Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
Page 55

S.96-15

•

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

OFFICE OF THE VICE-PRESIDENT, ACADEMIC

MEMORANDUM

From: ?

Subject: ?

Proposed Ph.D. Program in Political Science

Date: ?

February 12, 1996

Action undertaken by the Senate Graduate Studies Committee and the Senate Committee

on Academic Planning gives rise to the following motion:

Motion:

"That Senate approve and recommend approval to the Board of

Governors, as set forth in S.96 - 15, the proposed Ph.D. Program

in Political Science including:

Ph.D. Comprehensive Exam

POL 899

Ph.D. Thesis Research."

PROPOSAL FOR A PhD IN POLITICAL SCIENCE

9 Nov 1994

Approved "in-Principle" by Senate Committee on

Academic Planning

3 Apr

1995 ?

Approved by Faculty of Arts Graduate Studies

Committee

6 Apr 1995 ?

Received by Dean of Graduate Studies

18 May 1995

Reviewed by Assessment Committee for New

Graduate Programs

22 June 1995

Revised Proposal Received by Dean of Graduate

Studies

2 October 1995 ?

Reviewed by Assessment Committee for New

Graduate Programs

6 November 1995

Revised Proposal Received by Dean of Graduate

Studies

11 January 1996

Approved by Assessment Committee for New

Graduate Programs

29 January 1996

Reviewed by Senate Graduate Studies Committee

COV-POLDOC 12/01/96

Simon Fraser University

MEMORANDUM

DATE: ?

January 15, 1996

TO: ?

Phyllis Wrenn, Chair

Assessment Committee for New Graduate Programs

FROM:

Peggy Meyer

Graduate Studies Committee

Department of Political Science

RE: ?

Ph.D. Program - Political Science

Please find attached a further revised version of the Department of Political Science's Ph.D.

proposal.

In response to ACNGP's comments on our last revision, we have made editorial changes in

Sections 11.1 and 11.2 of the proposal. Figure

has been revised. References to teaching legislators have

been removed. We have enclosed easier-to-read copies of the attachments. The Calendar Entry has been

revised to clarify the Program Requirements, and the word "normally" has been added to the section on

Admission requirements. We have attached the notice from SCAP indicating approval of our new graduate

courses.

We hope that these changes are sufficient to satisfy the concerns of ACNGP members.

Peggy Meyer

P-j

Simon Fraser University

MEMORANDUM

DATE: ?

November 3, 1995

TO: ?

Assessment

Phyllis Wrenn,

Committee

Chair

for New Graduate

COPY

Programs

FROM: ?

Peggy Meyer

Graduate Studies Committee

Department of Political Science

RE: ?

Ph.D. Program - Political Science

Please find attached a revised version of the Department of Political Science's Ph.D. proposal

The Department's Graduate Studies Committee has revised the proposal in response to comments

made by the Senate Assessment Committee on New Graduate Programs at its October 2, 1995 meetins.

We have made the proposed rationale and focus of our program much stronger and clearer. This focus is

enunciated clearly in section 11.3 (Distinctiveness of SFU program). We have completely revised the chart

included in that section so that it no longer divides faculty members along traditional lines among

Comparative Politics, International Relations, etc. but instead hihlishts their areas of specialization

relating to Political Economy, Public Policy and Governance, the three areas of specialization proposed for

the Ph.D. program. Our reference to new appointments (just before Figure V) has been revised to reflect

these new areas of specialization, not the old ones.

We have made a number of changes in the Calendar Entry to highlight the proposed areas of

specialization and to ensure that they will remain a focus of the program. The section on Admission now

requires each applicant to identify two areas of proposed specialization in his/her statement of current

research interests. Applicants are told that an important consideration for admission will be how well their

proposed research coincides with the department's focus on political economy, public policy and

governance. The section on Supervisory Committee now states: Each supervisory committee will be

structured to reflect the department's focus on issues of political economy, public policy and governance

and to ensure that these constitute an integral part of each student's program. The section on Course Work

now requires students to seek the approval of their Supervisory Committee for all course choices and to

take one course in each area of specialization identified in his/her letter of intent. The Section on Thesis

makes clear that the Ph.D. seminar, where students will prepare their formal thesis topics, will ensure that

each topic is related to issues of political economy, public policy and governance.

We have edited the proposal to remove any claims about the "unique" strengths of our department.

We continue to claim, however, that our program will be distinctive in western Canada. In support of this

claim, we have added to Section 11.2 the direct quote from the 1992 External Review of our Department

which stressed its "particular thrust" (their words not mine) which differentiate it from UBC's Political

Science Department.

In order to assuage any lingering concerns about the size and quality of our proposed Ph.D.

program, we have raised the minimum admissions requirement from a G.P.A. of 3.5 to a G.P.A. of 3.67 in

graduate courses taken towards the M.A. degree. We have reduced the planned intake from two to four in

• ?

the previous draft to two new students per year in this draft.

We have updated the information in all the charts and attachments. Since our new M.A. courses

now have been approved, we no longer refer to the old curriculum. Figure III has been updated to project

teaching of our new graduate courses through 97-2. Figure IV now lists only our new and proposed

COPY

graduate courses.

have deleted the list of old courses. We have removed the old course outlines from

the attachments, leaving only the outlines for our new graduate courses. Figure V has been updated to

show Graduate Supervision during 1995. We have attached updated faculty cvs.

We have provided in Section V.1. (on

pp.

11 and 12) a much longer and more detailed

explanation of the proposed program's resource implications showing how our department will be able to

absorb the various direct and indirect costs (space, administrative and faculty time, teaching assistantships,

etc.) without asking for any increase in its budget beyond the S450 already mentioned. This figure of S450

actually is $100 less than the amount mentioned in our previous proposal. The difference is that money

will no longer be needed for the library since the item identified in Ralph Stanton's memorandum already

has been purchased to support our undergraduate and M.A. programs.

The Ph.D. package was approved by the Department of Political Science in March 1994. The

package received Approval in Principle from FAGSC on June 23, 1994 and from the Senate Committee on

Academic Policy (SCAP) on November 9, 1994. It received detailed approval from FAGSC on February

23, 1995 and passed a referendum in the Faculty of Arts in March, 1995..

The requisite graduate course revisions were approved by the Department's Graduate Studies

Committee at its meeting of December 12, 1994, by the Department of Political Science at its meeting of

January 10, 1995 and by FAGSC at its February 23, 1995 meeting.

We hope that the changes we have made in the attached proposal meet the ACNGP's concerns.

We look forward to hearing your reaction.

Peggy Me 'er

1/.

November 3, 1995 ?

Phd Proposal - Political Science

Ph.D. Program - Political Science

Table of Contents

I. General Information

Title of the Program

Credential to be Awarded to Graduates

Department to Offer the Program

Date of Senate Approval

Schedule for Implementation

II. Program Description and Related Matters

Objectives

Relationship to Role and Mission of the University

Relationship to Other Canadian Programs

Distinctiveness of SFIJ Program

Existing and Proposed Curriculum

Proposed Calendar Language

6.1. Deletion

6.2. Additions

6.3. New Courses

III. Need for the Program

Enrollment Predictions

Graduate Employment Prospects

IV. Present and Projected Resources

1. Administrative, Faculty, Library and Budgetary Needs

V. Evaluations

Letter From Bennett Library Collections Manager Ralph Stanton

Re: Library Costs

Letter From Dean of Graduate Studies Bruce Clayman Re: MA

Program in Political Science

Letter From Dean of Arts Evan Alderson Re: BA Program in

Political Science

VI. Appendices

Calendar Entry

Graduate Course Outlines

Faculty Vitae

60.0,

January 15,

1996

1 -

Political Science Ph.D. Proposal

I. General Information

1. Title of the Program

The program for which approval is sought is entitled "The Ph.D. Program in Political Science"

2. Credential to be Awarded to Graduates

The Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in Political Science

Department to Offer the Program

he Department of Political Science, Simon Fraser University

Date of Senate Approval

Approval in Principle by the Senate Committee on Academic Planning (SCAP) on November 9, 1994

Schedule for Implementation

First students to be admitted in 1996-97

H. Program Description and Related Matters

1. Objectives ?

The Department of Political Science is proposing the creation of a small, specialized Ph.D.

program which is distinctive in Western Canada. The proposed program will exploit the ability of our

faculty to teach, conduct research and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in areas such as

Political Economy, Public Policy and Governance which stand at the borders of traditional fields in the

discipline.

Comparative Politics, International Relations, Canadian politics and other traditional areas of

political science still are often considered in isolation. These boundaries are beginning to break down in

response to real world processes, e.g., globalisation, and to theoretical developments in political science.

The intent of our proposed program is to emphasize the linkages between and among these traditional

fields. The configuration of faculty expertise currently in place makes it possible to offer a small

specialized programme which is at the cutting edge of developments in the discipline.

The program can be mounted with minimal new expenditures by relying on the re-allocation of

existing resources realized through the re-organization of the existing graduate program. It is expected that

the first entrants will begin the program in the fall of 1996. The Department will place a high GPA

requirement (3.67) on entrants to ensure that the program remains small.

2. Relationship to Role and Mission of the University

Plans for a small, specialized program in political science draw upon established faculty expertise

at SFU in areas where our faculty compares favourably with the faculty at other universities in British

Columbia and Western Canada.

The small, specialized nature of our program will differentiate it from the much larger, omnibus

program at IJBC. In this regard we note the following assessment of the particular strengths of our faculty

that was expressed in the March 1992 External Review of our department: "The emphasis on questions of

January 15, 1996 ?

2 ?

Political Science Ph. D. Proposal

governance (institutions and the administration of policy, particularly in the interrelations of politics and

the economy) gives a particular thrust to the Department and one that is quite different from the areas of

strength of the TJBC Political Science Department (which, within Canadian politics, is much stronger on

questions of 'politics' than of 'policy' and/or 'governance')."

Internally, within the Department, the need for high-level graduate assistance has grown

dramatically in recent years. As more faculty have won major national and international research grants,

the opportunities for high-level graduate student training have also increased. This training not only

enhances faculty research, teaching and tutorial efforts, but also substantially promotes the ability of SFU

graduates to win post-graduate competitions and employment. The establishment of a Ph.D. program at

SFU enhances the ability of the University to win research grants, and enhances the ability of the

Department to instruct students in the latest developments in the discipline at both the undergraduate and

graduate levels. The benefits to MA students of the presence of Ph.D. students in graduate colloquia and

seminars are obvious.

The establishment of such a program will improve the capacity of SFU to train future civil

servants and academics in British Columbia, Canada, and abroad. The program will also clearly enhance

the ability of SFU faculty to carry out research of value to the University community. In so doing, it

contributes in a substantial fashion to the growth of the department, the university and the university.

community.

3. Relationship to Other Canadian Programs

At the present time there are 15 Ph.D. programs in political science in Canada (See Figure I

below.) One program exists in Eastern Canada, 11

Central Canada and three in Western Canada. The

only current program in British Columbia is located at the University of British Columbia, to which those

inquiring of SFU's programme have been referred in the past.

