S.O1-28

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

S

?

Senate Committee on University Priorities

John

Waterhou

eademic

Vice President,

Memorandum

TO: Senate

?

FROM:

RE: External Review - Department of

?

DATE:

?

20 February 2001

Political Science

External Reviews of academic units are conducted under Guidelines' approved by

Senate. The review process is intended to ensure that the quality of the

department's academic programs and research is high, that members of the

department participate in the administration of departments, and that the

departmental environment is conducive to the department's objectives. Under

these Guidelines, Senate is expected to receive advice from the Senate Committee

on University Priorities and to provide feedback to the unit and the Dean.

The following materials are forwarded to Senate for consideration:

The External Review Report

is

The response to the External Review Report by the Department

The comments of the Dean

The comments of the Vice-President, Academic

The recommendations from the Senate Committee on University Priorities

The Department Chair, Dr. S. McBride will be available at Senate as a resource

person.

Motion

That Senate concurs with the recommendation from the Senate Committee

on University Priorities concerning advice to the Department of Political

Science on priority items resulting from the external review, as outlined in

.

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

?

Senate Committee on University Priorities

?

Memorandum

TO:

Senate ?

FROM: John Waterh

Vice Presiden

RE: Political Science External Review

?

DATE: ?

12 Februar1

The Senate Committee on University Priorities has reviewed the External Review

Report prepared on the Department of Political Science in April 2000, together with

the response from the unit and comments from the Dean and the Vice President,

Academic.

SCUP believes that the external review report was exemplary leading to a series of -

very good recommendations by the external review committee. The Department of

Political Science is to be recognized for its success and for its effective leadership.

SCUP recommends to Senate that the Department of Political Science and Dean be

advised to pursue the following as priority items:

1.

SCUP commends the Department of Political Science for its success in

increasing representation in designated equity groups in recent hiring. The

- Department of Political Science is encouraged to continue being proactive in

its effort to increase the proportion of female faculty in the Department.

2.

The Department of Political Science should be encouraged to expand its co-op

program for undergraduate students.

3.

The Department of Political Science should be encouraged to develop

collaborative linkages with the Institute for Health Research and Education.

4.

The Department of Political Science should be encouraged to collaborate with

other University units to explore the potential for a masters program in

public policy.

C. ?

S. McBride

J .

Pierce

L

---

SCUP 00-25

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

Office of the Vice-President, Academic

?

MEMORANDUM

TO: Senate Committee on University

?

FROM:

John Water

Priorities ?

Vice-Presid Academic

RE: Political Science External Review

?

DATE: Novembei30, 2000

The report of the external review committee for the Department of Political Science was

received on April 20, 2000, the Department's response on October 15, 2000, and the

Dean's response on November 7, 2000. My comments on these documents follow.

First, I join the Department and Dean Pierce in acknowledging a very thorough,

constructive and positive review. Both the reviewers and the Department provided

very specific comments on the undergraduate and graduate programs, the faculty and

administrative issues. This review and the responses could well serve as models for

other external reviews.

Overall, the reviewers and both responses paint a picture of an effective Department

with vibrant and responsive programs. Many of the review's suggestions for change

have already been implemented or are in progress. The Department and its leadership

are to be congratulated.

Given the overall constructive tone of the review and responses, I will restrict my

comments, as follows:

1.

Both the reviewers and Department note the importance of maintaining gender

balance in future appointments. I wish to reinforce this view.

2.

The University's bridging program was introduced in 1998 as a fixed term

program to help units affect the impact of a significant upcoming retirement

bulge, particularly after a period of restricted hiring due to budget constraints.

As an increasing number of positions have become or are becoming available, it

is unlikely that the University's bridging program will be continued (at least in its

current form). As a result, the Department should not develop its hiring plan

counting on the University's bridging program. The Faculty may, however

choose to consider a bridged appointment to smooth hiring within the

Department from its own resources.

3.

I encourage the Department to develop collaborative linkages with the Institute

for Health Research and Education. Greater funding for graduate students and

research may result as new health related research funding becomes available.

. ?

Simultaneously, such collaboration may create new opportunities between the

Department and other parts of the University.

---

SCUP

?

Political Science External Review

?

November 30, 2000 ?

Page two

4. ?

In a similar vein and with similar integrative

effects

with other University units,

the Department should play a central role in a possible masters program in

public administration.

Cc: ?

S. McBride, Chair / Political Science

J .

Pierce, Dean / Faculty of Arts

John Waterhouse

Vice- President, Academic and Provost

Simon Fraser University

JHW:mao

---

SCUP 00-25

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

?

I

Office of the Dean, Faculty of

Arts

MEMORANDUM

To: ?

J. Waterhouse ? From: John T.

Vice-President, Academic

?

Dean of Arts

?

.....-'

Subject: Response to Political Science ?

Date:

?

November 7, 2000

External Review

This is a very thorough, positive and constructive review which provides a

number of very specific recommendations (22) which address issues in three

broad categories: programs; faculty; and administrative questions. Before

commenting on and responding to these recommendations, and the

responses from Political Science, I would like to reinforce a more general

assessment that this is a well run unit which, under the leadership of

Stephen McBride, has made significant improvements in program quality

and collegiality/ morale since his appointment as Chair

Programs

The Department of Political Science has provided a very detailed response to

the recommendations for changes to the undergraduate and graduate

program. Most of these changes are accepted by the Department. The

majority of these changes at the undergraduate level are relatively minor

housekeeping ones which help streamline access and completion

requirements. I might note that the co-op program is an important option for

undergraduate students and that efforts should be made to expand this

further. This is supported by the Department.

At the graduate level, the introduction of a PhD program was seen as an

important initiative. A number of improvements were suggested which the

Department has largely agreed to, that would standardize procedures for

comprehensive exams and better integrate MA and PhD programs

thematically. The reviewers made frequent reference, for example, to broad

fields of study in comparative politics, Canada and international relations set

within a tripartite specialization scheme involving: political economy, public

policy and governance. These fields and specializations, in the view of the

reviewers, provide a unique identity for the Department and, as such, a niche

in terms of attracting graduate students. Importantly, the Department has

agreed to give advance notice of graduate course scheduling and to examine

workloads of TA5. The funding of TAs remains an issue which presumably

the Dean of Graduate Studies will be commenting upon in the not-too-distant

0

?

future.

---

Faculty

A number of issues were raised with respect to faculty and appointments.

Most importantly, the Department was advised to specialize more and

become less comprehensive. This clearly would have an impact upon the

nature of hiring. Given the absence of any imminent retirements, bridgings

were recommended. The Dean's office is prepared to examine this in the

light of information from the three-year plan, perceived need and of course

the availability of bridging funds. The Department is committed to ensure a

better gender balance in future hiring, and in fact is seeking bridging funds to

do just that. The reviewers observed, for example, that the recent

appointments (5 of 6) favoured males. While this is true, the Department

notes in response that the equity policy extends beyond the hiring of women

to include other visible minorities. In this respect, they have done better than

the University average. The research productivity of faculty was also

questioned by the reviewers. Faculty were urged to apply to SSHRC more

frequently. This is a problem not unique to Political Science.

Two other issues deserve comment. The Department has made proposals for

a Canada Research Chair and, if successful, this would have a significant

impact on the program. And, secondly, the position of Canadian Studies

must be further clarified and a general attempt made to make it an integral

part of faculty interests. The Dean's office is firmly committed to making this

happen. ?

I*

Administration

The reviewers noted a lack of participation by faculty in university

governance. I would encourage the Department to become more actively

involved in the 'committee life' of the institution.

Lastly, the Department is to be congratulated for its efforts to liaise with high

schools, and establish better links with alumni. This addresses both ends of

the student recruitment and completion spectrum.

Tierce

JTP/jm:

.

copy:

S. McBride, Chair

---

I

d

s

cc:tt: ?

2_c=

SCUP 00-25

. ?

Response of the Department of Political Science to its External Review, 2000

The Department of Political Science welcomes the positive assessment

provided by the External Review. We appreciate the report's recognition of the

department's accomplishments since the last review. These include

strengthening and tightening the undergraduate program, consolidating and

giving greater shape to the masters program and launching a doctoral program,

and developing greater internal cohesion and a co-operative departmental

culture.

We wish to thank the reviewers for their thoughtfulness and hard work in

preparing the report. The report contains many useful suggestions which have

been fully discussed over the past few months.

