I

J, ?

I

S-95-10

.

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

• ?

Office of the Vice-President, Academic

MEMORANDUM

To: ?

Senate

From: ?

J.M. Munro, Chair, Senate Committee on Academic Planning

Subject:

?

Master of Arts in Gerontology

Date: ?

January 25, 1995

Action undertaken at the meeting of the Senate Committee on Academic Planning on

January 11, 1995 gives rise to the following motion:

Motion: ?

"That Senate approve and recommend to the Board of Governors as set

forth in S.95-

10 ,

approval of the Master of Arts in Gerontology."

The proposal for an M.A. Program in Gerontology first came to the Senate Committee

on Academic Planning in June, 1994 after consideration by the Faculty of Arts, the

S

Assessment Committee for New Graduate Programs and the Senate Graduate Studies

Committee. After consideration, SCAP referred the program back asking that it be

redesigned as a more applied program. The program was resubmitted in December,

1994 to the Dean of Graduate Studies who approved the revised proposal on behalf of

the Senate Graduate Studies Committee. At its meetings in December, 1994 and

January, 1995, SCAP considered the revisions and now recommends approval of this

program.

The program has been redesigned so that it is clearly defined as a professional program

with two streams: Aging and the Built Environment and Health Promotion and Aging.

While the focus of the program is clearly applied, there will be an opportunity for a

small number of students to take a thesis option if their preference is for a research-

oriented degree.

When this program has the approval of Senate and the Board of Governors, the normal

practice will be followed of sending documentation on the new program to the other

provincial universities for comment. Also, we expect the Ministry of Skills, Training

and Labour to institute a province-wide new degree program approval process in the

near future and this program would be subject to this process.

Since the implementation of this program would be contingent on additional funding, it

S

would

and the

be

Ministry.

considered

At

again

that time,

by SCAP

SCAP

after

will

approval

review

by

and

Senate,

make

the

recommendations

Board of Governors

on

priorities for new program funding.

?

A

---

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY SCAP 94-71

OFFICE OF THE DEAN OF GRADUATE STUDIES

?

Memorandum

TO: Evan Alderson ?

FROM: Bruce P. Clayman

Dean of Arts ?

Dean

of

Graduate Studies

SUBJECT: MA in Gerontology ?

DATE: December 4, 1994

Thank you for your memorandum of November 22 describing and enclosing the revised proposal

for an MA in Gerontology. I regret that my absence from campus delayed its consideration until

now.

I agree with you that the proposal appears to satisfy the earlier concerns of SCAP, as well as

those raised by members of the Senate Graduate Studies Committee and by me. The revisions

comprise a focusing and tightening of the proposal to areas of strength.

Accordingly, I am pleased to be able to approve the revised proposal on behalf of the SGSC and

forward it directly to SCAP.

S

c. A.J. Watt

G. Gutman

J.M. Munro

I,

MDE04ALD.DOC 4-Dec-94

---

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

Office of the Dean, Faculty of Arts

MEMORANDUM

H

NC :

V 21

L.tI±2:11

To: Bruce Clayman

Dean of Graduate Studies

Subject: Revised MA. in Gerontology

Proposal

From: Evan Alderson

Dean of Arts

Date:

22 November 1994

I am forwarding to you a revised proposal for a Master's program in

Gerontology. Following the SCAP meeting which referred back the

previous proposal, there have been several discussions within the

University regarding appropriate revisions, and the proposal has undergone

a number of further iterations within the Faculty of Arts.

Associate Dean Andrea Lebowitz, who chairs the Faculty of Arts

Graduate Studies Committee, and I are both of the view that the current

proposal satisfies the earlier reservations of SCAP and that in very

substantial measure it answers the critical comments by some of the

external reviewers. We do not believe the current proposal needs to be re-

addressed within the Faculty of Arts, and we hope that you will a

g

ree with

us that the matter can be passed directly back to SCAP.

The essential changes from the earlier proposal are as follows:

1.