. The general trend in Canadian universities has been away from the establishment of "omnibus"

Ph.D. programs offering instruction and supervision in all fields of the discipline and towards smaller,

specialized programs. This has been the case with new programs established over the past five years at

Carleton University, McMaster University and the University of Ottawa.'

• 1The discrepancies visible in Figure I in terms of teaching resources are partially explained by the division of universities into 'ous' 'specialized'

programs; with omnibus programs requiring many more faculty than more specialized programs. However, there is no direct link between teaching resources and

the nature of the program Thus, the smallest program in terms of teaching resources, that of Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, is of an "omnibus"

nature, Other discrepancies can be traced to other factors. Hence the number of faculty cited for CarletonUniversity includes a large number of faculty in the

associated School for Public Administration. The number cited for York University, the University of Toronto, and the University of Western Ontario includes

faculty

located at satellite or affiliated colleges who may not be present on the main campus itself.

- -

January 15, 1996

3 ?

Political Science Ph.D. Proposal

Figure I. Canadian Ph.D. Program Data - 1994

350

course/4 minor/course

theory/stats/Lang. /2 geni

course/Theory/Meth./3

oral/writ/comps or papers

UBC

2 oral and written./comps

300 pp

York

Canadian/Comp/

2 Oral and Written comps

Prop.

policy)/language/Comp.

Pol/StatsfResearch Design

compsllanguage/methods/t

SFU

Canadian Politics

language/2 written and

300 pp

6 ?

-- -

(2) NOTE: Includes Ph.D. in Policy

(3) NOTE: Integrated MA/PhD

The programs likely to be closest to the proposed program are those located at McMaster

University, the University of Western Ontario and the University of Ottawa. These programs specialize in

several sub-fields within the discipline.

Distinctiveness

of SFU Program

This specialization sets the program proposed for Simon Fraser University apart from that at the

University of British Columbia which is one of the smaller, "omnibus" programs offered in Canada. With

January 15, 1996

4 ?

Political Science Ph.D. Proposal

its growth in faculty complement and expertise over the past several years, the Department of Political

Science at SFU is now well placed to successfully mount this type of program.

Faculty members in political science have varied research interests. While the existing faculty

teach in all of the

fields of political science (Political Theory, Canadian Government and Politics,

Comparative Government and Politics, International Relations and Public Administration and Public

Policy) at the Undergraduate and M.A. levels, the departmental expectation is to focus on Political

Economy and International Political Economy, Canadian and Comparative Public Policy and Governance

at the Ph.D. level. Faculty areas of teaching and research are set out in Figure II below.

Figure II- Teaching Specializations and Research Interests, Department

of Political Science

FACULTY

TRADFrIONAL

POLITICAL

.. ......... -.- ......

PUBLIC

POLICY

GOVERNANCE

ECONOMY

Public Administration

Foreign Policy! Security

5 ?

q ?

Political Science Ph.D. Proposal

5. Existing and Proposed Curriculum

The Department of Political Science at Simon Fraser University has offered graduate instruction

since its inception as the Department of Political Science, Sociology and Anthropology (PSA) at the

University's creation in 1966.

Fifty MA and 8 Ph.D. degrees were awarded by the PSA between 1966 and 1974. Since division

of the Department into the Department of Political Science and the Department of Sociology and

Anthropology in 1974, however, the Department of Political Science has offered only an MA program with

students proceeding to the Ph.D. through Special Arrangements provisions of the University Calendar.

Since its inception, the Department of Political Science has awarded more than 60 MA degrees. Current

full-time equivalent enrollment in the MA program is

50.

The Department currently receives close to 100

written and telephone inquiries per year regarding the status of its Ph.D. program.

Graduate courses are offered within a three-semester academic year.

Students are expected to

complete the MA program within 6-8 semesters. The program is intended for students desiring academic

and research careers. There are five areas of research specialization within the MA Program: Canadian

Politics, Comparative Politics, International Relations, Political Theory and Public Administration and

Policy. ?

These

concentrations involve

examinations, and research.

Students are normally admitted to the M.A. program with a Bachelor's degree, and are matched

with their Senior Supervisor's research interests.

All

M.A. students are required to complete Politics 801,

a course in research design and data analysis. Courses must also be completed from at least two of the

five fields offered by the Department

MA Non-Thesis Option:

Students are normally admitted to the non-thesis MA program and must

apply to the Chair of the Graduate Program for approval to transfer to the thesis option. Completion of a

non thesis MA requires successful completion of six graduate courses and the completion of two oral and

written Field Exams. Students also may be advised to take additional courses specific to their research

specialization.

MA field exams involve the establishment of a major and a minor field by the student and the

student's supervisory committee. For each field, a list of readings is prepared by the supervisory committee

in consultation with the student. A three-hour written exam is then scheduled. After the written examination

results have been compiled, an oral defence is held.

MA Thesis Option:

Students approved by the Graduate Studies Committee may proceed into the

MA Thesis option. In this option four courses must be completed and a 100 page thesis defended in an oral

thesis defence. Courses include Politics 801 plus three additional courses taken from at least two of the

fields of study offered by the Department.

The MA thesis is expected to provide an in-depth treatment of a subject of concern to the

Canadian political science community. Students desiring to enter the thesis option must present a thesis

proposal of no more than 25 pages to the Field Committee in the area of the thesis topic. The proposal

includes a brief summary of the topic, its relevance and the methodology to be followed in its investigation;

a chapter by chapter outline of the thesis itself; a timetable for thesis completion; and a limited

bibliography. The Field Committee takes the availability of qualified faculty to supervise the thesis into

account in rendering its decision.

At present the department offers between 10-12 courses per year at the graduate level. Graduate

Students may also arrange with individual instructors to take related undergraduate courses for graduate

credit, providing that additional assignments and contact requirements outside of class time are completed.

Students may also arrange with individual instructors to pursue Directed Readings courses. Figure III shows

the range of graduate course offerings planned for 1993-1997.

January 15, 1996

/ ?

Political Science Ph.D. Proposal

Figure III - Grad Teaching 1993 - 1997

855

I ?

\ ?

Political Science Ph.D. Proposal

Figure IV- (1995) Course Offerings - Department of Political Science

1995 Offerings

Offerings

POL 801

The Scope and Methods of Political Science

POL

812

Political Theory

POL 814

Normative Political Theory

POL

821

Canadian Government and Politics

POL

825*

Canadian Political Economy

POL 826*

Parties and Ideologies in Canada

POL

827*

Issues in Canadian Government and Politics

POL 829

Legislative Internship

POL 830

Comparative Government and Politics

POL

832

Government and Politics of Communist and Post-Communist Countries

POL 838

Government and Politics of Industrialized Countries

POL 839

Government and Politics of Developing Countries

POL 861

Issues in Political Development

POL 841

International Relations

POL

842

International Law and Organizations

POL 843

Canadian Foreign Policy

POL

844

International Political Economy

POL

45*

Foreign Policy Analysis

POL 846*

International Security Issues

POL 851

Public Policy Analysis

POL

852

Urban Government and Politics

POL

853

Public Administration

POL

855

Science, Technology and Public Policy

POL 856*

Issues in Social and Economic Policy

Other Courses

POL 891

Master's Seminar

POL 893

Readings in Political Science

POL 897

Master's Field Exams

POL 898

Master's Thesis Research

Proposed Courses

POL 890

Ph.D. Seminar

POL 896

Ph.D. Comprehensive Exams

POL 899

Ph.D. Thesis Research

*New Courses approved by Senate Graduate Studies Committee and Senate

Committee on Academic

Planning, 

SCAP 

Reference:S.95-47

*Approved by Senate September. 18, 1995 

.

.

January 15, 1996

8 /

Political Science Ph.D. Proposal

Proposed Calendar Language

The establishment of a Ph.D. program in the Department of Political Science requires the

following changes to be made to the Simon Fraser University Calendar.

6.1.

Deletions

Delete current sentence "The Department is not currently admitting

candidates to work toward the Ph.D. degree." and add the following

language:

62.

Additions

A complete calendar entry is provided in Appendix I.

63.

New Courses

Three new courses will be created for the Ph.D. program in order

to provide administrative mileposts judging progress through the

program. These courses will cover the completion of the

Comprehensive Examinations, the Ph.D. Thesis Seminar, which

will be designed to assist students with the preparation of a

formal thesis topic related to issues of political economy, public

policy and governance, and the Ph.D. Thesis.

M. Need for the Program

In 1992, the External Review of the Department of Political Science noted that the establishment

of a Ph.D. program was a logical step in the evolution of the Department (p. 4). In doing so, it stated that

"once the Department is more satisfied with its MA programme the question of further expansion can be

raised". The external reviewers specifically noted that:

(This) recommendation should not be seen as suggesting a waiting period in the development of

the graduate programme but rather that the Department should accord greater priority and greater

attention to its development (pp. 18-19)

The reviewers argued that "development of the MA programme will result in even more clearly

defined areas of strength and it would then be possible to think of creating a specialized PhD programme in

those areas of strength" (pp. 18-19)

It is the position of the Department of Political Science that the time has now come for the

development of a Ph.D. program. The department has significantly revised its MA program, and has

developed specializations through hirings and appointments which now form a close fit with existing

library resources. Establishing a Ph.D. program is thus in keeping with the thrust of the External Review

and is a logical step in the evolution of the Department into the front rank in Canadian political science.

The establishment of such a program will improve the capacity of SFU to train future civil

servants and academics in British Columbia, Canada and abroad. The program will also clearly enhance the

ability of SFIJ faculty to carry out research of value to the University community. In so doing, it contributes

in a substantial fashion to the growth of the department, the university and the university community.

Enrollment Predictions

It is expected that the first entrants will

begin the program in

the fall of 1996.

January 15, 1996

Political Science Ph.D. Proposal

Although the Department currently receives over 100 written and telephone inquiries annually

regarding its (non-existant) Ph.D. program, the Department will place a high GPA requirement (3.67) on

entrants to ensure that the program remains small and that each student is assured of a reasonable level of

funding. As such the Department expects to allow only 2 students into the program annually.

Graduate Employment Prospects

Given the views of the External Review and the Department expressed above, it should be clear

that the view within the political science community in Canada is that the establishment of a Ph.D. program

at Simon Fraser University is in keeping with the general evolution of the Department and represents a

logical step in that evolution.

The establishment of a small, specialized program at SFU is not only in keeping with

developments in the discipline, but also is considered to be the best model for ensuring graduands have a

high probability of post-graduation employment . While most older, omnibus, programs remain oriented

towards the preparation of teachers, both the Canadian and American Political Science Associations have

recognized that smaller, specialized programs enhance the possibility of post-graduate employment not

only in academe, but also in government and elsewhere, primarily because of the system of close student-

supervisor interaction found in smaller programs.

In academia, there will be a large number of retirements

and renewed demand for Ph.Ds., especially in the fields emphasized by our program. In British Columbia,

this will include opportunities both in universities and in the colleges where anticipated retirements and the

growing pressure to teach first and second year university courses will increase the demand for faculty with

Ph.Ds.

Graduates may also seek employment in the public services of Canada and abroad. Although

overall levels of employment in this area have begun to decline, most of these declines have been in the

clerical rather than managerial ranks. In the managerial ranks, the academic credentials for employment

and promotion continue to increase, including a doctoral requirement for specialized positions in policy and

administration.Other

potential avenues for employment are in private sector consulting firms, in polling firms, in

the media, in non governmental organizations, and in industry, where there will be a continuing need for

specialists in business-government relations and in international risk analysis.