For the most part the department has accepted the report's recommendations;

where it differed it has often incorporated other measures that reflect the spirit of

what the reviewers had to say.

The department found the review a most useful process and, in the context of the

three year planning cycle, will take the opportunity to revisit the report, not only

in preparing the three year plan for 2000-2003, but also when the time comes to

update that plan.

The Undergraduate Program

The department appreciated the favourable assessment that the External

• ?

Reviewers made of the Undergraduate Program:

"The department has a well-structured, comprehensive undergraduate

program. Given its faculty complement, it has the depth to offer courses in

political philosophy and political theory, research methods, Canadian politics,

comparative politics, and public policy and administration. The curriculum has a

logical structure, beginning with an introduction to political science in the first

year, introductions to the various fields of political science at the second year, a

selection of more specialised courses in the third year, and finally a series of

specialised, seminar courses in the fourth year of the program. The department

has also stipulated that developing increasingly sophisticated writing skills is

important in its program, and has agreed on common levels of writing aptitude to

be pursued at different levels in the program."

While we are mindful of the need to make continuous improvements in

what we do, we are also conscious of the need make changes incrementally since

current practices have attracted such favourable comments.

The report's principal recommendations were grounded in the need for greater

flexibility in the undergraduate programme. Specifically, the report suggested

abolishing breadth requirements at the undergraduate level. Under our current

rules, majors are required at both the Lower Division and Upper Division levels

to take courses in at least 3 Field areas. At the Lower Division, majors must take

Pol 100 (Introduction to Politics), either POL201 (Research Methods in Political

Science) or STAT 203( Introduction to Statistics for the Social Sciences), and four

other courses from at least 3 of the Fields. At the Upper Division, majors must

take 32 credit hours (8 courses) with classes in at least three of the Fields; 8 of the

32 UD credit hours (2 courses) must be at the 400 level.

---

With breadth requirements removed the External Review recommended a core

of compulsory courses -100, 201 and 210 (Introduction to Political Philosophy).

Beyond those courses students, who would of course receive academic advice,

would be able to structure their own program.

The department went part way in accepting these proposals. First, we note that

increased flexibility of choice is already being introduced by altering the

prerequisite system from one of specific course prerequisites to, instead,

requiring a certain number of credit hours prior to enrolment in Upper Division

courses. We hope that these changes will also address one of the review's other

recommendations of making upper year courses more accessible to students not

majoring in political science, but who are interested in studying politics in more

depth. Second, in response to the review the department decided to eliminate

field requirements in the upper division thus further increasing flexibility of

offerings at that level. However, it was felt desirable to retain the breadth

requirements in the lower division. We believe that requiring breadth at the

lower level and permitting flexibility, including specialisation, at the upper level

is a sound pedagogical principle. Given the desire to retain breadth in the lower

division, and concerns about the resources available to mount a compulsory

theory course with sufficient frequency, the department chose not to adopt the

review's recommendation to make political theory a required course at this time.

The department will endeavour, through advising and written materials

produced in the department, to encourage students to take some political theory

during their course of studies. Moving from a course based to an hours based

prequisite system should facilitate this. We note that Pol 210 (Introduction to

Political Philosophy) is already required for the Honours degree.

The reviewers pointed out that the department is one of the stronger

departments in the Arts Co-op program and urged us to make more of this

opportunity. We certainly intend to so. As well as increased publicity for the co-

op option the department is proposing the addition of four co-op placement

courses, a move that reflects the practice in other departments with established

co-op degrees.

In response to the review's comments about greater use of faculty advisors the

Undergraduate Chair has increased activity in this area and this practice will

continue. The review's idea of mothballing infrequently offered courses is a good

one and the Undergraduate Committee will begin identifying such courses in the

near future.

The Graduate Program

Again the department would like to thank the External Review for their

positive assessment of both the MA and PhD programs. We particularly

appreciate the sense of engagement with which the reviewers confronted some of

the issues with which the department has been grappling and their capacity to

offer constructive proposals. We note their remarks on the Ph.D.: "we are very

positive about the doctoral program, we wish to congratulate the department on

taking the very important step in setting up the program, and we want to see it

2-

---

succeed." They clearly appreciated the structure and logic of the PhD program:

S

"The Ph.D. program takes a slightly different approach [to the MA] It retains

three of the fields - - Canadian government and politics, comparative

government and politics, international relations - - and adds that within each of

these fields, the department has particular strengths for a focus on political

economy, public policy, and governance. This definition of a field structure plus

a focus or specialisation within fields is a very interesting and welcome one. It

gives the departments Ph.D. program a definite profile, one that is potentially

unique in Western Canada. The three foci within the fields permit students to

carry out research on some of the more compelling issues in political science,

under the supervision of professors with recognised reputations in these

specialisation's. If this profile can be nurtured and built upon gradually over the

coming years, the graduate program at Simon Fraser will become and

increasingly important centre of study for political science in Canada." This led

to two useful observations. First, that the MA program be harmonised with the

PhD by reducing the number of fields offered from 5 to 3 - Comparative,

International and Canadian - each of which would reflect the same focus on

issues of governance, political economy and public policy. The department has

moved to re-organise its MA program along these lines.

Under the new reduced field offerings Fields A (Political Theory) and 'E' (Public

Policy and Public Administration) will disappear as distinct graduate fields.

Most courses presently offered under the field E grouping, which already reflect

the three focus areas of governance, political economy or governance, will be

merged into other fields of study. And, of course, not all graduate courses will be

S

within the areas of focus so other courses, including courses in political theory,

will continue to be offered.

Second, the reviewers made the important recommendation that the department

begin to create a long-term strategy that identifies a few core fields of special

emphasis, rather than attempting to achieve the "comprehensiveness" to which it

currently aspires; [and] that the department in so doing, reflect on the fact that it

has already established recognised concentration in the inter-related fields of

political economy, public policy, and governance, and that these are fields that

currently offer particularly attractive opportunities in relation to both the

University itself and the community at large, and also provide a vehicle for

distinguishing the department from its counterparts elsewhere in B.C. and in

western Canada generally."

The department has moved in this direction by changing the number of fields

from 5 to three at the MA level thus harmonising both graduate programs in line

with the External Reviewers' suggestion. At both PhD and MA levels, therefore,

the department will offer three fields - Canadian, Comparative and International

Politics - and three themes -- Public Policy, Political Economy and Governance.

While all faculty members in the department can and do fit into one of the

themes, there are outstanding individuals, and small groups, whose central

interests are not captured by the themes. We wish to make it clear, therefore, that

scope for other themes to develop in the future exists. Once they have met the

test of external recognition they will be incorporated as themes in the program.

is

Response to other Graduate Program recommendations:

3

---

1]

New course proposed:

It was decided that POL 801 (currently 'Scope and Methods of Political Science')

will be retitled "Theoretical Approaches to the Study of Politics. And, also in

accordance with a recommendation from the review team, a new POL 802

"Research Design and Quantitative Analysis" will be created and will be offered

regularly. POL 802 will provide students with a review of advanced quantitative

techniques of analysis designed to be useful in their subsequent research and

analysis. Incoming graduate students will be required to take either the retitled

801, or the new 802--but will be able to do both should they so wish.

The graduate committee agreed in principle with the proposal to adopt a one- or

when possible a two-year planning cycle for graduate courses that would reflect

the matrix created by the three fields of Comparative, Canadian and

International and the three theme areas of Governance, Political Economy and

Public Policy. However, the details of how this might be done remain to be

worked out.

The committee examined the External Review's proposal to 'mothball' all

graduate courses not offered over a two year planning period but found that this

option is available only for undergraduate courses. Accordingly, the department

will keep this concern under active review and if and when it becomes possible,

infrequently offered courses will be either 'mothballed' or given some special

designation in the university calendar indicating their status as courses taught

irregularly.

The department strongly reaffirmed its current practice of communicating

to prospective students the intended schedule of courses over the relevant two

year planning cycle for each student. Such communication is currently done in

the form of an up-to-date listing of courses soon to be taught in the application

package for every potential graduate student. The department's web site is also

updated in this respect regularly so that clear, accurate information is provided

to prospective students.

The department did not adopt the External Review's proposal to eliminate the

breadth requirement that each student must take courses in at least two field

areas. A degree of breadth was felt to be a desirable and achievable goal.