The program has been clearly defined as a professional program,

designed to teach applied research skills and wide gerontological

knowledge to practitioners in a variety of employment categories. The

program will retain a small and select thesis option, but everyone will be

admitted to the project' stream. Only a few students who have more

academic inclination will move into the thesis stream. The increased

expectation of methodological expertise for these students will be met by

a course requirement from another department.

2.

The projected cost of implementing the program has been substantially

reduced. The two new faculty requested will handle undergraduate

courses now taught largely by sessionals as well as contributing to the

M.A. program. A total faculty complement of tour for both programs,

together with collaborative arrang

e

ments with Sociology &

Anthropology, will in my view provide an appropriate balance of faculty

strength and variety of expertise for a program of this type. The co-

operation with Sociology & Anthropology, and the postponement of the

"Administrative Services" stream pendin

g

further discussions with

Business Administration are well advised on both academic and

financial grounds.

.

L

W1,

---

I

Having re-read the original letters of external review, it appears to me

that the proposed revision responds appropriately, within the SF1) context,

to the reservations expressed therein. Perhaps these reservations can best be

summarized by quoting a sentence from the letter of Allen Dobbs:

"Although I am sceptical about the program turning out researchers, I do

think it is very well suited to turning out qualified professionals." In my

view the program proposal has now focused on its primary strengths and

potentials in ways that will be academically sound and cost effective. I urge

you to expedite its return to SCAP.

Evan Alderson

EA/hj

?

Dean of Arts

cc: ?

A. Wister

C. Gutman

A. Lebowitz

0

---

.

[I1

---

1/

program.

C: ?

G. Gutman

A. Wister

A. Lebowitz

M. McGinn

KIMA23CLA.DOC 25-Mar-94

) Q°

?

. 1 )

.........-

.

1.

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

DEAN OF GRADUATE STUDIES

SMemorandum

TO:

?

B. P.

Clayman, Chair

?

FROM: Phyllis Wrenn

Senate Graduate Studies Committee

?

Associate Dean

SUBJECT:

MA in Gerontology

?

DATE: March 25, 1994

The Assessment Committee for New Graduate Programs (ACNGP) has approved and

recommends to the SGSC for approval a proposal for an MA

in Gerontology.

The first draft of

the proposal was received on 20 April 1993. In making this recommendation, the committee

noted, and wishes to draw your attention to, the following points:

1)

The committee noted, and expressed concern regarding anomalies in the external reviews,

particularly with respect to the assessment of faculty resources. It noted also, however, the lack of

substantive or concrete comment on the program proposal itself in the case of the dissenting

reviewer

2)

The committee suggested that BUS 527 - Financial Accounting, and BUS 528 -

Managerial Accounting, be added as recommended electives for students in the professional

option.

3)

The committee noted concerns expressed by reviewers regarding the research option, and

faculty strength in this area. It noted the difficulty of assessing a new program proposal which

relies for its instruction on as-yet-unidentified faculty; it noted assessments of the research records

of the cohort of associated

I

adjunct faculty, as well as the recognition gained by the two core

faculty members.

Please place this proposal on the agenda of the next meeting of the SGSC. By copy of this memo,

I am inviting G. Gutman and A. Wister to attend this meeting as representatives of the proposed

---

AC NGP-93-15

PROPOSAL FOR MA IN GERONTOLOGY

?

6 Nov 1991

?

Approved "in-Ii-inciple" by Senate Committee on

Academic Planning

?

11 Mar 1993

?

Approved by Factifty of Arts Graduate Studies

Committee

?

20 Apr 1993

?

Received by Dean of Graduate Studies

?

27 May 1993

?

Revised version iecêivéd by Iieañ Of Graduate

Studies

?

21 June 1993

?

Reviewed by Assessment Comm ittëe for New

räduate Piogiaths

?

5 Aug 1993

?

Second revised version received

by Dean of

Graduate Studies

?

13 Sept 1993

?