IV. Present and Projected Resources

Administrative, Faculty, Library and Budgetary Needs

A major Departmental administrative re-organization has taken place since the last Department

External Review was completed. This includes: enactment of a new Departmental Constitution and Bylaws;

establishment of new committees to deal with issues such as scholarships and student funding; appointment

of a new Department Chair; a re-organization of office staff and duties; completion of the computerization

of the department staff and faculty; and establishment of new graduate and undergraduate computing labs.

Their impact upon the general managerial capacity of the Department of Political Science is attested to by

the Dean of Arts in Evaluation #3. The net result of these efforts is that the proposed new Ph.D. program

can be mounted with little additional administrative cost.

The Department has also focused much time and energy since 1991-92 towards improving its

graduate program. These steps have included: the early assignment of a supervisory committee for each

student; the establishment of faculty "field" committees responsible for thesis proposals, field exams, and

graduate curricula review; establishment of a graduate student colloquium and departmental speakers'

program; production of a new Departmental graduate studies guide and handbook; establishment of course

planning over a four year cycle; establishment of new scholarships for graduate students from alumni funds;

and re-organization of the process and priority system for allocation of Teaching and Research

2 Deborah K. Furlong and Scott R. Furlong, 'Netting the Big One: Things Candidates (and Departments) Ought to Know' in PS: Political Science and

Politics 27(1), 1994 91-98; and Peter H Russell, Richard A. Vernon, and Margaret Little, Report of the Committee to Review the Academic Job Market for

PhDs in Political Science, (Ottawa Canadian Political Science Association, 1991).

January 15, 1996 ?

10 /

Political Science Ph.D. Proposal

Assistantships so as to orient non TA funding towards incoming students and TA funding towards finishing

students. The Department has successfully implemented the addition of a non-thesis option at the MA level

and has taken many steps towards improving the average completion time required for a degree.

The general thrust and attainments of these efforts are set out in a letter from the Dean of Graduate

Studies contained in Evaluation #2 below.

While these reforms to graduate programs have been taking place, the number of permanent

faculty has risen from 16 at the time of the External Review to 18 faculty members of different ranks now

supervising graduate students (See Figure V below). These have included additional appointments in the

three areas of specialization -- political economy, public policy and govenance -- which the department has

developed and proposes to extend at the Ph.D. level.

Figure V - Graduate Supervisions, Department

Political Science 1995

II!sT

IA1'L

•

*Professor Emeritus

The outstanding research performance of the departmental faculty noted by the External Review

has been retained and augmented by contributions from new and older faculty. On a per capita basis, the

Department ranks first among similar sized Canadian universities in articles published in the flagship

Canadian Journal of Political Science. In addition, faculty members have dramatically increased their

success in national and international research competitions, now sit on the editorial boards of several major

journals, have responsible positions in many national and international scholarly associations, and have

• ?

won major prizes for research work awarded by those associations.

The SF11 library has collections in the fields emphasized in our proposed program which already

are being taught at the Master's and undergraduate levels. Our Library Collections Manager, after a

thorough review of our holdings, concluded that they were more than adequate to support the type of

January 15, 1996

11 ?

Political Science Ph. D. Proposal

program envisioned (See Evaluation #1). The one cost which he mentions -- $140.00 per year for a

subscription to

International Security -- will

no longer be necessary since the Library already has

subscribed to this journal to support our new undergraduate and M.A. courses. Our library also encourages

and supports faculty and student use of interlibrary loan to access the collections of other libraries, not just

in British Columbia but also outside it.

The costs of the new program, direct and indirect will be modest. Currently we are admitting an

average of 15-20 Masters students per year. Adding two new Ph.D. students per year to this program

should not greatly increase the administrative burden. Due to the small number of students involved, the

costs of the Ph.D. program will be borne by the existing graduate program and can be covered by a

reallocation of resources occasioned by calibrating Ph.D. entrants with those to the existing M.A. program.

There will be no net increase in the department's operating budget as a result of the Ph.D. program

other than the $450 identified in Figure VI below. There will be no net increase in the department's use of

space or any other resources as a result of the Ph.D. program. Other costs will be covered by internal

efficiencies in office operation stemming from office re-organisation, re-organisation of jobs, and improved

use of technology. Many of these changes have already been made, and the process is continuing.

Sufficient space will be made available by better managment of sessional instructors' timetables

and office hours so more sessional instructors can be accommodated in each office. In the later stages of

their Ph.D. program, some Ph.D. candidates will replace non-Ph.D. program sessional instructors, creating

additional space for Ph.D. candidates.

Increased funds made available to Ph.D. students in the form of Teaching Assistantships or, for

senior Ph.D. students, sessional instruction stipends, will be accompanied by decreased resources for M.A.

level Teaching Assistantships on the one hand, and reduced sessional slots for non-Ph.D. students, on the

other. The new Ph.D. program will have a positive impact on the existing B.A. program. Rather than draw

resources from the undergraduate level, the creation of a Ph.D. program will augment the resources

available to the Department to teach and tutor students. Unlike M.A. students, Ph.D. students will be

qualified to tutor third year classes, thus removing a long-standing impediment to their expansion in class

size.

Existing graduate courses will accommodate Ph.D. students. The projected number of graduate

offerings will remain the same whether the Ph.D. program is approved or not, i.e., resources assigned to

graduate teaching will remain constant. Additional reading courses for Ph.D. students will be made

available by faculty without teaching credit. The Ph.D. seminar, an important tool for integrating the

distinctive focus of the department's Ph.D. into each student's program of studies, will likely be team

taught In any case no teaching credit will be given. Hence the additional teaching costs associated with

the program will be absorbed entirely by the faculty.

As a result, it is the Department's expectation that the new Ph.D. program can be mounted and be

successful while utilizing existing administrative, faculty and library resources.

January 15, 1996

12 ?

Political Science Ph.D. Proposal

Figure VI- New and Emergent Programs Budget Format

Ph.D.

Costs

($)

Faculty Salaries

0.00

Secretarial

0.00

Teaching Assistantships

0.00

Technical

Staff

0.00

Supplies and Services

0.00

Total Recurring Direct Operating Costs

450.00

Non-Recurring Costs

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

Total Non-Recurring Costs

0.00

Capital

Total New Program

----

450.00

(for information only)

Building

0.00

Equipment

0.00

Renovations

0.00

Total Capital

—

Evaluations

Letter From Bennett Library Collections Manager Ralph Stanton Re: Library Costs

Letter From Dean of

Graduate Studies Bruce Clayman Re: MA Program in Political Science

Letter From Dean of

Arts Evan Alderson Re: BA Program in Political Science

VI. Appendices

Calendar Entry

Graduate Course Outlines

Faculty Vitae

January 15, 1996

13 ?

Political Science Ph.D. Proposal

Attachments 

Attachment 1.: Letter from Ralph Stanton re: Library Costs 

.

MEMORANDUM 

W.A.C. Bennett Library, Simon Fraser University 

?

Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada V5A 156 

Date: 13 April, 199 

From: Ralph Stanton (Collections Librarian) 

To:

?

Michael Howlett, Chair, Graduate Studies Committee, 

Department of Political Science 

Re: ? 

Political Science Ph.D. Programme 

Thank-you for your memorandum of April 6, 1994. Here is 

our assessment of the impact on the Library of this new 

programme: 

The Ph.D. programme in 

p

olitical Science has, according to 

your memo to A. Lebowitz dated April 6, 1994, the following 

characteristics which are relevant to this assessment. 

1. The programme requires six courses, with a minimum of 4 

from Political Science, including a theory/methods course. 

2. 2 new students per year will be admitted. 

3.

The programme will use existing courses and course 

materials. 

4.

This will be a "specialized programme. 

5.

A 300 page thesis is part of the programme. 

6.

Advanced study in the department is in the fields of 

Canadian Politics, Comparative ?oliticsi International 

Relations, and Public Policy. 

7.

There are 3 special topics Ph.D. students in the 

Department at the moment. 

Process: 

Normally a new course or programme proposal comes to our 

office complete with course outlines and bibliographies. In 

this case existing courses are being used. The Department 

Graduate Studies Committee Chair indicates he will recommend 

a review and possible revision of graduate offerings 

beginning in 94-3 after which it is possible that additional 

costs may be added and/or deletions of material from. the 

collection, and cost savings, may be made. 

January 15, 1996

Ir ?

Political Science Ph.D. Proposal

Books: 

The

?

monograph collection is adequate to support the 

.

programme as presently structured based on brief comparisons 

to UBC Library and the use of the OCLC Amigos Collection 

Development CD. 

Journals: 

The Library currently has an urgent request from Douglas 

Ross for the journal 

International Security

which he 

describes as '... a very important publication for both my 

graduate teaching and forth year courses in 

international conflict resolution and Canadian international 

security relations 

• •

11,

and further notes that "... it is 

simply incredible that the Library is without it. This 

journal appears to be important to subjects covered by this 

progra.rrime. This publication should be purchased for $140 per 

year. 

COSTS: 

International Security

$140 per year. 

SUMMARY OF COSTS: 

RECURRING COST FOR THIS PROGRAMME ARE $140 PER YEAR. 

Please call me if you have any questions. 

c;t5 

.

.

January 15, 1996

15 ?

Political Science Ph.D. Proposal

MEMORANDUM

OFFICE OF VICE PRESIDENT, RESEARCH

TO: John M. Munro

FROM: Bruce P. Clayman

Vice-President, Academic

Vice-President, Research and

Dean of Graduate Studies

RE: Ph.D. Program in Political, Science

DATE October 17, 1994

..... ?

....... ?

I have had a chance to read over the latest Department Ph.D. proposal and would

concur with the Department view that significant improvements have been made

to the MA program in Political Science since the receipt of the last External

Review in 1992.

The Department has moved forward m the

mplemefltatlon of a non-thesis

option to its MA program which promises to continue the trend toward a

sigrtificant improvement in completion tin-es at the MA level in the Depar

tment

over the past several yeazs. In adoition, the Department has made a major effort

to clarify supervisory duties, and instiuct incoming graduate students with

respect to the expectations of the Department and.,

y office concerning thesis

i'ength and completion times.

The Department has this year adn-uited a record number of students into its MA

program and is offering a record number of courses. Incoming students are of

excellent quality and have won major University entrance scholarships and

prizes. Non-University examiners have commented very favourably on several

recent MA theses and students from the SHJ program have been accepted into

major Ph.D. programs in Canada and abroad on a regular basis.

The Department appears to have surpassed the expectations of the Exteri\al

Review with regards to the re-organization of its MA program and has

developed considerable expertise in the three fields mentioned in the Ph.D.

proposal. To this end, the establishment of a small, specialized Ph.D. program

would be in keeping with the evolution of the Department towards the front

•1çC

January. 15, 1996

Political Science Ph.D. Proposal

Attachment 3: Letter

From

Evan

Alderson Re: BA Program P

o

litic

al

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

'Office

the

Dean, Faculty of Arts

Subject: Proposed Ph.D. in Political Science

Date: 2 November 1994

I am writing to you to comment on the current state of the

undergraduate program in Political Science in relation to the department's

re-submission of its request to SCAP that its proposed Ph.D. be approved for

further development.