Ph.D. Comprehensive Examinations:

The department agreed with the reviewers' proposal to revise current practices

with respect to the Ph.D. comprehensive examinations. Henceforth the Ph.D.

comprehensive examination process will be premised on the idea that students

should be tested on a standardised reading list of 'classics' and 'best current

practice' in each of the 3 fields of concentration. A list of readings equal to 40

books and 'book equivalents' will be drawn up almost exclusively by the faculty

members on each field committee. A very limited number of books (or book

equivalents) may be substituted for the common standardised field list at the

instigation of a supervisor or doctoral student--provided that they both concur

with the proposed substitution.

Each field committee will be asked to revise its standardised list annually.

As part of its annual review process it will be expected to solicit advice from

---

• graduate students in the program and to take such student recommendations

under advisement prior to finalising that year's reading list for the

comprehensive examination. Each reading list will feature works from political

economy, public policy and governance.

The department agreed with the External Review recommendation that

henceforth comprehensive exams should be graded as 'pass with distinction',

'pass' or 'fail'--not merely 'pass' or 'fail', and with the reviewers' proposal that the

number of (post-MA) courses required of Ph.D. students should be reduced from

6to4.

The department felt that it was inappropriate to reduce the course requirements

for MA students. They will remain unchanged: 6 courses for the field exam

option; 5 courses for the project or extended essays option; and four courses for

the thesis option.

Graduate student workload challenges:

The department acknowledges the External Reviewers' observation that our (i.e.

SFU) graduate students are given an exceptionally heavy burden when they take

on teaching assistantships (TA ships).

However, the department also recognises that the TSSU agreement and the

Dean's policy framework constitute checks on the ability of the department to

reduce or restructure this workload unilaterally. The department has

agreed to try to find informal means for reducing the TA workload burden on

each graduate student since SFU's demands do seem to be clearly out of line with

less onerous practices at other universities.

Noting that the need to reduce workload for Ph.D. students is especially great

(given the far greater pressures for early publication and professional experience),

it has agreed to explore ways to procure more graduate fellowships for the

doctoral program so as to be able to reduce the reliance on TA - ships for doctoral

student funding.

Finally, it was agreed that the department's faculty must

make still greater efforts to secure graduate funding in the form of

research assistantships to reduce the load imposed on the GF budget. Efforts in

this direction have been ongoing. There has been some recent success. For

example, two letters of intent submitted in the SSHRC (Society, Culture and

Health) competition received invitations to develop full proposals.. As well, non-

SSHRC sources like the Canadian Institutes for Health Research, Canada Housing

and Mortgage Corporation, and other agencies are being explored.

Appointments

The Appointments Committee discussed the Department's statement of hiring

priorities in the context of the External Review comments on appointments.

The department noted the External Review's identification of a pattern of hiring

(all male, last 6 hires) that would be untypical of other Canadian political science

S_

---

departments.' In response to the reviewers, and recognising the absence of junior

female faculty, the department adopted the following decision:

?

0

"The Department should make every effort, in each of the categories identified

below, to ensure that this pattern is broken. Such efforts should extend to the

definition of positions to be filled, language used in advertisements, as well as to

active solicitation of women applicants."

Other decisions related to appointments follow.

In accordance with the reviewers' recommendation that the department open

discussions with the Dean regarding bridging appointments the Department will

immediately request and pursue a bridging appointment in IPE (the area of the

next scheduled retirement in 2005.) Although the next scheduled retirement after

2005 does not occur until 2007, thereafter a sizeable proportion of the department

will retire in a relatively short period. Therefore, the Appointments Committee

will begin to review other scheduled retirements and develop a plan for

addressing them.

The department will be requesting permission to advertise for a new position in

either Development or Political Theory with the job advertisements being

constructed with a view to attracting a large pool of women candidates. Both are

long-standing areas of departmental need.

The department will identify candidates and actively seek a Canada Research

Chair in one or more the following three areas:

- Canada in the Era of Internationalization (joint with Canadian Studies)

- Public Policy

- Health Policy

With a number of other departments, Political Science is also proposing a CRC

Chair in Urban Studies.

Other issues

In an effort to become more involved in university governance, the department

will seek to identify positions that confer the advantages noted by the External

Review and try to advance candidates for them, as vacancies occur. One faculty

member has been elected to the Faculty Association Board since the review.

It will further pursue the issue of making sure the PSSU has access to reasonable

space.

The review commented favourably on the department's efforts to

establish links with the high schools and beginning better links with the alumni:

"The department should certainly continue and expand these initiatives." These

activities will be continued and, as far as resources permit, expanded.

1

the Review made a small factual error here in that one of the previous six hires was female. In

addition, some of those hires have resulted in better representation of other equity groups.

---

Canadian Studies

Finally, the reviewers

-

commented that:

"An administrative problem has prevented any kind of clear view of the links between

Political Science and Canadian Studies. The department feels strongly that the Faculty

[of Arts] has reneged on its agreement and that the department is being punished for its

efficiency. At the same time, there is willingness on the part of the support staff to be

able to manage this work, should there be a resolution of the disagreement.

It would be a pity not to come to an agreement both for Canadian Studies and for

Political Science. There are all kinds of links that would be beneficial to both: from the

Health Initiative, to co-sponsoring conferences, to the possibility of a joint

appointment."

We are delighted to report that the difficulty alluded to above has been resolved and

the Department looks forward to developing its connections with Canadian Studies.

Work has begun planning a joint conference for 2002 on the theme Global Canada, and

a proposal for a joint appointment is included in the Appointments Committee

recommendations.

In conclusion

The Department would like to emphasise how valuable the review and the self-study

process has been in confirming our sense of what we have done well; and we thank the

•

?

reviewers for their useful suggestions in areas that need improvement.

We feel that the review forms an important part of the foundation for the future

development of the department.

n

9

---

SCUP 00-25

.

Report of the

?

External Review Committee

Department of Political Science?

Simon Fraser University

.

Caroline Andrew?

William Coleman?

Denis Stairs

April 2000

---

We wish to start this report by stating that it is a report on a basically healthy department.

Since the last review, the department has developed a great deal - strengthening and tightening

its undergraduate program, consolidating and giving greater shape to the masters program and

launching a doctoral program. These programmatic improvements went on at the same time as

the department was rebuilding its internal cohesion and moving on from the past. The

overwhelming impression that we were left with was of a group of colleagues pleased with what

they had accomplished, but willing to engage in discussions about next steps. It is a department

with ambitions - it sees itself as becoming one of the best Political Science departments in the

country - and it feels that this goal can be obtained.

We have organized the report into three major areas: programs, faculty and

administrative questions. Recommendations have been placed in the body of the text, but we

have also regrouped our recommendations at the end.

Programs

1. ?

Undergraduate Programs

The department has a well-structured, comprehensive undergraduate program. Given its

faculty complement, it has the depth to offer courses in political philosophy and political theory,

research methods, Canadian politics, comparative politics, and public policy and administration.

The curriculum has a logical structure, beginning with an introduction to political science in the

first year, introductions to the various fields of political science at the second year, a selection of

more specialized courses in the third year, and finally a series of specialized, seminar courses in

the fourth year of the program. The department has also stipulated that developing increasingly

sophisticated writing skills is important in its program, and has agreed on common levels of

writing aptitude to be pursued at different levels in the program.

Over the past several years, like many other political science departments across North

America, the department has been faced with declining numbers of students enrolled in its

courses and with lower numbers of students taking political science as a major. It has responded

to this development in several ways. It has revisited its prerequisite structure and proposed

changes that will add flexibility to course selection for students. It has added courses of a more

thematic nature focussed on contemporary problems to its second year offerings. The

department has changed courses at the third year level from three credit hours to four credit

hours in response to student demand for recognition of the levels of work being demanded. It

has increased the enrolment caps in some third year courses so as to reduce the number of

students who do not get their first choice in course selections at this level. It has made all these

changes during a period when it has had to decrease the number of courses it can offer, due to

reductions in the budget for sessional instructors. We do note, however, that these reductions

also mean that students are much more likely to be taught by full-time professors in the

department than they were at the time of the last review.

As a consequence of these changes, the undergraduate program is smaller in terms of the

number of courses offered, while still comprehensive in its coverage. It is organized formally

2

---

into five tields ot'study - political theory, Canadian government and politics, comparative

government and politics, international relations, public policy/administration and local

government. At the Lower Division, students in the major program are expected to complete

POL 100 and POL 201, Research Methods in Political Science, plus 12 other credit hours of

lower division courses that cover at least three of the five fields of study. At the Upper Division,

students are required to complete an additional 32 credit hours, covering again at least three of

the five fields of study. Eight of these credit hours must be at the 400 level.

