an English course. With the writing required for many
science lecture and lab courses, as well as the work reports for the co-op terms. I think
6
our students would be able to demonstrate their writing abilities to the Board of
Examiners and thus meet the requirements of the College of Applied Biologists.
In June, the Director attended a 3-day meeting of Canadian Environmental Science
Pro g
ram Heads at Royal Roads Universit
y
where they discussed the certification program
for Canadian Certified Environmental Professionals (CCEP). Unlike the CAB which has
matured and is mandated through a provincial act in British Columbia. the CCEP
program is still developing. I examined the requirements for the CCEP and our
Environmental. Science Program does not seem too far from providing our students with
the curriculum that would let them meet certification. A particular deficienc
y
is a course
in Environmental Ethics. Such a course could he developed at Simon Fraser University
with cooperation of other departments but if it was added to our current curriculum them
an existing required course would have to be dropped. When the EVSC curriculum is
reviewed, changes should include courses that would accommodato, CCEP certification
for those students that wish to pursue that option.
Information about the CCEP program is available on the ECO Canada web site. Links to
this web site and specifically to the CCEP web site will he provided when the
Environmental Science web page is redesigned.
. ?
Recommendation: The resources pro vided for the Program are totally inadequate.
Even if the Program were to remain in its current form increased resources must be
made available to support an adequate level offaculty involvement and administrative
support.
While more resources are desirable and could be used to assist the program. more
resources without a clear vision and plan would not be prudent. The curriculum needs to
be reviewed and modified. This modification could be relatively small and achieved by
increasing flexibility and giving students greater choice in courses pertinent to
environmental science. Alternatively, the modification could he a major overhaul.
However, I do not know if this major overhaul is needed. Environmental Science students
are easily placed into coop work terms and some go on to graduate research. This
indicates that the basic curriculum is consistent with professional needs. As well, students
like the program, but they find it constraining and difficult to schedule the required
courses.
Initially, flexibility can he added to the program by reducing required courses and by
providing more options to required components of the program. This could he done
immediatel
y
, and then a comprehensive curriculum review conducted. This curriculum
review would also include specific reviews of content and overlap among of REM 100.
GEOG 100. and EVSC 200.
fl
Recommendation: Participating departments should ensure that faculty appointed to
0
the Steering committee play a positive role as both a departmental representative and
as
an active participant in an interdisciplinary program.
I agree. Perhaps clear terms of reference could be prepared that would help the steering
committee provide the appropriate advice needed by the program. There is alwa
ys
some
risk that people will be concerned with the implications of the Environmental Science
Program to their home departments.
Recommendation: A dedicated area within the University must be made available to
students in the Program.
It would be very helpful and positive for the university to provide space to students in the
program. Several benefits would he realized: camaraderie, peer support, and cohort
development. This allocation of space can be made whether Environmental Science
remains a program or developed into a department.
Recommendation: Whether the existing program is moderatel y restructured, or
whether there is a major restructuring of environmental programming at SFU there i
considerable benefit to its students, and a responsibility of its administrators to develop
a program that recognizes national initiatives in terms of curriculum goals, and which
prepares its students with time resources to become effective environmental problem-
solvers and employable professionals.
Recommendation: A separate Department of Environmental Science be created
Recommendation: Existing faculty members at the University be given the opportunity
to consider transferring to the new Department of Environmental Science, and that
priority be given to new hires as required.
Recommendation: There must he the allocation of an identifiable space for the new
Department of Environmental Science that will perm it its faculty, staff and students to
function as a coherent unit. As a department, Environmental Science should also
obtain a library representative and a separate allocation budget to ensure adequate
material and resources are available.
Recommendation: The new curriculum should contain an identifiable core, which
includes at least one or two courses per year with an Environmental Science label,
beginning in the first year.
Recommendation: Student participation should be included in the formulation of a
curriculum committee. This committee should involve also time
new
facult' members of
the new Department of Environmental Science whether they be full time or cross-
appointed.
0
0
S
Recommendation: That Simon Fraser University seek to achieve its potential as a
national leader in environmental education and research at the university level
establishing a Faculty
of the Environment based initially on three
departments-
REM,
Geography, and a new Department of Environmental Science.
The Environmental Science program at SFU currently has an identifiable core but is
deficient in designated EVSC courses. Although there are 6 streams, these streams have
asimilar suite of required courses especially at the lower levels. For example in the 2
dominate streams, biology and physical geography, 74% of the credit hours are the same
during the first 2 years and 52% are the same during the
3
and
4th
years. Required
courses taken by Environmental Science students in the biology and physical geography
streams overlap by 50% (60/120 credit hours) for their whole program. In comparison.
streams within the Department of Biological Sciences overlap by 44%
(531120
credit
hours).