I have been impressed by the changes in the Department's

undergraduate program since the last external review. Following the

review, the Department undertook a major re-examination of its

curriculum, c!arifing the streams of study and simplifying the prerequisite

structure. Moreover, following the appointment of the present Chair, there

have been major efforts to increase teaching efficiency in

the department

while retaining quality of instruction. I hold the view that the

undergraduate program is now academically sound and well managed.

"^— 

el,^Z, 

Political Science Ph.D. Proposal

—(j-

0 0 8

• ?

_ _

The

UN1VERSITYof WESTERN ONT\RIO .

Local Government Program • Department of Political Science • Social Science Centre

August 21,

1995

Professor Phyliss M. Wrenn

Associate Dean of Graduate Studies

Simon Fraser University

Burnaby, BC

V5A 1S6

Dear Phyliss:

Thanks for sending me the additional material in connection with my review of the

proposed PhD in political science.

I enclose my review. I hope it meets your needs.

I have enjoyed this opportunity to learn more about political science at SF0 and am

especially pleased that you and I have been able to renew our old acquaintance.

Yours sincerely

Andrew Sancton

Professor and Program Director

end.

London, Ontario • Canada • N6A 5C2 • Telephone: (519) 661-3657 • Fax: (519) 661-3865

REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED Ph.D. IN POLITICAL SCIENCE AT SIMON FRASER 

UNIVERSITY 

Andrew Sancton ? 

Professor of 

Political Science? 

The University of Western Ontario 

August 1995 

I have 

reviewed the "Political Science Ph.D. Proposal" dated 

May 25, 1995, taking into account the guidelines contained in a 

letter to me dated July 5, 1995 from the Associate Dean of 

Graduate Studies, Phyliss M. Wrenn. 

My conclusion is that the political science department at 

SFU is sufficiently strong to launch and maintain the program at 

levels consistent with high academic standards. I do, however, 

have some questions about the content of the Proposal document. 

The Proposal calls for the creation "of a small, specialized 

Ph.D. program which is distinctive in Western Canada (p.2)." 

Despite the usual (for these kinds of documents) rhetoric about 

"being on the cutting edge of developments in the discipline," 

close analysis uncovers nothing especially "distinctive." This 

is a proposal for a Ph.D. program focussing on three well- 

established sub-fields within the discipline: Comparative 

Politics, Canadian Politics, and International Relations. 

The other two political-science Ph.D. programs in western 

Canada are at UBC and Alberta. The UBC program is referred to in 

the Proposal as being "omnibus." The Alberta program appears 

similar to the proposed SFU one, except that it also includes 

political philosophy. In my view, the potential virtues of the 

SFU proposal rest not on any claims to uniqueness but on the 

strengths of the faculty members in the designated fields. 

At least one statement in the Proposal concerning Ph.D. 

programs in other Candian universities is wrong. It is stated on 

p.3 that the Ph.D. program at my University (Western Ontario) has 

been established "over the past five years." It is true that we 

added a new sub-field recently, but the Ph.D. has been accepting 

students in other sub-fields for at least twenty years. This 

error in itself is not serious, but it did lead me to wonder 

about the credibility of some of the data relating to other 

universities with which I am not so familiar. 

The Proposal leaves me somewhat confused about future 

graduate course offerings. Apparently (see p.7), the offerings 

are being revised regardless of the fate of the Ph.D. Proposal. 

Yet Figure III (p.7) presents graduate teaching loads from 1993-7 

Figure 

for existing 

seems 

courses. 

quite useless. 

In light 

If

of

teaching 

the impending 

assignments 

changes, 

can bethis 

?

projected.to 1997 for existing courses, why can the same not be 

done for the new courses? 

?

2

In my view, the quality of the faculty is more important for 

a Ph.D. program than is the structure of its courses. For the 

designated fields of Ph.D. study, the relevant faculty must have 

proven records of recent research. They must be working in areas 

that are likely to be of interest to students. There must be a 

sufficient number of faculty in each sub-field such that the 

occasional resignation, sabbatical and other leave does not mean 

that there is nobody left to supervise affected students. In 

regard to these criteria, the current Proposal succeeds 

admirably. 

I am personally familiar with the work of many of the 

faculty; for others I was extremely impressed by the vitae 

contained in Appendix IV. Naming particular individuals in this 

review is unlikely to be helpful. Hopefully it is sufficient to 

state that the relatively recent appointments of both junior 

scholars and more established ones are extremely impressive. 

They join others who have been at SFU for longer and who have 

built solid reputations for themselves, especially in the three 

designated sub-fields. 

Impressive as these people are, I would not agree with the 

Proposal's assertion (p.5) that they have "the unique 

ability ... to teach and research in a more than a single field of 

the discipline." Such ability is common in political science 

departments across the country. The quality of the SFU faculty 

in the three designated fields is, in my view, quite sufficient 

to merit approving the Ph.D. Proposal. Dubious assertions about 

unique versatility add nothing to a case that is already strong. 

Apart from faculty, the other essential ingredient for any 

graduate program is a good academic library. There is nothing in 

the Proposal giving any indication about library resources and 

facilities. 

Ph.D. students require financial assistance and office 

space. The Proposal is silent on these matters. On August 9, 

Professor Wrenn sent me additional information that helps explain 

existing policies for M.A. students. I assume that Ph.D. 

students will will be given priority for financial assistance and 

offices but this is not explicitly stated in the Proposal. 

I cannot claim to have much expertise about student demand 

or about demand for potential graduates. My own experience at 

Western suggests that the number of genuinely committed, well- 

qualified potential Ph.D. students likely to want to become part 

• ? 

of a small Ph.D. program is very limited. The great danger is 

not that there will be no demand from students but that the 

program will end up admitting people who are barely capable of 

3

Ph.D.-level research. Such people can cause massive problems for 

all concerned. It is one thing to fail the weakest of ten 

students sitting their Ph.D. comprehensives; it is quite another 

to fail one of one, two, or three. The admissions process in a 

small program is, therefore, absolutely crucial. 

Demand for graduates is an even more difficult issue. I was 

puzzled by the statement that approval of the Proposal "will 

improve the capacity of SFU to train future legislators, civil, 

servants, and academics in British Columbia, Canada, and abroad 

(p.9)." The prospect of our legislatures at all three levels of 

government being full of political-science Ph.D.s is quite 

frightening! Surely the market for graduates is among the 

(declining) ranks of civil services, the (growing) ranks of 

specialized private-sector consulting firms, and in traditional 

academic positions. Given the number of impending retirements in 

Canadian political-science departments in the next two decades, I 

should think that the academic market would be quite good, 

especially in the sub-fields in which SFU has chosen to 

specialize. 

I recommend that the Ph.D program at SFU, as proposed, be 

approved. If the actual document needs to be re-submitted to 

other committees prior to final approval, consideration might be 

given to amending it in respect to some of the relatively 

unimportant matters that I have raised. 

?

nt of-Political Slencé

L.. HâIifàx, Ilova coiia

'__CAa6

4

E13H 4H6-

995O4

HOME:1 .7%9487

FAX: (9O2 94,3825;

ad: ?

STU'

rih ?

ac.a$.ca

Denis itairs

McCulloch Professor

Dalhousie University

•' *1

August 23, 1995 

Dr. Phyllis M. Wrenn 

Associate Dean 

Faculty of Graduate Studies 

Simon Fraser University 

Burnaby, B.C. 

V5A 1S6 

Dear Dr. Wrenn: 

As previously arranged, I am writing in response to the 

materials that you were kind enough to send me last month in 

connection with the proposed Ph.D. programme in your Department oft. 

Political Science. My comments are arranged in accordance with the 

. ?

four headings identified in your covering letter of 

July 5. 

Academic Merit and Structural Inte 

grit y 

of the Programme 

The formal structure and academic requirements of the 

programme, as defined in the draft calendar entry, are broadly 

consistent with those in use elsewhere in Canada, and present no 

significant difficulty. This is a detail, but I am not sure that 

it will prove practicable to review applications for admission only 

"once each year, 

11

and the Graduate Studies Committee may find it 

necessary to have follow-up iterations during the later stages of 

the admissions period. I was also a little surprised by the 

comment under "Time Limits" to the effect that "it is the 

expectation of the Department that the Ph.D. program may [should 

this read "will"?] be completed within six years of entrance." 

This is probably a realistic empirical judgment, but most observers 

(both inside and outside the university environment) would 

presumably regard a period of 4 to 5 years as a more appropriate 

target. We keep our graduate students in harness too long, and I 

am not sure that it is wise to give formal calendar encouragement 

to an already-powerful tendency to procrastination. 

?

These, ? 

however, are very minor matters. 

More substantively, I offer the following observations, not in 

any particular order: 

•

-2-

(1) The Department defines the proposed programme as "small" 

and "specialized." The "smallness is to be ensured by imposing 

careful limits on admissions. Given the Department's relatively 

modest size, it will certainly be important for it not to take on 

too much. But the admissions process is an annual one, and in the 

absence of clear bench-marks (e.g., quotas) there may be a natural 

tendency over time to allow the numbers to escalate -- especially 

if individual faculty members begin to press for the admission of 

students in support of their respective fields. I am not 

sufficiently familiar with the Department's internal culture to 

know whether this is likely to be a problem, but it should be kept 

in mind as a possible source of lack of restraint. 

With regard to the question of "specialization," I have to say 

that the programme does not appear to me to be as narrowly defined 

as a superficial reading of the Department's account of the matter 

would suggest. The Department says that it expects "to focus on 

the fields of Comparative Politics, International Relations, and 

Canadian Politics and Public Policy." But there is a sense in 

which this includes everything in Political Science except 

Political Philosophy (or Theory) -- depending, of course, on the 

range of countries that are included for analysis under the rubric 

of "Comparative Politics". The listed specialties are compared 

with the "11 fields" that are commonly identified in the reference 

tools provided by the Canadian Political Science Association. But 

a close analysis of the Department's documentation would suggest 

that in practice all 11 of these fields would be incorporated in 

the three areas that the Department has marked out for itself. The 

categories, in short, are malleable, and their boundaries are 

opaque, and it is not clear to me that, taken by themselves, they 

will have a markedly controlling effect on what the Department 

actually does. 

This impression is heightened by the first paragraph in the 

proposed calendar entry, in which the three areas of specialization 

are clearly identified, but are then followed by the observation 

that "the department also offers opportunities for advanced study 

in other fields of political science, subject to the availability 

of faculty research expertise." This means, in the end, that the 

range of subjects that will be regarded as suitable for 

departmental supervision will depend entirely on the aspirations -- 

and the will -- of the Department's members at any particular time. 

Perhaps this is alwa 

y

s true. But it does mean that the onus for 

being "responsible" will rest almost completely with the 

Department, and that the programme regulations themselves will not 

provide the Faculty of Graduate Studies with very much by way of a 

transparent instrument for limiting the Department's ambitions. 

In response to this comment, the Department might point to its 

assertion, at the bottom of 

p.