In our discussions with the department, we were told that the department members had

given some thought to whether they wished to retain five fields of study or whether the number

of these fields might be reduced. The issue of fields of study is a complex one, and one that has

different implications at the undergraduate and graduate levels. The department would have

introduced field requirements at the undergraduate level to ensure that students' programs had

breadth. In combination with stringent prerequisites, the field requirements also had the effect of

spreading students across different courses, and thus acting as an indirect control on course

enrolments in some fields.

Over the past years, with the changes noted in the size of the program, and with changes

in the definitions of the fields themselves, some of the rationale for these field requirements has

weakened. Given the changes in the courses offered, it is more difficult for students to

concentrate all of their course work in one field only. In addition, the boundaries between these

fields are not as sharply defined as they were even ten years ago. Comparativists find their work

• ?

crossing into international relations, while Canadianists take a more comparative perspective in

their research. Public policy is often seen as a subfield of Canadian politics and of comparative

politics alike. With the active research records of members of the department, this blurring of

field boundaries also is reflected in the research of many of the department's faculty. Students

too are aware of the changes in the world that are reflected in this blurring of fields and are

looking to construct programs that allow them to examine these changes in various different

ways.

For all of these reasons, we would suggest that the department consider seriously a

restructuring of their undergraduate program that removes the field requirements. We would

suggest that students continue to be required to take POL 201, so that they have sufficient

familiarity with quantitative research techniques that they can read and understand some of the

more technical literature in political science. They may also be able to carry out elementary

quantitative analysis of their own in upper level courses and research papers. In addition, we

would recommend that the department require students to take a course in political philosophy,

with POL 210, Introduction to Political Philosophy, being the most likely candidate. As was

argued in the last external review of the department, political philosophy provides a foundation

to the discipline. It is essential that students have a basic understanding of the concepts and

ideas of the principal thinkers of the western world. Such an understanding is crucial if the

students are to grasp fully the central aspects of the relations between states and the political

institutions within states and how these institutions function.

With these two foundational courses in place, we believe that the students should be

3

---

permitted to construct a program of courses that meets their particular interests and allows them

to follow their own unique paths in discovering the discipline. The department has an able

department assistant who can advise students about the relationships between courses. Many

departments also ask one or two of their faculty members to act as undergraduate advisers.

These faculty members assist students in constructing programs of study that best meet their

needs. We suggest that the department consider whether such faculty advisers might also be a

useful complement to their services to students. Certainly, having faculty advisers increases the

face to face contact between Major students and faculty members.

With such counselling and these two required foundational courses, we are confident that

students would graduate with an excellent political science degree. Their education in political

science would equip them well for postgraduate study if they wish or for the various careers

most often sought by students. In addition, students may be able to finish their degree programs

more promptly because they need not wait for a given course to be offered in a particular field of

study. Such a change might also reduce part of the demand for directed reading courses at the

undergraduate level.

We suggest two final steps for fine-tuning the undergraduate program. We recommend

that the department "mothball" any course in its calendar that it does not plan to offer over the

next two years covered by the next university calendar. Retaining courses on the books that are

not going to be offered is not only false advertising, but also invariably going to be a matter

causing frustration among undergraduate students. Such frustration is needless and should be

avoided in the future. In addition, we recommend that the department consider how its upper

year courses might be made more accessible to serious students interested in Political Science,

but who do not have the necessary prerequisites. Some departments in the country are making

some or all of their third year courses open to anyone who has taken the equivalent of POL 100.

Often students at the 300 or 400 level in other programs will have the background and the skills

to take upper year courses in political science. The interchanges that will take place with

Political Science Majors in these courses should also enrich the education of all the students

concerned. Of course, such a step might also help raise enrolments in political science courses.

Therefore, our recommendations for the undergraduate program are as follows:

a)

that the department seriously consider removing the field requirements;

b)

that students continue to be required to take POL 201;

C) ?

that students be required to take a course in political philosophy;

d)

that the department consider whether faculty advisers might also be a useful complement

to their services to students;

e)

that the department "mothball" any course in its calendar that it does not plan to offer

over the next two years covered by the next university calendar;

f)

that the department consider how upper year courses might be made more accessible to

students not majoring in political science, but interested in studying politics in more

depth.

4

?

S

---

2.

?

Graduate Programs

9 ?

2.1

?

Introduction

The department continues to operate with the field structure at the MA level. The Ph.D.

program takes a slightly different approach. It retains three of the fields - - Canadian

government and politics, comparative government and politics, international relations - - and

adds that within each of these fields, the department has particular strengths for a focus on

political economy, public policy, and governance. This definition of a field structure plus a

focus or specialization within fields is a very interesting and welcome one. It gives the

department's Ph.D. program a definite profile, one that is potentially unique in Western Canada.

The three foci within the fields permit students to carry out research on some of the more

compelling issues in political science, under the supervision of professors with recognized

reputations in these specializations. If this profile can be nurtured and built upon gradually over

the coming years, the graduate program at Simon Fraser will become and increasingly important

centre of study for political science in Canada.

MA and Ph.D. students study from a common roster of courses. At present, this roster is

expected to respond to the needs of the MA program to cover five fields of study and of the

Ph.D. program to cover three of these five fields, with some emphasis on political economy,

public policy and governance. These expectations are very demanding ones to fill for a Ph.D.

program that will probably have two to three students per year taking courses and a MA program

• ?

that will have an additional 10-15 students taking close to a full set of courses. For these

reasons, we would recommend that the department give some consideration to harmonizing the

field arrangements for the MA and Ph.D. programs. Hence, the MA program would have three

fields - - Canadian, comparative and international relations - - with each of these having a

particular emphasis on political economy, public policy and governance. With such a change,

then, one of the department's five fields, public policy/administration/urban politics, would be

integrated into these three fields.

The issue then arises about political theory as a field of study at the graduate level. In its

submission to us and in the various comments given to us in our interviews with the department,

it became clear that the department considers itself under-staffed in the area of political theory.

It has faculty members who are quite competent to teach political philosophy and political theory

at the undergraduate level, but this field is not a primary area of research for any member of the

faculty. Without having a faculty member with this area as primary area of research, it does not

make sense to offer political theory as a graduate field. Such a conclusion does not mean that

political theory courses cannot be offered as elective courses at the graduate level. We note that

the department has offered consistently POL 814 , Normative Political Theory, a cross-listed

undergraduate course, over the past several years and plans to offer it each of the next three

years. We also observe that the core course at the graduate level in political theory, POL 812,

Political Theory, was last offered in the fall semester of 1996 and is not planned to be offered

over the next three years. Under such conditions, it is evident that political theory is not really

an academic field at the graduate level equal in any sense to the three discussed above.

fl"

---

MA students are currently expected to take POL 801, The Scope and Methods of

Political Science. This course provides students with some introduction to issues in the

philosophy of social science, to competing theoretical paradigms, and to some aspects of

research methods. In our discussion with the Ph.D. students, we learned that they believed that

they needed more instruction in research methods and research design as a preparation not only

for preparing a dissertation proposal, but also for defining research projects once they had

completed the doctorate. We also note that the department has a faculty complement that is

relatively rich in its knowledge of issues related to research methods and research design.

Accordingly, we recommend that POL 801 be changed slightly to focus principally on

the philosophy of social science and on introducing students to major theoretical paradigms in

the discipline. Such a change would compensate, in part, for not having political theory

available as a field at the MA level. We also recommend that the department create a new

course on research methods and research design in political science. This course should be

required of all Ph.D. students and be available to MA students under conditions that we note

below.

With these recommendations about field structure and foundation courses, we turn now

to look specifically at each of the MA and the Ph.D. programs.

2.2 The MA Program

The large majority of MA students are seeking to finish their degree in one calendar year

or in four semesters, given the lack of graduate courses available in the summer semester. For

these reasons, we believe that the department should be working on a one-year planning cycle

for the scheduling of graduate courses. In the fall and winter semesters, the department should

commit itself to offering:

POL

801, Scope and Methods of Political Science

New course on research methods and research design

Two international relations courses, with one of these normally focussing on

international political economy

Two Canadian politics courses, with one of these normally focussing on political

economy or public policy

Two Comparative politics course, with one of these normally focussing on political

economy or public policy.

These courses would be the department's minimum annual commitment. Other courses

would also be offered depending on faculty availability and interests.