There is merit in having an identifiable core but if the core becomes too large it would
unduly restrict student's individual choices and lead to the sorts of scheduling issues
students currently face in the program. It is appropriate that students he given some
opportunity to specialize and tailor their program to meet their particular interests. If
there were greater prescription of an "identifiable core", likely there would he greater
' ?
difficulties in course scheduling and flexibility in the program would he even more
constrained.
Students will be included in assessing the current curriculum and identifying options for
changes to the curriculum. Students bring unique and relevant perspectives to discussions
on curriculum and also would help ensure changes do not create further problems with
the program.
There are short term and lon
g
term responses to address the issues raised by the External
Review. The short term response does not depend on whether the Environmental Science
Program remains a program. develops into a department within the Faculty of Science. or
becomes a central unit in a Faculty of Environment. The long term response depends
greatly on whether there are structural changes and the role that the Environmental
Science programplays in the resulting institutional arrangement.
In the short term. flexibility can be inserted immediately into the program b
y
reducing the
number of required courses and providing more options within areas of specialization
(i.e.. streams). initially, this means that approximately 1$ credit hours (6 courses) that are
now required should be made optional. For the more heavily prescribed streams (e.g..
environmental chemistry) even more courses should he made optional. After a curriculum
review, the stream design could he modified or dropped. If it was dropped then it could
be replaced with a more individuall
y
driven curriculum (in terms of optional courses) that
5 ?
is bounded by a core and course selection principles that ensure academic quality.
O.
9
Over the long term, there are several potential futures for the Environmental Science
Program. Some depend on large-scale changes to university structure. Whatever the
organizational level, success of Environmental Science at Simon Fraser University will
need research, teaching and governance cultures that respect difterent disciplines and
embrace the strengths that science and social science faculty bring to interdisciplinary
programs. The challenge will be to ensure different disciplines can accept and value each
other's contributions. Although there is merit in restructuring to form a Facult
y
of the
Environment, it is well beyond the scope of a program to initiate such a substantive
change. Also, many of the benefits used by the Review Team to support the formation of
a Faculty of the Environment could be achieved by other institutional models. Should the
university make changes. then the Environmental Science program can adapt and fit
within a fairl
y
wide range of structures.
.
r
31-
i ()
SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
Office of the Dean of Science
?
MEMORANDUM
TO: Bill Krane, Associate VP ?
FROM: Dr. Michael Piischke, Dean
Academic
?
Faculty of Science
RE: External Review of
?
DATE: October 25, 2006
Environmental Science
Program
I write with regard to the report of the External Review Committee (ERC) on the
Environmental Science Program and the response of its Director, Dr. Alton Haresad. I
requested a review of this program because I was concerned about the apparent drop
in demand for the program and because it seemed to me that the structure of the
program reflected departmental priorities at the time of its creation more than it did a
coherent view of environmental science. As Dr. Harestad points out in his response, the
• drop in demand may have been a fluctuation but the lack of growth in this program is
nevertheless disappointing especially since there will be strong demand for graduates
for the foreseeable future.
The main recommendation of the ERC is the creation of a new Faculty of the
Environment, which would become the home of a new Department of Environmental
Science that would take ownership of the EVSC Program. I find this recommendation
very attractive. However, this new Faculty can only be successful if there is, at a
minimum, strong support from the School of Resource and Environmental Management
(REM) and the Department of Geography. I am quite confident that a number of current
faculty in Science would find it attractive to transfer to a Department of Environmental
Science.
Other recommendations concern revisions to the curriculum of the program. In
essence, what is recommended is a complete overhaul of the program. I support this
and have asked the current Director to chair a committee to initiate this process. This
committee will be different from the current Steering Committee and will have
membership from REM. If the new Faculty and Department come into existence, the
work of this committee will, hopefully, provide a point of departure for the Department's
Curriculum Committee.
A third important point that the ERC makes is the lack of visibility of the Program on
campus and the lack of space for the students enrolled in it. Thanks to the completion
10
an TASC II, the Faculty of Science has a bit of flexible space. I have decided to assign
an office in TASC II to the Director of the Program and a nearby office to the EVSC
Undergraduate Student Society. This is a modest first step but it should serve to make
the Program more visible and to improve the
esprit de corps
of the students.
.
In summary, this review was a most valuable exercise, no matter what the eventual
outcome of the Faculty Restructuring Process turns out to be. I am confident that we
are now in a position to create an attractive and effective EVSC Program in either a
new Faculty or in the Faculty of Science.
Michael Plischke
C: ?
Alton Harestad
.
.
33.