5 of its proposal, to the effect 

...3 

L27.

. ? -3 - 

that the programme "would be distinctive in that students would be 

encouraged to explore the overlaps between these fields in areas 

such as International Political Economy, Governance and Comparative 

Public Policy." And it is certainly true that the Department has 

a particularly heavy concentration of expertise in the "political 

economy" tradition. But of course this kind of overlap can serve 

to broaden, as well as narrow, the points of entry into the 

discipline, and once again everything will depend on the 

Department's willingness to police itself. 

I say all this, not by way of criticism, but simply to make it 

clear that the proposal, as described, is not so tightly focussed 

in relation to substance as the uninitiated might assume. In 

practice, it will offer the Department's faculty members a very 

wide supervisory latitude. 

(2)

The existing and proposed graduate courses provide an 

interesting and stimualting array (although I notice that some of 

the descriptions of the former are a trifle long in the tooth; for 

example, the accounts of Political Science 

824

(Canadian 

Federalism) and Political Science 

843

(Canadian Foreign Policy) 

both date to the Summer of 

1981).

They offer good coverage of 

Canadian politics and public policy at all levels, reasonable (if 

somewhat eclectic) exposure to comparative politics, and expanding 

. opportunities in international relations. The display obviously -- 

and appropriately -- reflects the interests of the Faculty, and it 

is presumably this that accounts for the absence of a clear "area" 

specialization in the comparative field, as well as in "IR". If 

the Department were being built up de novo, I might have been 

inclined to suggest that it would have been better to identify sub- 

specialties in both the comparative and international areas as a 

means of giving the programme a more distinctive flavour. Over the 

longer term, I still think it might be worthwhile developing a 

strategy of this sort. But in the short run you will have to work 

with the team you already have in place, and the pattern before you 

is not uncommon in cases where departments are introducing advanced 

programmes after many years of serving undergraduates and Master's 

students. The available resources reflect the teaching requirements 

typical of the initial phase of departmental development. 

• (3) My

conclusion from all this is that the programme is 

academically and structurally sound, but is not so unique in 

conception as the Department seems to be claiming. If there is a 

distinctive flavour, it comes from the "political economy" 

orientation of many of the Department's members -- an orientation 

that is not (I would agree) the most obvious characteristic of 

other Political Science departments in western Canada. But the 

political economy perspective is matched by alternative approaches, 

and it is not clear that it will be the dominant feature of the 

• Department's doctoral-level work. 

...4 

-4 - 

This leads to an obvious question, which you may well think 

lies outside my terms of reference. But I raise it anyway, scarred 

as I am by my own experience of senior academic administration in 

a province that is often thought to be unhappily afflicted with too 

many universities chasing too few resources. If the programme 

proposed by the Department is actually more "omnibus" (and, ipso 

facto, less specialized) than it appears on the surface, does it 

really make sense to offer it in such close proximity to tJBC? Put 

another way, does British Columbia really need another doctoral 

programme in Political Science? I understand very well that the 

academic potential of the Department itself may be difficult to 

develop as fully as you would like without doctoral-level students 

in place, and I also understand that the presence of such students 

offers real advantages in expanding the supply of personnel 

available for undergraduate teaching. I realize, too, that the 

mere mention of this issue may have a dampening (if not an 

infuriating!) effect. But it does seem to me nonetheless that the 

proposal should be evaluated in the context of the university 

structure in British Columbia as a whole. I cannot make such an 

evaluation from this great distance. But someone should. 

Ade q 

uac y 

of the Faculty and Other Resources 

The Department's faculty is certainly competent to teach at 

the doctoral level, and many of its members have genuinely 

impressive records of scholarly publication. In a few cases, the 

persuasiveness of the c.v.s has been unnecessarily weakened by the 

inclusion of routine journalism, works of advocacy and exhortation, 

and other forms of ephemera. But the padding of resumes is 

currently a widely prevalent academic disease, and is not peculiar 

to Political Science in general or to this department in 

particular. ? 

For this phenomenon, the academicians and their 

?

administrators are probably responsible in roughly equal measure! 

The "quality-control" procedures at both the Department and 

Faculty levels appear to be appropriate. The Department itself is 

relatively small (my own is smaller, as the Department points out), 

but not unreasonably so if restraints are exercised in relation to 

both the number of students admitted, and their areas of 

substantive interest (see comments above) 

I gather that the Library feels that the collection at its 

disposal is adequate for the purposes of the programme. In the 

absence of supporting information, I am not in a position to offer 

an independent judgment, but I assume in any case that students 

will have access to the library resources at UBC as well as at 

Simon Fraser -- either directly, or through inter-library loan. 

...5 

?

.

? -5 - 

Having said that, I confess to being a little surprised by the 

Department's assertion that the programme can be offered for less 

than $1,000. (additional) per year 

($550. 

is the precise figure). 

It is easy, of course, to draw such conclusions if the calculations 

are done only from the Departmental perspective. The Department 

does not feel that it will need to hire more people, and (as always 

in these cases) the extra load seems to be manageable on the 

departmental "front line" without much additional sacrifice. Such 

assessments are often strengthened by the prospect of having a new 

supply of qualified talent to help carry undergraduate programme 

responsibilities. 

But does the Department really believe that the communications 

and other costs of handling doctoral admissions, processing the 

paperwork that will follow each student through the programme, 

arranging for external examiners, etc., etc., will be covered by an 

increase in supplies and services of no more than $300. per year? 

That amount will be consumed by the FAX machine alone -- and very 

quickly, too! And I am at a complete loss (not having seen the 

Librarian's evaluation) to know what essential (but sufficient) 

improvement in library collections can be introduced for a one-time 

expenditure of $100.! 

In addition, I notice that no money has been budgeted for 

TA5.

Perhaps the assumption is that the money will be moved from the 

Master's to the doctoral level. Or perhaps Simon Fraser does not 

pay its 

TA5.

Or perhaps 

TA5

are paid from someone else's envelope, 

and the Department has good reason to think that the contents of 

that envelope are in surplus and are available for the asking. Or 

perhaps the availability of doctoral-level 

TAs will

permit an 

increase in undergraduate enrolment that is expected to raise fee 

revenues in a way that will offset the cost. In short, there may 

well be some sort of explanation of which I am not aware. But in 

the absence of one, I certainly have to raise the question, noting 

in the process that it will be very difficult to attract first 

class doctoral candidates in competition with other institutions 

unless supportive funding of this kind is available. 

The same sort of issue arises in relation to scholarships. I 

note from your calendar that Simon Fraser has a considerable array 

of possibilities for providing financial assistance to graduate 

students. So does my own university. Without such resources, our 

graduate programme would probably collapse, since graduate support 

is NOT provided by the Nova Scotia government. In this connection, 

the arrival of doctoral candidates in Political Science will 

constitute a new source of demand -- and that demand will have to 

be met either by additional funding, or by intensifying the 

competition for such funding as is currently available. In the 

first case, there is a cost-increase. 

?

In the second case, 

S

programmes elsewhere in the institution will incur a sacrifice 

7O.

-6-

equivalent to the resources allocated to the new students in 

Political Science. 

It should also be observed that the addition of a new 

programme of this sort, with the ongoing obligations that it 

generates, automatically creates a further constraint on the budget 

process in the event that financial contractions are required in 

the future. Perhaps Dalhousie is perverse in this respect, but my 

own experience has been that programmes that seem to cost very 

little "going in" become transformed into recalcitrant financial 

monsters should economies have to be introduced at a later stage. 

I assume that your office is very aware of these realities, 

but the Department itself may need to be reminded that the lunch is 

never free. Somewhere, somehow, someone always pays! And my guess 

in this case is that the office that is responsible for allocating 

the Department's operating resources will, within a year of the 

start-up of the programme, find itself confronted with a request 

for a departmental budget increase -- even if the request is 

explained by reference to some uncontrollable force of financial 

darkness that is superficially related to something else! 

Demand for the Proposed Programme amon 

g

Prosp 

ective Students 

This is very difficult for me to assess. The Department 

reports that it receives some 100 inquiries per year from students 

interested in pursuing doctoral work. That does not surprise me, 

but of course we would need to know much more before we could 

assess the potential significance of the pattern. How many of such 

students would actually meet admissions standards? Are most of 

them from British Columbia, or do the inquiries come from farther 

afield? To what extent have the communications been directed 

specifically to Simon Fraser, as opposed to reflecting little more 

than the students' routine preliminary canvassings of a variety of 

potential opportunities for graduate work? 

But having said all that, I am quite sure that the Department 

would be able to attract a few well-qualified students to the 

programme each year. It would be important, I think, for it to 

insist on a reasonably high standard, since the reputation of the 

programme over the long haul will be determined in significant 

measure by the calibre of its early graduates. 

Demand for Graduates 

This is even more difficult to assess. The Department is 

quite right in observing that Ph.D.s in Political Science are 

increasing engaged in non-academic occupations -- notably in 

...7 

31.

government and in other public service agencies. To what extent 

this is a function of their own interests (or those of their 

employers), and to what extent a result of the relative scarcity in 

recent years of university vacancies, is extremely difficult to 

assess. Both factors are probably at work. In any case, the 

demographics of the professoriate would suggest that there will be 

a resurgence of demand for young university teachers at the end of 

the 1990s and during the first decade of the third millenium (even 

taking into account the probability that current university 

programming will be to some extent re-structured in response to 

changing societal need). If this assumption is correct, the first 

graduates of the programme would be entering the academic "labour 

market" at a very opportune time. The so-called "globalization" of 

the international economy and related technological developments, 

moreover, are certainly creating an environment in which there is 

an increasing requirement for expertise in international affairs 

and in the internal politics of overseas environments. 

Having said that, it is obviously difficult for me to assess 

whether Canada (or British Columbia) really needs more doctoral 

programmes in Political Science. On a 

p er ca pita 

basis, Canada is 

reputed to have more political scientists than any other country in 

the world. It would be pleasant to think that this is partly 

responsible for the civility with which we are usually able to 

. conduct the intricate affairs of our complex and diversely composed 

federation (our politics appear disheartening only when they. are 

examined without reference to politics anywhere else!) . But I 

doubt that Canada's political scientists can really take the credit 

for such accomplishments as Canadian political life represents. In 

any case, I assume that this sort of question lies beyond your 

purview. At a more immediate and practical level, I have no reason 

to think that graduates of the programme would be unable to find 

employment. Certainly the market looks more inviting down the road 

than it has been over the past few years. 

I hope these comments are helpful, but if I can be of further 

assistance, please do not hesitate to let me know. I will keep the 

materials that you sent to me on file for a short time in case you 

have further inquiries. After that, I will see to it that they are 

destroyed, unless you indicate that you would like to have them 

returned. 

With all good wishes, 

Yours sincerely, 

Denis Stairs 

199

OF GRADUA11.

Université d'Ottawa• University of Ottawa

Faculté des sciences sociales

Faculty of Social Sciences

Simon Fraser University

Burnaby, B.C.

V5A 1S6

Dear Phyllis Wrenn,

Enclosed please find my review of the proposed Ph.D. Programme in Political Science. I'm

sorry to be slightly late with this review.

Thank you for the opportunity of reviewing the document.