This one-year planning cycle should be clearly advertised to students in the calendar and

in all material that is sent to them. Any courses that would not be part of this one-year planning

cycle in any way over the two year period of the next calendar should be "mothballed". Given

the short stay of MA students in the department and the short period in which Ph.D. students are

taking courses, it is essential that these students have a clear idea of what courses will be

6

---

available to them. Students at the MA level, in particular, choose programs often based on such

availability and it is important that their expectations and the department's offerings match.

If this commitment on courses is agreed to by the department, then we also believe that it

is unnecessary to stipulate that students take courses in two fields of study defined by the

department. The department will not be, offering sufficient courses in any given field that

students can concentrate all of their efforts in one field only. Virtually by definition, they will

take courses in more than one field. By removing the field constraint, the department would free

students to design a MA program that is as close to their personal interests as possible. The

student's supervisory committee could counsel the students on course selection that will satisfy

best their respective interests.

We also note that students in the MA program have diverse career objectives. Some

hope to go to study for a Ph.D., while the majority probably plan to move into non-academic

careers. For these reasons, we suggest that the department consider requiring MA students to

take one of POL 801 or the proposed new research methods and research design course. In our

experience, the latter type of course is often used by students as a springboard to policy analyst

jobs in the public, voluntary, or private sectors. Given the diverse interests of MA students,

giving them a choice between these two courses as foundations for their study might increase

interest further in the program. It would also permit the department to build more directly on its

obvious strengths in the quantitative and qualitative methods areas, and in research design.

2.3

?

The Ph.D. Program

In their submission to the external review, the Ph.D. students identified three areas of

concern, comprehensive examinations, mentorship, and program funding. Each of these areas is

important and we will use these as a springboard for our discussion of the doctoral program. We

are well aware that the program is new and that all new programs will have their "teething"

problems. We see our task as one of helping with some of these problems. As noted, above, we

are very positive about the doctoral program, we wish to congratulate the department on taking

the very important step in setting up the program, and we want to see it succeed.

Comprehensive Examinations

It is essential that the department define clearly for itself and its doctoral students what is

the purpose of these examinations. As one looks across the social science disciplines, one finds

two somewhat distinct purposes. Some departments see the comprehensive examinations to be a

means for students to define two or three, usually rather specialized, research fields that will be

central to their dissertation research. In this approach, the students usually prepare a reading list

for each field, and then write examinations, normally followed by an oral defence of their

answers. Other departments see the comprehensive examinations as a means for pushing

students to obtain a wide grounding in the core literature in two or three fields of their discipline

and to thinking about how this literature might be used synthetically to investigate fundamental

questions. In this approach, the examinations are used to assess the students' abilities to address

• ?

intelligently and comprehensively general types of questions that are of perennial interest in the

7

---

given field. In this second approach, directed readings composed of the classics and the "best

practice

S '

works in the field are prepared by faculty members who work in that field. These

reading lists are normally limited to 25 or 30 such core works.

?

0

In our discussion with faculty and students, it was unclear which of these

two

approaches

was favoured by the department. Our investigation would suggest that the department was

closer to the second approach in its thinking and this approach is certainly the most common one

used in political science in North America. Certainly, the questions posed to students in the

examinations that have occurred to date are written in a style that reflects this second approach.

We also learned, however, that the students were being asked to prepare reading lists themselves,

that the directions for preparing these lists varied from one supervisory committee to another,

and that the resulting lists varied considerably in length. Moreover, sometimes the list at issue

came closer to a list that might be associated with the first approach to comprehensives, rather

than the second approach. We also learned that having students prepare the lists was a time-

consuming process so that all of the Ph.D. students were taking comprehensive examinations

later than expected.

We recommend strongly that the department define clearly which of the two approaches

to comprehensive examinations it wishes to adopt. If it decides to follow the second approach,

which is the disciplinary norm in Canada and the US, then several additional steps need to be

taken.

The Faculty members in the disciplinary field groups- - Canadian government and

politics, Comparative government and politics, international relations - - should assume

responsibility for preparing lists of classic texts and examples of "best practice" work in

their fields. These lists might be revised every two years. These lists should also include

major works in political economy, public policy, and governance issues in the given

field.

The respective supervisor of the given doctoral student should meet regularly with the

student to discuss issues and questions arising from the student's study of the reading

guide.

The questions of the comprehensive examinations should be designed to test students'

ability to wrestle with central problems in the field, by synthesizing and drawing from the

leading thinkers and works.

The department should adopt a common grading scheme for all of the comprehensive

examinations and a common procedure for holding oral defences of the written

examinations. In devising a grading scheme, the department might also give

consideration to defining a level of performance in the examinations that would merit a

"pass with distinction". Such recognition of superior performance is important and could

be a factor in the later hiring of a student for an academic position.

The department appears to expect students to complete the comprehensive examinations

before the end of two years in the programme. Given the time required for preparing reading

lists, the time spent working at teaching assistant duties at Simon Fraser (time well above the

national norm), and the requirement that Ph.D. students take 30 credit hours of courses beyond

0

---

*

?

the MA. meeting this expectation is probably unrealistic. Such a result is unfortunate, however,

because it means, in our view, that the number of years taken to complete a Ph.D. may be

prolonged beyond what it should be. We believe that most departments of political science in

Canada encourage students to try to finish their programs in four years, albeit with mixed

success. Under the present arrangements at SFIJ, a four-year completion time would seem to be

close to impossible. The changes suggested above to the comprehensive examinations should

assist somewhat, but we will return this issue when we discuss funding arrangements below.

Mentorship

In digesting doctoral students's concerns in this area, there are two distinct, but related,

issues we would like to address: preparation for carrying out longer-term research projects and

publishing by students. With respect to the first of these, we believe that having students take

the new proposed course on research methods and research design will address part of the

students' concerns. They will gain a systematic introduction to issues related to research design

that will not only lead to more carefully designated doctoral proposals, but also to proposals that

are researchable and doable within a two-year frame. If the experience gained in this course is

coupled to associating students with research projects of faculty members, we are confident that

the preparation the students identified as necessary will be available to them.

The timing of student publishing is a complex issue. We believe strongly that students

should not be distracted by demands to publish before they have completed their comprehensive

• ?

examinations, and prepared and defended a dissertation proposal. We are uniformly of the view

that having students present papers at academic conferences before they are embarked on

programs of primary research is largely a waste of time. The papers presented are often not very

interesting and the student gets distracted from the tasks at hand: completing their

comprehensives and preparing and defending a doctoral proposal. Once these tasks are

completed, however, the students' supervisors and supervisory committee members should look

for ways to assist students to begin a publishing program. These ways might come through

participation in a larger research project being carried out in the department, through a faculty

member receiving an invitation to prepare a book chapter or a conference paper and then

associating the student in the writing of same, or through assisting students to publish some

early, interesting results from their dissertation research. Any of these kinds of steps will

provide the mentoring for publication that is increasingly essential for doctoral students who are

planning academic careers.

Student Funding

In applying for establishing a Ph.D. program, the department argued that it could make

this change without an increase in funding for graduate students. It would reduce enrolments in

the MA program slightly and thus be able to fund doctoral students. These expectations might

have been realistic at the time that the proposal was made, but appear to be less so today. In

addition, since part of graduate student funding (graduate fellowships) is contingent on the

number of students enrolled in graduate programs, there is some incentive to increase numbers

of students overall so as to ensure adequate numbers of graduate fellowships for both MA and

9

---

Ph.D. students. In our discussions with MA and Ph.D. students, we detected a certain discontent

with funding arrangements. Ph.D. students occasionally resented MA students receiving

graduate fellowships, particularly if these were not embarked on a thesis, and MA students

believed that there were fewer teaching assistantships and graduate student fellowships available

to them as a result of the Ph.D. program. These feelings are unfortunate and, if prolonged, may

lead to a decline in collegiality among graduate students.

Part of the pressure here comes from the very strong requirements and pressure placed on

the doctoral students. In their first two years in the program, they are expected to complete 30

credit hours of classes. This requirement is well above the Canadian norm, which we understand

to be one additional year of course work after the MA, usually including 6 semester-length

courses taken over their first two semesters in the program. They are also expected to complete

the comprehensive examinations in their second year. Finally, they are almost all receiving a

mix of graduate fellowship and teaching assistantships support during this period. We note that

a student acting as a TA is only able to take two courses per semester. In short, the combination

of program requirements plus funding arrangements virtually ensures that the doctoral program

is going to take well beyond four years to complete.

There would appear to be two steps to address these problems.

1.

The department could ask the university to increase the number of graduate fellowships

or cognate support assigned to it. This increase should be given to Ph.D. students so that

in their first year at least, they have no TA duties. Such a step would begin to make it

more possible for Ph.D. students to complete course and comprehensive examination

requirements in their first two years in the program.

2.

If this change in funding is not possible, then the department may need to take alternative

steps. It should reduce the course requirements for doctoral students to a point where

they can be completed in their first two semesters in the program. It should allocate

graduate fellowships to Ph.D. students in their first two semesters. If such an allocation

is going to deprive MA students of graduate fellowships, then perhaps it should increase

its graduate student intake by four or eight students to secure the graduate fellowships it

needs to support MA students adequately as well.

3.

If teaching assistantships are going to be a primary means of financial support for MA

students and if MA students are going to be regularly working about 200 hours or so per

semester as teaching assistants, then the department might consider whether it is

advisable to reduce the course requirements for MA students in the project or essay

options from five courses to four. The standard completion time for non-thesis MA

degrees in political science in Canada is now one calendar year. Given that MA students

work such a large number of hours as TAs and given that the department does not

normally offer graduate courses in the summer semester (our information shows a course

last being offered in the summer of 1997, with none planned in the summer for 2000,

2001 or 2002), a one-year program is likely possible only for students who receive at

least one graduate fellowship. Such a situation may place the department in a weak

position in the national "market" of MA programs in Political Science.

10

---

Conclusion

We would like to reiterate that we found the graduate programs at Simon Fraser to be

strong. We believe that they have gained a place of some importance in the Canadian political

science community and that they could grow in importance over the medium term. It is

important to remember that these programs are operating in a national market place, and not just

in British Columbia. Students will compare all aspects of Simon Fraser's programs with those

elsewhere in Canada in deciding whether to apply and whether to accept offers of admission.

The introduction of the Ph.D. program has caused some perturbations in the MA program and

the Ph.D. program itself will continue to face growing pains as it moves its first cohorts of

students through the successive phases of doctoral work.

We found the administrative support for these programs to be effective. The graduate

secretary has a good sense of her job. The Graduate Committee has student representation and

has a clear sense of its mandate and responsibilities. The department compensates the chair of

this committee with a one course teaching release in a given two year period. The field

committees are in place and seem well positioned to assume the greater role in the

comprehensive examinations process that we recommend. They may need to have somewhat

more flexible memberships to ensure that the three foci of concern - - political economy, public

policy, governance - - are integrated into discussions of course design and reading lists for

comprehensive examinations. With adequate administrative arrangements, we are confident that

the graduate programs will continue to be strong and will be adapted in ways to improve further

•

?

the education they provide to students.

Our recommendations for the graduate programs are as follows:

g)

that the department give some consideration to harmonizing the field arrangements for

the MA and the Ph.D. programs. Hence, the MA program would have three fields -

Canadian, comparative and international relations - with each of these having a particular

emphasis on political economy, public policy and governance;

h)

that POL 801 be changed slightly to focus principally on the philosophy of social science

and on introducing students to major theoretical paradigms in the discipline;

i)

that the department create a new course on research methods and research design in

political science. This course should be required of all Ph.D. students and be available to

MA students under several conditions;

j)

that the department work on a one-year planning cycle for the scheduling of graduate

courses;

k)

that the department not require students to take courses in two fields of study defined by

the department;

• ?

I) ?

that the department consider requiring MA students to take one of POL 801 or the

11

---

proposed new research methods and research desi

g n course.

M)

?

that the department define clearly which of the two approaches to comprehensive

?

S

examinations it wishes to adopt.

H.

?

Faculty

3. ?

General - Departmental "Culture" and Related Matters

The Review Committee was very impressed by the collegial atmosphere that has become

the most immediately visible feature of the department's current political culture. This is

particularly noteworthy because of the very deep divisions that typified the conduct of its

internal affairs during its early years as an independent academic unit. So far as we can

determine, these divisions have now been almost entirely overcome. This is doubtless the result

in part of changes in academic personnel, several of the original members having retired, and a

number of new scholars having been brought, successfully and amiably, into the faculty ranks.

It is the consequence also, however, of the extremely effective leadership of the current Chair,

whose performance in office seems to be universally respected and admired by his colleagues.

His management of the department's affairs is regarded as fair, sensitive, and service-oriented,

and he is clearly adept (among other things) at the task of ensuring that issues and problems are

expeditiously resolved, so that they do not have the time to become destructively controversial.

The consequence overall is that - for faculty, staff and students alike - the department is now

a happy, comfortable and welcoming place in which to work. So much is this the case, and so

enjoyable is the experience (especially when compared with the one that resulted from the much

more combative

milieu

that prevailed a decade ago), that the faculty are now deeply and

collectively committed to the values and practices associated with tolerance and compromise,

which they have come to see as crucial to the maintenance of a constructive and congenial

working environment.

This in itself is "good news," and no experienced member of a university will

underestimate the importance of this sort of collegiality to the productive conduct of the

academic enterprise. The Committee, moreover, is acutely aware that meddling in matters of

this kind "from the outside" can sometimes have damaging effects. Keeping bulls out of china

shops and not trying to fix things that "ain't broke" are maxims whose longevity is well-

deserved.

Nonetheless, the ingredients of the department's culture that we have just described may

be having some practical consequences for "policy-making" that warrant a closer look. In

particular, the Department has been somewhat reluctant to define (at least explicitly) core areas

of specialization, or disciplinary "niches," around which it can focus its future development over

the longer term. Its declared ambition is to be "comprehensive." In consequence, its approach

to faculty recruitment is to identify geographical areas or thematic fields that are not already

covered by its existing faculty, to regard these as lamentable gaps in its ability to deliver

"political science" across the board, and hence to define its vacancies with a view to making sure

the gaps themselves are filled. All of this is pursued in a self-conscious spirit of pragmatic give-

12

---

and-take - a spirit that the department's members themselves describe as "intellectual

pluralism."

While we sympathize with the underlying intent of this approach, and while we certainly

think the department's colle

g

ial environment should continue to be carefully nurtured, we

nonetheless wish to make two observations. The first is that we think it highly improbable that

the department can achieve the kind of comprehensiveness it seems to have in mind within the

foreseeable future. It may well be, in fact, that only the departments at the University of Toronto

and York (both of which now have well over 50 faculty members) can hope in the Canadian

context to achieve that sort of objective. If we are right in this, then there is a case for saying

that other departments, including the department at Simon Fraser, are well advised to think in

more strategically selective terms as they manage their evolution over the long haul.

Our second observation is that, while some members of the department - given its

difficult history - may experience a cold chill at the thought of having to reach a consensus on

such sensitive and potentially contentious matters, their concern may not be as well-founded as

they appear to think. This is partly because the collegiality that they have successfully

engendered is now much more deeply rooted than they realize, partly because in current

circumstances they have both the time and the opportunity to work the problem through, and

partly because they are half-there already. It may be worth commenting briefly on each of these

in turn.

With regard to the first, it became apparent during the course of our visit that the sense

. ?

that the department's pleasant atmosphere might be fragile, and hence unable to withstand the

pressures that would come from trying to reach a consensus on developmental priorities, was

unevenly distributed. In particular, the older hands - with their memories of past events still

very much on their minds - tended to be much more concerned about this than the new arrivals,

who were relatively free of this sort of anxiety and who were clearly willing to work towards

identifying a clear (and necessarily selective) strategic direction, even if that meant that their

own fields of specialization were not among the ones that would be given the strongest emphasis

in future recruitment. The more we probed into this general question, the more we became

convinced that the department is stronger in this respect than it thinks, and that it can manage

such a debate in accommodative style.

Secondly, it seems to us that the time is now very opportune for initiating precisely this

kind of discussion. As we understand it, the department is expected to launch a new three-year

plan by December, and this could well be the occasion for broaching the strategic question in at

least a preliminary way. In addition, several retirements are expected, not immediately, but in a

grouping that will materialize at the end of the next three or four years. This means that a

number of vacancies will open up at that time, thereby making it possible to engage in some

strategic decision-making under conditions in which hiring priorities are likely to be much easier

to identify than they have been in the past. At the same time, in order to avoid there being

excessive turnover in a single year, we think it may be wise to make some "bridge

appointments" in advance - an arrangement that we believe would contribute significantly to

•

?

easing the stresses involved and to ensuring that newcomers are effectively "socialized" into the

13

---

department's constructive way of doing things. Our understanding is that bridging appointments

of this kind would be sympathetically considered by the administration, assuming that they were

appropriately imbedded in a persuasive developmental program.