Laurier C.P. 450, Succ. A

75 Laurier Ave., P.O. Box 450, Stn. A

Ottawa (Ontario) K1 N 6N5 Canada

Ottawa, Ontario KiN 6N5 Canada

(613) 562-5754 •

Téléc.IFax

(613) 562-5106

Review of proposed Ph.D. in Political Science at Simon Fraser University

1. ?

Academic Merit and Structural Integrity

I feel that the proposal for the Ph.D. in Political Science deserves to be supported.

The primary basis for this judgment is the quality of the faculty and their capacity to

carry out a programme that is destined not only to produce university teachers and

researchers but also skilled analysts capable of working in governments, with private

groups and in the private sector. I also support the Programme because its successful

understaking will continue the development of the Department into one of the best

Political Science Departments in the country. The Department has worked hard and

the Ph.D. programme would demonstrate University support of the departmental

effort.

The overall form of the programme seems to me sound - course work, two

comprehensives, a second language requirement. However, the description given

raises a certain number of points that I feel need to be explained in greater detail.

Some of these may well be settled in the minds of the Department but they do not

appear clearly in the document.

The first of these points touches the question of the general nature of the programme

being proposed - "omnibus" or "specialized". The description given on

suggests

that of 11 major sub-fields the Department will concentrate on three of these.

However, as the description of teaching areas of the Department on the same page

suggests, the proposed programme will in fact cover 3 of the major sub-fields of

Political Science. Political Theory is the only sub-field not included and even in this

case I am not sure that the document explicitly indicates that prospective students will

be clearly told that they will not be accepted if their area of interest is not within the

area of defined strength of the department - Comparative politics, International

Relations, and Canadian Politics and Public Policy.

Therefore despite the description of the proposed programme as being specialized, it

could be seen to be very close to an omnibus programme - with the exception of

Political Theory. The document describes the specificity in terms of departmental

expertise in areas such as Political Economy and Public Policy (p. 2) and in terms of

encouraging students to explore the overlaps (p.

such as International Political

Economy, Governance and Comparative Public Policy. These are interesting

possibilities but I see nothing in the description of the programme that suggests how

these will be done concretely. Will students be required to take courses in more than

one area? Will they be required to take at least one course in Political Economy or

International Political Economy and in Public Policy or Governance? If overlaps are

to be encouraged will this be systematically done in the Ph.D. seminar?

These are important questions for the Department to be clear about, because it is too

late to make decisions once students have been admitted. If the Department really

wants to have a programme that will lead not only to university teaching but also to

31/'

public and private sector policy analysis etc. (which is almost a necessity in today's

economic climate), I think it would make sense to require students to take courses in

more than one area and in Political Economy and Public Policy.

proposed course descriptions) say nothing about the ways in which doctoral students

will be combined with MA students in these courses. I think it would be important to

indicate somewhere in the document (or at least for the Department to be very clear

on this point) how this is to be done - what kind of extra work or different work this

would involve. It is important both for the Ph.D. students and the MA students that

this be very clear - and this can also help to clarify the nature of the intended links

between the course work and the comprehensive exams. It would also be useful to

have an indication (in the section on the comprehensive exams) of what the

Department would see as the normal progress of when students would write the first

and second comprehensive exams. Again this seems to me important for the students

to know what the expectation is but also for the Department to know what their

collectively agreed upon expectation is. Not setting fixed dates has some advantages

but it also has disadvantages in that students may well drag this process on longer than

the Department intended.

Indicating expectations might help. And the Department should also develop a

description about whether the exams are based on the reading lists from the courses

taken, on a reading list drawn up by the student and the supervisor or some other

format based on material drawn from other sources. It is important to be able' to give

very clear guidelines to the students.

2. ?

Adequacy of the facult y

ad other resources

As I stated earlier, the quality of the faculty is certainly the basis for my support for

the programme. The Department has research and teaching strength in Comparative

Politics, International Relations and Canadian Government and Public Policy.

Having said this I would also like to point out that the c.v.'s sent with the document

need to be put into better shape. A few of them date from 1992 (at least 1992

publications are listed as forthcoming) and none of them are more recent than 1994. I

can appreciate how irritating it is over the long process of developing a proposal for a

new programme to have to continually ask colleagues to update their c.v.'s (and

perhaps standardize the format somewhat more but this is perhaps a different question)

but it is not easy to come to an evaluation about the departmental capacity to direct

Ph.D. students if c.v.'s are not up to date. If someone has done almost no research

and publishing in the last three years, their ability to direct Ph.D. students is

considerably less than those of people whose recent research activity is flourishing.

•

But

despite this problem it is evident that the Department has a very high proportion

of its members who are actively engaged in researching and the disseminating of this

research through conferences, publications and a whole variety of mechanisms

including community and government work. Indeed the range of ways research

findings are being communicated to a broader public is a very positive sign of the

vitality of the Department and a very promising factor for the Ph.D. programme.

Obviously the levels of research and scholarly activity are unequal across the

Department but there is good strength in each of the three areas described for the

Ph.D. - Comparative Politics, International Relations and Canadian Politics and Public

Policy. It did seem to me in looking at the c.v.'s that there were more people

involved in public policy research that those indicated for that area of

If the

Department wants to indicate its strength in this area (as it presumably does) and in

particular if it wants to indicate that its strength in this area in fact bridges

international and Canadian perspectives, this could be done by more clearly

highlighting those people (at least Cohn, Covell and McBride in addition to the people

listed on

whose research work includes public policy oriented work both in a

Canadian and non-Canadian context. Some ways of visualizing (perhaps a matrix-type

diagram) the areas of expertise of the faculty that included both the traditional sub-

fields but also the overlaps the Department wants to emphasize would be useful.

This, plus the kind of precisions I was calling for earlier, would make far clearer how

the Department sees itself giving a specialized training to the Ph.D. students. The

Department does have strength in these "bridge" areas but unless it is concretized in

the document, one does not really get a good idea of this strength and prospective

students might not get a clear sense of what this programme would offer them. In the

"bridge" areas of governance, public policy and political economy, it would be

important to describe these areas in somewhat more detail and in ways that connect

the research work being done on Canada and that being done on international topics.

The Department contains some very productive scholars who are working in these

"bridge" areas but unless these are highlighted in more specific terms, the proposal

appears much more conventional than it might be in reality.

3. ?

Demand for proposed programme

I have no doubt that the proposed Ph.D. programme will attract top quality

candidates. There are a lot of students who want to do a Ph.D. in Political Science

and a programme that explicitly talks about preparing students not only for university

teaching but for research and analysis in the public and private sectors will have

interest for a number of students. In addition, a number of the members of the

Department have reputations and are involved in research that will attract students. I

would strongly recommend that the Department keep the numbers very small in the

first years in order to establish the programme and make sure that it is running

smoothly and that the Department feels comfortable with the requirements of

supervision. It is also important to do this in order to be able to choose really good

quality students and also to be able to choose students who want to work in areas of

departmental strength. The Department must be willing to turn down students who

want to work in areas where there is not sufficient strength in the Department. This is

essential if the Programme is to acquire a real focus and therefore attract students on

the basis of this focus.

4. ?

Demand for graduates

I agree with the proposal when it underlines that a programme such as the one

described can produce graduates destined not only for academic positions but also for

policy and administrative positions. Graduates from Political Science Ph.D.

Programmes are finding employment in increasingly diversified settings and for a

Programme to explicitly recognize this is an advantage (both in general terms but also,

As long as the programme remains small I feel confident that the graduates will find

useful outlets for applying their training in academia, in consulting, in policy analysis,

in administering non-governmental organizations, etc.

In summary I think the proposal has academic merit. I would suggest some

departmental discussion about how the specialized nature of the programme can be

better translated into programme requirements. I feel confident that the Department

will be able to carry out these discussions successfully. There has been a real effort to

develop and improve the Department over the past few years and obtaining the

doctoral programme would be a proper recognition of the success of the Department

OCT:319,S

FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES

sun op

Office of the Dean

MEMORANDUM

TO:

Phyllis M. Wrenn, Associate Dean

FROM:

David Leyton-Brown, Dean

SUBJECT: Proposed Ph.D. program in Political Science at Simon Fraser University

DATE:

September

25, 1995

I am pleased to submit these comments on the proposal for a Ph.D. program in Political

Science at Simon Fraser University. In doing so I must make clear that I am fundamentally

supportive of the proposal - the Department has a more than adequate complement of faculty

to deliver such a program; the proposed fields are appropriate to the concerns of the

discipline and the competence of the faculty; the initiative is a natural outgrowth of the

academic plans and developments of the Department in recent years. Any questions I raise

are offered with constructive intent, to suggest ways in which the proposal might be

strengthened, or are matters that might easily be clarified if I had the opportunity to speak

with members of the Department and University rather than simply to read the written

proposal. As well as general observations, I will also offer some specific comments on

matters that are unclear to me, although discussion might easily have been able to answer

them.

The Academic Merit and Structural Integrity of the Program

Overall structure - The academic structure of the program is at the moment minimal. The

proposal (calendar entry pp. i-ii) says that 30 credit hours of graduate course work are

required (including a theory/methods requirement, and of which at least 20 hours must be in

courses offered by the Department), along with two comprehensive exams and a thesis.

However, since there are to be no net additional courses, and every course is to serve the

needs of the MA program as well as those of the limited number of Ph.D. students, it is not

apparent that the doctoral course work will prepare students for the comprehensive

examinations, and for thesis research, better than MA students in any qualitative way beyond

the sheer number of courses taken. Many Ph.D. programs have a dedicated doctoral course,

either as preparation for the comprehensive exams, or as preparation for the design and

development of the thesis proposal, to speed progress through the program. Has such a

course been considered here? Would the proposed low enrolment levels make such a course

viable if it is considered academically desirable?

- 1 -

The proposal (pp. 2,

says impressive things about the emphasis on new and growing

concerns within the discipline ("the interaction between institutions, organizations and policy,

governance, and political economy"), or on the overlaps between the identified fields.

However these emphases are not explicitly reflected in the structure of the program (i.e. its

field structure, the absence of requirements for cross field course selection, no specification

that the comprehensive examinations will address these interactions and overlaps, etc.) or its

curriculum (descriptions of existing courses reveal no explicit attention to these themes, but

are for the most part traditional in scope and content, and only two or three of the proposed

new courses have these explicit themes). Either this rhetoric seems overblown, or more

attention should be given to build the program explicitly around these defining themes.

The characterization (p. 3) of several; other Ph.D. programs across the country as "omnibus"

rather than as specialized by fields is somewhat misleading. It is not only new programs

which specify their fields - under the OCGS appraisal system, every university in Ontario

(including the purported omnibus program at the University of Toronto, must specify their

fields, and operate only within them; a smaller university like Dalhousie may not designate

fields formally, but has clear and recognized areas of concentrated expertise. This really

strengthens the point being made in the proposal, that it is appropriate for this proposed

program to specify its fields.