Finally, we think it may be useful for the department to recognize that, while it has been

thinking of its future evolution in "comprehensive" terms, in reality it has already developed a

de

facto specialization - and with it an external "image" among political scientists and others

elsewhere in the country - in the three fields of political economy, public policy, and

governance. These specializations (which in practice are often inter-related) seem to have

become especially pertinent, even now, to the decisions of many of the students who have come

to the department to do graduate work (not least among them those whose origins are "out of

province"). We are not surprised that this is so, and it seems to us that the pattern is one upon

which the department could easily - and appropriately - build in planning its future. Among

other things, it would provide a distinctive focus that would differentiate the department from its

counterparts in other universities in western Canada, and we think also that it would provide an

impressive array of collaborative opportunities in cooperation with governmental and other

agencies. The activities of the Canadian Health Research Group provide promising examples of

the

genre,

as does the Institute of Governance Studies, and if it eventually becomes possible to

act on Dean Pierce's proposal for a program leading to the degree of Master of Public Policy,

this would be a natural, and potentially a very exciting, "fit."

In offering these observations, of course, we are mindful of the discussion within the

department on the matter of whether the next faculty appointment ought to be in "political

theory" or "political development." Like the previous External Review Committee, we take the

position that "political theory" is a foundational field within the discipline of Political Science,

?

40

and that every serious student of the subject should be exposed to it. This view is reflected in

our recommendation earlier in this report that, while the field requirements be removed from the

undergraduate program, all students be required nonetheless to take a course in political

philosophy (as well as in basic quantitative methods). In practice, political theory is already

being taught very well in the department, although not by someone who will admit to being a

specialist in the field. While we recognize that this is a matter upon which the department has

specifically requested our advice, we have concluded after much careful discussion that the

problem is one that the department itself will have to resolve. This is because the issue is central

to the department's task of defining its own curricular philosophy, and that task cannot be

delegated to outsiders. We have therefore chosen in this case not to make a recommendation of

our own.

Taken together, these general observations lead us to the following conclusions and

recommendations:

(n)

that the department and its Chair should be warmly congratulated for their

success in creating an unusually constructive and congenial academic environment;

(o)

that the department, while taking reasonable care to maintain the traditions

of tolerance and compromise that it has established, begin to create a

14

---

long-term strategy that identifies a few core fields of special emphasis. rather

. ?

than attempting to achieve the "comprehensiveness" to which it currently

aspires;

(p)

that the department, in so doing, reflect on the fact that it has already

established a widely-recognized concentration in the inter-related fields

of political economy, public policy, and governance, and that these are

fields that currently offer particularly attractive opportunities in relation

to both the University itself and the community at large, and also provide

a vehicle for distinguishing the department from its counterparts elsewhere

in B.C. and in western Canada generally; and

(q)

that the department, in conjunction with the Dean, give very careful thought to

the advantages that might ensue from making some "bridge appointments"

in the next few years, in order to facilitate the transitions that will

inevitably result from the forthcoming retirement of a cohort of the

department's most senior faculty members;

The foregoing comments are obviously general and "strategic". In response to some of

the more specific issues raised in our terms of reference under the "Faculty" heading, we offer

(somewhat more briefly) the following comments:

4.

?

Size and Background of the Facult

y

Complement

On the basis of the information at our disposal, it is difficult to assess the size of the

Political Science department relatively to other comparable departments at Simon Fraser,

although we know that some departments there, as in other universities, are considerably larger

(e.g., English and Psychology). In general, however, it does not seem to us that the department

is unduly disadvantaged from the workload point of view. On the other hand, from the

"discipline" point of view it is somewhat smaller than most of its counterparts in major

universities elsewhere. It has a faculty complement of 17 FTEs. As a rough comparative

indicator ("rough" because the data may be imperfect), an examination of the lists of faculty

members by department in the 1998

Directory of Political Scientists in Canada

indicates that the

complements of selected other anglophone (or bilingual, in the case of Ottawa) Canadian

departments are approximately as follows: Alberta - 26; Calgary - 26; Carleton - 27; Dalhousie

-

15;

Manitoba - 19; McGill - 22; McMaster - 19; Memorial - 11; Ottawa - 20; Queen's - 21;

Saskatchewan - 20; Toronto -

55;

Victoria - 13; Western Ontario - 23; Wilfrid Laurier - 12;

Windsor - 14; York - 51. The utility of these figures is obviously limited in the absence of data

on student enrolments, and the like, and not all of the departments on the list offer the Ph.D.

Nonetheless, they provide at least some measure of the Simon Fraser department's relative

position in quantitative terms. Clearly it is at the smaller end of the range, and by national

standards, if its complement were to decline further, it would certainly begin to lose the

minimum "critical mass" normally expected of departments offering higher graduate degrees.

This reinforces once again the case for developing a measure of specialization, rather than

• ?

attempting to cover the full array of sub-disciplinary fields.

15

---

5. ?

Teaching, Research and Service Contributions

?

-

The enthusiastic reactions of the students whom we interviewed, together

with

the

teaching evaluations that were made available to us, both indicate that the department as a whole

is handling its teaching responsibilities in effective and conscientious style, and we have nothing

to add here to our observations above under the heading of "Programs". Some members of the

department are also engaged in very innovative experiments in distance education and in the use

of computers for instructional purposes.

The distribution of teaching workloads naturally varies to some extent from one

professor to the next, depending on the popularity of the field in question, but this is normal, and

the pattern at Simon Fraser is very similar to the ones that are currently evident in other

Canadian universities. The Chair of the department is visibly sensitive to the need to deal with

the workload problem as equitably as possible, and his colleagues understand and accept that

some degree of variation from one professor and field to the next is unavoidable. The standard

requirement of a four-course load is somewhat lighter, perhaps, than it would be in counterpart

departments in other institutions of comparable size, where the equivalent of five such courses is

frequently expected.

The research performance of the department is certainly very creditable, and the faculty

as a whole has had an impressively productive track record. The results overall may well fall

above the national mean. On the other hand, there is some concern that participation- and

success-rates in SSHRCC competitions have not been as high as they have been in some other

political science departments, even taking the Council's resource-deficiencies fully into account.

Our sense, however, is that serious efforts are being made to rectify the problem (if "problem" it

be), and that the department is thinking about its resource requirements for research purposes in

increasingly entrepreneurial style. It is possible that some of its difficulties with SSHRCC

adjudications result from the fact that many of its publications appear in outlets other than peer-

reviewed journals, and it might be helpful over the longer haul if a greater proportion of the

manuscripts produced in the department were submitted to the periodicals that academics

(rightly or wrongly) appear to accept as vehicles for disseminating work of the highest quality.

The department's service contributions to the discipline at large have been excellent. It is

the home of "PolCan" - the e-mail communications centre for the Canadian Political Science

Association - and in that capacity has played an indispensable (and very high profile) role in

the day-to-day work of political scientists and others all across the country and even abroad. The

department's members have been very active in the Canadian Political Science Association, and

have been leading players in its provincial counterpart in British Columbia.

While on the subject of "service," however, our impression is that the participation of the

department's faculty in the affairs of the University as a whole is rather less extensive than it

would be in many other institutions. Some individuals have been extremely active over many

years, and as "university citizens" appear to be well-known to the larger Simon Fraser

community. Having said that, however, our sense is that the department as a whole has been

heavily focused (perhaps understandably) on its own internal affairs, and that it has not been a

16

---

particularly visible player on the larger University scene. At one level, it could be argued that

?

S

?

?

this ?

is a matter of having one's priorities straight! But at another, it seems to us that it may be

having the effect of depriving the department of useful information about what other

departments are doing, and about the kinds of opportunities that activities elsewhere on the

campus may be generating. It could also be leaving the department somewhat unaware of

performance standards, teaching practices, and the like that prevail in the other units with which

it would normally be compared. We have no idea whether such standards are higher, lower, the

same, or different, but we certainly think it to be in the general departmental interest to have its

ears "close to the ground" on these and other matters.

6.

?

Gender Balance

While still on the matter of the department's faculty, we are somewhat concerned to note

that not one woman was included among the last six "hires" into the ranks of the department's

faculty. The department is very much aware that this is the case, and it reports that considerable

effort was made to identify suitable female candidates in each instance, but that for various

reasons the appointments have always gone to a male in the end. While we understand that the

circumstances bearing on individual academic appointments are always in some measure unique,

we note that the pattern as a whole is NOT one that would be common to other political science

departments in Canada over the past decade. In this discipline, as in others, very intensive

initiatives are now routinely taken to promote the objective of achieving a reasonable balance of

male and female faculty members over the longer run. We think the department should identify

this as a priority in responding to the appointment opportunities that will be opening up over the

next few years.

In the light of these various observations on teaching, research and service contributions,

we add the following three substantive recommendations to our list:

(r)

that the department continue its efforts to improve its record in obtaining

various categories of SSHRCC award, and that in so doing it consider

what options it may have for increasing the proportion of its publications

that appear in peer-reviewed academic outlets;

(s)

that it seek to play a somewhat more active role in University governance, with a

view to keeping fully abreast of the standards, practices and expectations

that prevail in cognate departments (and in administrative offices) elsewhere on the

campus, and to making sure that it is kept adequately aware of opportunities for

collaborative research, teaching, and community service initiatives as they arise; and

(t)

that it give considerable priority in its future faculty recruitment drives to the

need to develop a more reasonable balance of male and female faculty members in the

department over the longer term.

.

?

17

---

III

?

Administrative Questions

7.

Teaching Evaluation Process

As we have already indicated, we were impressed by the department's handling of its

teaching responsibilities, and by its commitment to the teaching function. The students with

whom we discussed the matter at both the graduate and undergraduate levels appeared to be very

enthusiastic about the way in which they were being treated, and reported that their professors

are both accessible and helpful. So far as we can determine, the teaching evaluation instruments

are well-designed and responsibly administered.

8.

Dissemination of Scholarly Activity within the Department

The department now has a speakers series and our sense is that scholarly communication

has improved quite significantly in tandem with the general development of a much more

collegial atmosphere. Many of the department's publications are the product of collaboration

among various combinations of its members, and this, too, is an indicator of a healthy and

mutually supportive scholarly environment.

9.

Student Space

On the question of resources, the strongest claim that was made to us came from the

undergraduate students who would like a "room of their own." They argued that a lounge would

give them a place to bring students together and help create a sense of identity. This seemed to

us a very sensible suggestion, and that it would be a shame not to support the efforts of the

students.

10.

Connections with Canadian Studies

An administrative problem has prevented any kind of clear view of the links between

Political Science and Canadian Studies. The department feels strongly that the Faculty has

reneged on its agreement and that the department is being punished for its efficiency. At the

same time, there is a willingness on the part of the support staff to be able to manage this work,

should there be a resolution of the disagreement.

It would be a pity not to come to an agreement both for Canadian Studies and for

Political Science. There are all kinds of links that would be beneficial to both: from the Health

Initiative, to co-sponsoring conferences, to the possibility of a joint appointment.

11.

Relations with alumni

Once again, the department is beginning to build a data base from which it could

increasingly build contact with alumni. The department staff have begun this task with

enthusiasm, and we encourage the department to continue its activities.

S

18

?

S

---

1 2. ?

Relations with the Community

The department has begun some initiatives of linking to the high schools, under the able

organization of the departmental administrator. This is clearly an area that she wants to develop,

and this should be encouraged, both with high schools and with colleges. The objective of this

activity should be seen as creating a base, on the long term, of support for political science and

for the social sciences in general.

The Co-op program is also another very important link between the University and the

community. The number of Political Science students in the co-op option was far higher than

the departmental statistics had first led us to believe. Indeed, Political Science is one of the

stronger units within the Arts Faculty Co-op Program. We feel that the department should make

more of the co-op program when describing itself to its student population. The program

appears to have put together very interesting possibilities of co-op placements for students in

Political Science - across the public, non-profit and market sectors. Students who have followed

the co-op route should be included in the liaison activities with the high schools and colleges.

The Health Initiative can also be included in initiatives that relate to the community. A

wide variety of partners have indicated interest in being connected to the project, and this

naturally enhances community-university relations. This is of course also an interesting

initiative in terms of creating research teams within the department and, as such, an initiative

that we feel should continue.

These administrative issues led to the following recommendations:

(u)

that the department explore all possible channels to find "space" for the undergraduate

students.

(v)

that the department, and particularly the departmental administration, should be

congratulated for their initiatives in linking the department to the high schools and

beginning better links to the alumni. The department should certainly continue and

expand these initiatives.

For the purpose of clarity, we have drawn together our recommendations which are as

follows:

Programs

Undergraduate:

(a)

that the department seriously consider removing the field requirements;

(b)

that students continue to be required to take

POL

201;

(c)

that students be required to take a course in political philosophy;

(d)

that the department consider whether faculty advisers might also be a useful complement

to their services to students;

• ?

(e) ?

that the department "mothball" any course in its calendar that it does not plan to offer

19

---

over the next two years covered by the next university calendar;

(f)

that the department consider how courses at the 300 level might be made more accessible

to students not majoring in political science, but interested in studying politics in more

depth.

Graduate:

(g)

that the department give some consideration to harmonizing the field arrangements for

the MA and the Ph.D. programs. The MA program would thus have three fields -

Canadian, comparative and international relations - with each of these having a particular

emphasis on political economy, public policy and governance;

(h)

that POL 801 be changed slightly to focus principally on the philosophy of social science

and on introducing students to major theoretical paradigms in the discipline;

(i)

that the department create a new course on research methods and research design in

political science. This course should be required of all Ph.D. students and be available to

MA students under several conditions;

U)

?

that the department work on a one-year planning cycle for the scheduling of graduate

courses;

(k) ?

that the department not require students to take courses in two fields of study defined by

the department;

(1) ?

that the department consider requiring MA students to take one of POL 801 or the

proposed new research methods and research design course.

(m)

that the department define clearly which of the two approaches to comprehensive

examinations it wishes to adopts.

Faculty:

?

0

Departmental Culture

(n)

that the department and its Chair should be warmly congratulated for their

success in creating an unusually constructive and congenial academic environment;

(o)

that the department, while taking reasonable care to maintain the traditions

of tolerance and compromise that it has established, begin to create a

long-term strategy that identifies a few core fields of special emphasis, rather

than attempting to achieve the "comprehensiveness" to which it currently

aspires;

(p)

that the department, in so doing, reflect on the fact that it has already

established a widely-recognized concentration in the inter-related fields

of political economy, public policy, and governance, and that these are

fields that currently offer particularly attractive opportunities in relation

to both the University itself and the community at large, and also provide

a vehicle for distinguishing the department from its counterparts elsewhere

in B.C. and in western Canada generally; and

(q)

that the department, in conjunction with the Dean, give very careful thought to

the advantages that might ensue from making some "bridge appointments"

in the next few years, in order to facilitate the transitions that will

inevitably result from the forthcoming retirement of a cohort of the

20

---

department's most senior faculty members;

Size of Faculty Complement

(r)

that the department continue its efforts to improve its record in obtaining

various categories of SSHRCC award, and that in so doing it consider

what options it may have for increasing the proportion of its publications

that appear in peer-reviewed academic outlets;

(s)

that it seek to play a somewhat more active role in University governance, with a

view to keeping fully abreast of the standards, practices and expectations

that prevail in cognate departments (and in administrative offices) elsewhere on the

campus, and to making sure that it is kept adequately aware of opportunities for

collaborative research, teaching, and community service initiatives as they arise; and

(t)

that it give considerable priority in its future faculty recruitment drives to the

need to develop a more reasonable balance of male and female faculty members in the

department over the longer term.

Administrative questions

(u)

that the department explore all possible channels to

find

"space" for the undergraduate

students.

(v)

that the department, and particularly the departmental administration, should be

congratulated for their initiatives in linking the department to the high schools and

beginning better links to the alumni. The department should certainly continue and

expand these initiatives.

In concluding this report, we would like to thank very much all those people who worked

so hard to organize our visit. Among many, we would like to mention our colleague on the

evaluation team, Professor Hannah Gay of the Department of History who participated fully in

all stages of the project (except the writing up) and who provided us with insight into the specific

University culture of Simon Fraser. Our thanks also to Sue Roppel for her incredible efficiency

in organizing our visit. And, finally, thanks to the departmental staff who made the visit

extremely comfortable.

0 ?

21