Fields - It is a minor quibble, but the "11 fields of Canadian Political Science" specified on

are not universally recognized as such. Many universities combine one or more of these

proposal repackages them into three without explanation. The combining of the Canadian

Politics and Public Administration and Policy fields into Canadian Politics and Policy is

easily understood, but no explanation is given as to why Political Theory is dropped as a

field. Is this an implicit commentary on the scholarly quality of the faculty listed in Figure

II as members of the Political Theory field (and if so what does it say about their

contribution to their other fields)? Is it an implicit commentary on the anticipated student

demand and employment prospects for graduates in this field? Is it an implicit commentary

on the place on political theory and its contribution to the defining themes of this proposed

program? Is there some other reason for the change? And finally, though it goes beyond the

scope of this proposal, if the three fields identified for the Ph.D. program make sense for the

department at the doctoral level, do they not also make sense at the MA level, and will the

number of fields in the MA program be adjusted accordingly (and if not, why not)?

Curriculum - I have already mentioned above that the curricular requirements seem to

suggest that doctoral students will take only 4-6 more of the same courses than do MA

students. Might it have been helpful to define somewhat more fully a program of Ph.D.

study, and the ways (if any) in which it differs from MA study? This becomes particularly

relevant when one examines the actual course descriptions (which parenthetically are not

consistent as regards level, intended enrolment, basis for evaluation, etc.). It is not clear at

-2-

• ?

what level the graduate curriculum is pitched - one course for example is described as a

"general introduction" (830-5), while another is an "overview ... and intensive introduction"

(841-3), while a third is "an introduction ... at the graduate level"

(844-5).

While

recognizing that the word "introduction" may have very different meaning at the

undergraduate and graduate levels, is it appropriate for doctoral students to take

introductions, especially in their major field? Are some course more advanced than others,

and intended to be taken only after completion of the graduate-level introduction? And what

course offerings will be available for Ph.D. students who were members of the MA program

in the same department, and who therefore will already have taken many of these courses?

One proposed new course

(856)

estimates an enrolment of 15, which raises a question about

the number of students needed to make any course academically (and financially) viable. Is

there a minimum enrolment needed for a course to continue? If so, what provisions are

made to make the course work available for a displaced student who needs the material (e.g.

in preparation for comprehensive examinations, which cannot be put off until the next time

the course might be offered)?

It appears that there will be no net additions to the curriculum, because the proposed new

courses will be matched by courses removed from the curriculum. However two of those

(863-5

and 864-3) do not appear to have been offered since 1983 and 1985 respectively, so

their removal may be more apparent than real. The more substantive question would be

whether there is any change to the number of courses offered in any given year.

0 ?

Timing - The proposal (calendar entry) states that the comprehensive examinations are to be

taken upon completion of coursework, but there is no indication of whether there is a

requirement as to how soon after the completion of coursework the exams must be done.

a seminar to the Department on their research interests, and then to submit a formal thesis

proposal, but again there is no indication of whether there is any requirement as to how soon

each of these is to be done. I expect that drafters of the proposal could easily answer these

questions, but the proposal itself is silent on them. Many programs elsewhere have found

that specification of maximum times for completion of each of these stages has had beneficial

effects on the time to completion of the entire doctoral program. Incidentally I should

comment positively that I think the departmental seminar presentation could be a valuable

assistance to the student in formulating the thesis proposal, and thus in moving on more

quickly and successfully to the actual thesis research. To speed completion further, some

universities incorporate such a discussion in the comprehensive examination, and I wonder if

any thought has been given to doing so.

Adequacy of Facult

y and Other Resources

Faculty - I have some complaint about the fact that the CVs were not in uniform format,

which made it difficult to assess some qualifications - e.g. the research funding (if any)

received by some faculty is unclear, and only five indicate any previous graduate supervisory

-3-

experience, even at the MA level. This latter point is surprising given that the Department

has graduated 47 MAs since 1974, and currently has

MA students enrolled (p. 6). I am

confident that there is more supervisory experience in the Department than the CVs indicate,

but the written materials given to me make it impossible to assess that.

I paid particular attention to the scholarly activities of the faculty in the past seven years,

because of my conviction that those teaching and supervising doctoral students should

themselves be actively and continuously engaged in research and scholarship. The scholarly

records of all of the faculty range from adequate to good over that period.

Experience in the OCGS appraisal system has shown that a bare minimum of four and

preferably five faculty members are essential to offer a viable field at the doctoral level, to

allow for continuity of teaching and supervision with inevitable sabbaticals, administrative

leaves, etc. The three fields proposed here exceed those minimum numbers.

There are some inconsistencies in the data and CVs presented. For example, P. Faikenheim

is included among the CVs, but is not listed among the faculty in Figure II, nor shown as

expected to teach in the graduate curriculum in Figure ifi. On the other hand, P Meyer is

included in Figures II and ifi, but there is no CV. Nor is there a CV for C. Szafnicki, who

presumably teaches the only required graduate course in theory and methodology.

There is no discussion of anticipated retirements, and if I had had the opportunity I would

have asked how many faculty are expected to retire within the next five to seven years, and

what impact those retirements would have on the viability of the fields in which they teach

and supervise. I trust that the University will be mindful of this point, because I am unable

to comment one way or another about it.

Finally, the self-congratulatory comments (p.

about the unique ability of the SFU faculty

to teach and research in more than a single field of the discipline seem unnecessary,

especially to non-SFU eyes.

Other Resources -

he proposal asserts (p. 2) that the program can be mounted with minimal

new expenditures, and Figure VI shows a total anticipated cost of

$550.

I fear that this is a

serious underestimate of the actual costs which will be incurred. The largest potential cost

for any new program is faculty salaries, and the proposal asserts that this cost will be zero,

and that existing resources will be reallocated. It may in future become academically

desirable to mount a Ph.D. course, which would involve new faculty time. Even if not, I

cannot determine if in fact there will be constant or increasing teaching resources in the

graduate curriculum. Different credit weighting makes it hard for me to interpret Figure III,

which shows nine courses offered in 93-3, 94-1 and 94-2 (if I have matched the 93-94

academic year properly), nine courses in 94-3, 95-1 and

95-2,

but eleven courses in

95-3,

96-1 and 96-2, and twelve planned for 96-3, 97-1 and 97-2 (the first intended year of the

doctoral programme). It is possible that with different course weightings these could all

amount to the same allocation of teaching resources, but this is not clear to me.

-4-

41/

• A second area of cost will be teaching assistantships. Figure VI shows zero for this amount,

but the proposal (p. 10) rightly comments on the availability of Ph.D. students to tutor third

year classes, and of Ph.D. students near completion to be sessional lecturers. These useful

activities will not come without cost.

In addition to teaching assistantships there will have to be some provision for student

assistance funds, such as scholarships and bursaries.

The proposal presumes zero additional secretarial costs (apart from a modest amount for

supplies and services and overhead). There will be real additional work to be performed (in

every area from admissions through registration to advising and convocation), and even if the

costs are small, they cannot be ignored.

A non-recurring amount of $100 for library collections seems impossibly low. A Ph.D.

programme will require more than the one or two books that $100 could buy in its first year

of operation.

Finally there is no indication of costs for office space for the Ph.D. students. At 2-4 per

year for up to six years, there could be potentially as many as 24 Ph.D. students who will

have to be accommodated.

In short, I cannot believe that any Ph.D. program could be mounted without more costs than

. ?

are contemplated in this proposal. This is not to say that the proposal should therefore be

refused - quite the contrary. Rather it is to say that the costs should be recognized and the

necessary resources committed.

Student Demand

The enrolment levels contemplated are low, and I do not anticipate difficulty in reaching

those targets.

The proposal states (p. 9) that there will be a high GPA requirement (3.5) to ensure that the

program remains small. This at least implies that the hight if the GPA requirement is

volitional, and was chosen to achieve this end. However my reading of the SFU Calendar

suggests that a

3.5

GPA is the minimum requirement for admission to any doctoral program.

Demand for Graduates

I find the discussion in the proposal (p. 10) on this point weak. The academic job market is

declining, and many programs in many disciplines are questioning the wisdom of continuing

to educate the same number of Ph.D. students in the past to face a dwindling range of career

prospects at the end. The proposal puts great weight on the prospects for positions in policy

and administration, but the current global pattern of government deficit reductions and

downsizing can hardly fill one with confidence for continued expansion in these career

opportunities.

-5-

However, it would be wrong to conclude that there will be no demand for graduates, and so

there should be no program. Manpower estimates are notoriously unreliable, especially as

far off as six or more years. Even with continued downsizing and budget cuts, there will

continue to be a need to replace those who retire, and to undertake new activities. A small

and well designed program should be able to contribute graduates to meet that market.

David eon-Brown, Dean

Faculty of Graduate Studies

SIMON FRASER I

DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

JNIVERSITY

995

BURNABY, BRSH COLUMBIA V5A 1S6

Telephone: (604k 291-42

Associate Dean of Graduate Studies

Simon Fraser University

September 22, 1995

Dear Phyllis:

I have enclosed the Department of Political Science's response to the external review of our

proposed Ph.D. program. We understand that the comments of the External Review Committee

and our response will be discussed at the October 2nd meeting of the Assessment Committee for

New Graduate Programs. Professor Stephen McBride will represent our Department at that

meeting since I will be teaching at that time.

RESPONSE TO THE EXTERNAL REVIEW OF THE PROPOSAL FOR A

PH.D. IN POLITICAL SCIENCE ?

I am writing on behalf of the Department of Political Science in response to the external

review committee's comments on our proposed Ph.D. program. We are grateful to the members

of the Review Committee for the time and careful attention they have given to their task.

We are very pleased that the external reviewers unanimously endorsed the creation of a

Ph.D. program in our department and recognized the high quality of our faculty members. We

note with particular satisfaction Professor Caroline Andrew's comments that our proposed

Ph.D. program 'will attract top quality candidates' and 'will continue the development of the

[our] Department into one of the best Political Science Department's in the country". We also

welcome Professor Andrew Sancton's remark that he was "extremely impressed" by the vitae

of faculty members in our department, both new appointments and "others who have been at

SFU for longer and who have built solid reputations for themselves, especially in the three

designated subfields'.

Em p lo y

ment opportunities.

We welcome the external reviewers' assessment that there will be a growth in employment

opportunities for the graduates of our program in private sector consulting, in

nongovernmental organizations, in the civil service and especially in academia where there will

be a large number of retirements and renewed demand for Ph.D's, particularly in the fields

emphasized by our program. We anticipate that in British Columbia this will include

opportunities both in universities and in the colleges where retirements and the growing

pressure to teach first and second year university courses will increase the demand for faculty

with Ph.Ds.

Pro g

ram size.

We reiterate our commitment to establish a small Ph.D. program with 2-4 entrants per year.

The Department is opposed to including formal limits in the calendar but we anticipate that

. ?

Response to External Review of Proposed Political Science Ph.D.

the high GPA required for admission plus our own strong determination to keep the number

of entrants small and to avoid establishing an omnibus program will serve as adequate limits.

While we have designated Canadian Politics and Public Policy, Comparative Politics and

International Relations as the approved fields for our program, our firm intention is to

maintain a focus on political economy, governance and public policy. We do not want an

omnibus program. The culture in our department is opposed to one.

Pro

ram distinctiveness.

We believe that the small, specialized nature of our program will differentiate it from the

much larger, omnibus program at UBC. In this regard we note the following assessment of the

unique strengths of our faculty that was expressed in the March 1992 External Review of our

department: 'The emphasis on questions of governance (institutions and the administration of

policy, particularly in the interrelations of politics and the economy) gives a particular thrust

to the Department and one that is quite different from the areas of strength of the UBC

Political Science Department (which, within Canadian politics, is much stronger on questions

of 'politics' than of 'policy' and/or 'governance'). We believe that British Columbia can

support one omnibus and one small, focused Ph.D. program when Ontario, with three times its

population has seven political science Ph.D. programs and Alberta, with a smaller population,

has two political science Ph.D. programs. Our program's focus on public policy, political

economy and governance will be an asset to British Columbia in an era of increasing

globalization.

Our smaller program not only will have the academic benefit of bringing together students

and faculty with shared research interests Its small size also will help ensure that the students

get the individual attention and supervision they expect and deserve. In this regard, we

welcome and strongly endorse Professor Caroline Andrew's comments that the Department

should clarify what kinds of extra work or different work would be expected of Ph.D. students

work and the comprehensive exams, our expectations regarding when these exams will be taken,

and the procedures for drawing up the reading lists for comprehensive exams. It is our

intention to establish clear and concrete procedures and expectations before the program

begins. We also intend to follow up on Professor Andrew's suggestion that the information sent

to prospective students should highlight the "bridge' areas of governance, public policy and

political economy and the work being done in these areas by the 'very productive scholars" [her

words] in our department. We recognize that lack of clarity regarding such matters can be

annoying to graduate students. We accept that the time limit for the program should be

3-5

years, not 4-6 years in order to encourage students to complete the requirements as

expeditiously as possible.

Professor Andrew has raised a legitimate question about how the specialized nature of the

proposed program is reflected in program requirements. We believe that the required course

work should ensure that the students have a broad background in their general areas of interest

and that they are capable of teaching in at least two sub-fields in the discipline. Students will

be required to specialize during the thesis research and preparation phase which will take the

bulk of their time in the program. Each candidate has to go through a thesis proposal process

which requires approval of the thesis topic by the supervsiory committee and its presentation

to the Department. The composition of students' supervisory committees and their expectations

will encourage the kind of specialization and overlap between sub-disciplines that are the focus

of our proposed program.

We agree that Professor Maureen Covell, Professor Theodore Cohn and Professor Stephen

McBride should be included in the list of faculty members specializing in the fields emphasized

in our program. We regret that we did not include more up-to-date curriculum vitae with the

proposal. If we had done so, they would have demonstrated the continued high research

4'9.

Response to External Review of Proposed Political Science Ph.D.

productivity of our department.

Program costs.

We recognize that the external reviewers have legitimate concerns about the costs of our

program. There will be modest, incremental costs which can easily be covered in our existing

operating budget. We believe that the costs will be modest even if the indirect costs are

included. Currently, we are admitting an average of 15-20 Masters students per year. Adding

two to four new Ph.D. students per year to this program should not greatly increase the

administrative burden.

Our Ph.D. students will be able to tap into sources of funding not available to our Master's

students. We anticipate that some of our Ph.D. students will receive SSHRC fellowships for

which our Master's students are not eligible and that some, for example, college faculty seeking

upgrading, may even come with their own funding. In some cases, Ph.D. students may be

qualified to serve as research assistants for externally funded projects run by members our

department for which there is no qualified M.A. student. Some advanced Ph.D. students may

serve as sessional instructors whom our department needs to mount its program. These various

sources of funding should allow us to admit Ph.D. students with little or no negative impact on

our Master's students.

Ph.D. students also would be qualified to serve as teaching assistants for third year courses

which would enable our department to accommodate a larger number of students at this level.

At the moment, the Department does not assign teaching assistants to third year courses because

we are not convinced that Master's students are qualified to perform this function. Yet the

enrolment pressure in third year courses has been increased by the growing tendency for

students in B.C. to complete their first two years of university training at one of the colleges

and to transfer to our program for their third and fourth years. The admission of Ph.D.

students would allow a more rational distribution of the teaching assistant resources already

L/.

Res

p onse to External Review of Pro

p osed Political Science Ph.D.

allocated to the department.

Library.

The SFU library has collections in the fields emphasized in our proposed program which

already are being taught at the Master's and undergraduate levels. Our Library Collections

Manager, after a thorough review of our holdings, concluded that they were more than

adequate to support the type of program envisioned. Our library also encourages and supports

faculty and student use of interlibrary loan to access the collections of other libraries, not just

in British Columbia but also outside it.

In summary, we are pleased with the strong unanimous support that the external review

committee voiced for our proposed Ph.D. program and their conviction that there will be strong

and growing employment prospects for its graduates. We reiterate our commitment to keep the

program small and to admit only high quality applicants which will be guaranteed by the high

admissions standards which we have set for the program.

41,q

• ?

APPENDIX I

CALENDAR ENTRY

•

January 15, 1996

Political Science Ph.D. Program

Appendix

I - Calendar Entry

Title

Graduate Studies - Political Science

Ph.D. Program

Degree Requirements

General

Prospective candidates should be advised that the Department offers specialized research resources in the

fields of Canadian Politics and Public Policy, Comparative Politics, and International Relations with a focus within

each field on issues of political economy, public policy and governance. However, the department may be able to

offer opportunities for advanced study in other fields of political science, subject to the availability of faculty

research expertise.

Admission

In addition to the minimum admission requirements established in the Graduate General Regulations

section (1.3.3.), the department also requires a completed MA in political science normally with a minimum 3.67

GPA in graduate courses taken towards the MA degree. A written statement of current research interests

indicating two areas of proposed specialization, three letters of reference from qualified referees, and a sample of

the candidate's written work are also required. How well the proposed research of the applicant coincides with the

department's focus on political economy, public policy and governance is an important consideration for

admission. Any deficiencies in a student's background must be met by taking appropriate courses in addition to

work normally required for the Ph.D.

Applications for admission are reviewed once each year by the departmental Graduate Studies Committee

with the program commencing in September.

Supervisory Committee

In accordance with Graduate General Regulation 1.6., upon admission into the program, the departmental

Graduate Studies Committee shall assign a Senior supervisor and two second supervisors to each student. This

supervisory committee shall be responsible for monitoring, aiding and evaluating the student's progress through the

Ph.D. program. Each supervisory committee will be structured to reflect the department's focus on issues of

political economy, public policy and governance and to ensure that these constitute an integral part of each

student's program.

Program Requirements

The program leading towards the Doctor of Philosophy degree in political science consists of 30 credit

hours of graduate course work beyond the requirements of the MA degree plus a second language requirement, two

comprehensive exams and a thesis.

January 15, 1996

Political Science Ph.D. Program

• ?

Course Work

Students enrolled in the Ph.D. program are required to successfully complete 30 credit hours of graduate

level course work of which at least 20 credit hours shall be attained from courses offered by the Department. All

course choices must be approved by the student's Supervisory Committee and reflect the student's areas of

specialization within the fields of political economy, public policy and governance as identified in the student's

letter of intent. All students must complete Politics 801 - Scope and Methods or an equivalent course. All courses

must be completed prior to completion of any other component of the program.

Language Requirement

Students will be required to demonstrate a reading ability in one language, other than English, that is

acceptable to the student's supervisory committee. Students proposing to study a topic related to Canadian politics

must demonstrate an ability to read French. Ability will be determined by successful completion of a nine limited

examination consisting of a dictionary aided translation of a passage from the political science literature written in

the language selected.

Comprehensive Examinations

Upon completion of course work and prior to the commencement of thesis research, students must

successfully complete a comprehensive examination in two selected fields. By the end of the second semester of a

student's enrollment in the program, that student's Senior Supervisor must notify the departmental Graduate

. Studies Committee of the two fields of study within the discipline of political science which will serve as subjects

for comprehensive examinations. Each examination will consist of a three hour written examination and a one

hour oral examination held one week after the completion of the written exam. The examinations will be

established, conducted and evaluated by a Comprehensive Examination Committee selected by the department

Graduate Studies Committee. The Comprehensive Examination Committee shall be composed of one member of

the student's Supervisory Committee, an additional faculty member from the department, and one from outside the

department. The Comprehensive Examination Committee will be chaired by the department Graduate Studies

chair.

Students will receive a grade of Satisfactory or Unsatisfactory from the Comprehensive Examination

Committee following completion of the written and oral component of each field. Students who receive a failing

grade shall be permitted one retake of that exam following a one semester lapse.

Thesis

Candidates successfully completing both Comprehensive Examinations will be required to complete POL

890 the department's Ph.D. seminar designed to assist students with the preparation of a formal thesis topic and to

relate it to issues of political economy, public policy and governance. POL 890 will culminate with the

presentation by each student of a seminar to the Department outlining his/her research interests. This will be done

prior to submission of a formal thesis proposal to the Graduate Studies Committee.

Following the Departmental seminar and after consultations with the Student's Supervisory Committee,

the student shall prepare a thesis proposal for approval by the Graduate Studies Committee. The proposal shall

state the thesis title, topic, general intent, methodology and selected bibliography. It will be accompanied by a

• ?

detailed research plan and timetable for the completion of each chapter of the thesis. The thesis proposal should

not exceed 25 pages in length, excluding bibliographic references.

January 15, 1996

Political Science PkD. Program

The Thesis itself should be no more than 300 pages in length and must represent an original contribution

to the development of the discipline. The completed thesis must be successfully defended at an oral defence

established in accordance with Graduate General Regulations 1.9. and 1.10.

Performance Evaluation

In accordance with Graduate General Regulation 1.8. the progress of each student towards the Ph.D.

degree shall be reviewed periodically by the Graduate Studies Committee. At least once each year the student's

Supervisory Committee shall subiit a written report on the student's progress to the Graduate Studies Committee

to aid its deliberations. Students judged to have maintained unsatisfactory progress by the Graduate Studies

Committee may be asked to withdraw from the Program.

Time Limits

Although Graduate General Regulation 1.12 establishes an eight year time limit for the Ph.D., it is the

expectation of the Department that the Ph.D. program may be completed within three to five years of entrance.

January 15, 1996 ?

5c.

Political Science Ph.D. Program

• ?

APPENDIX II

The Scope and Methods of Political Science

Political Theory

Normative Political Theory

Canadian Government and Politics

Canadian Political Economy

Political Parties and Ideologies In Canada

Issues in Canadian Government and Politics

Comparative Government and Politics

Government and Politics of Communist Countries

Government and Politics of Developing Countries

International Relations

International Law and Organizations

Canadian Foreign Policy

International Political Economy

Foreign Policy Analysis

International Security Studies

Public Policy in Canada

. ?

POL 852 ?

Urban Government and Politics

POL 853 ?

Public Administration

POL 856 ?

Issues in Social and Economic Policy

POL 861

Political Development

OTHER COURSES

POL 829 ?

Legislative Internship

POL 891

Master's Seminar

POL 893

Readings in Political Science

POL 897

Master's Field Exams

POL 898 ?

Master's Thesis Research

(Detailed course outlines available 

?

on request) 

APPENDIX

ifi

FACULTY VITAE

(Faculty Vitae available on request) 

January 15, 1996

Political Science Ph.D. Program