Reviewed by Assessment Coniiuittee for

New

Graduate Program

09 March 1994

?

Revisions received by Dean of Graduate Studies

18 March 1994 Assessment of external reviewers and revised

proposal reviewed by Assessment Committee for

New Graduate Programs

---

I

S TU

a!

GERONTOLOGY RESEARCH CENTRE AND DIPLOMA PROGRAM

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY AT HARBOUR CENTRE

w

TO: ?

Dr. P. Wrenn, Associate Dean of Graduate Studies,

Chair, Assessment Committee for New Graduate Programs

FROM: ?

Dr. Andrew Wister, Chair, Gerontology Graduate

Committee, and Dr. Gloria Gutman, Director, Gerontology

Research Centre and Program

SUBJECT: External Reviews of the Proposal for

.

a

Master's Program in

Gerontology

DATE:

?

February 22, 1994

This memorandum is in response to the four reviews of the proposal to establish a

Masters in Gerontology at SFU submitted to the Assessment Committee for New

Graduate Programs. Each of the reviewer's comments will be addressed separately.

Dr. Friedsam's Review

It should be noted that Dr. Friedsam is the only reviewer who has personally

developed and directed a Master's Program in Gerontology. It is worth emphasizing

that Dr. Friedsam strongly supports our proposal for an M.A. in Gerontology. For

example, with respect to the academic merit and structural integrity of the proposed

program, he notes that it is at a higher standard than recommended in the

guidelines of the Association for Gerontology in Higher Education. Unlike some of

the other reviewers, Dr. Friedsam recognizes that this is possible because:

• . .The "psychosocial cluster," for example, will presumably have been met or be

required to be met as prerequisite to admission to the Master's program.

On the question of adequacy of the faculty and other resources, he states that the

resumes appended to the proposal "reveal appropriate backgrounds, extensive

experience, and excellent records of professional activity related to their roles in the

proposed program." He comments favorably on the credentials of the Director,

stating that she has an international reputation in gerontology.

Dr. Dobbs' Review

• ?

Dr. Dobbs, who for the past several years has directed the Gerontology Centre and

Diploma Program at the University of Alberta (both were developed by the late Dr.

Brendan Rule), concurs with Dr. Friedsam's assessment that graduates of the

proposed Master's program will find employment. He also concurs that there will be

student demand for the program, noting that:

---

...It clearly is the case that the Diploma program has been in high demand and

it has had similar foci. Perhaps that is the best predictor.

?

0

His judgment on these points is particularly important since he is knowledgeable of

the Canadian context. His preliminary remarks concerning competition between

Canadian universities to develop graduate programs in Gerontology and the desire of

some individuals to delay other university's progress should also be noted.

There are only two shortcomings of the proposed program that Dr. Dobbs identifies.

The first relates to entry requirements for the program; the second with the training

of researchers. Dr. Dobbs feels strongly, as we do, that a basic level of undergraduate

training in the core areas of gerontology (i.e. in the psychology, sociology and biology

of aging) as well as in the integration of the three (as is done in our GERO 300 -

Introduction to Gerontology) is highly desirable. In prior drafts of the proposal, the

required courses of the Diploma Program were listed as pre-requisites for admission

to the Master's Program. These included GERO 300- Introduction to Gerontology;

PSYC 357 - Psychology of Aging; S.A. 460 - Sociology of Aging, KIN 461 - Physiology.

of Aging; GERO 301 - Research Methods in Gerontology and GERO 400 - Seminar in

Applied Gerontology -- the latter, containing a very strong research component. After

considerable consultation, it was decided to remove these as formal requirements for

admission. They were replaced by the paragraph at the top of page 7 of the current

version which states:

Students may be required to complete courses from the existing Diploma

Program in Gerontology as a condition of admission, or to register as a

Qua1iiring Student before consideration for admission to the

M.A.

program. A

detailed educational and work biography will be required as part of the

admissions procedure. This information, in conjunction with a personal

interview in some cases, will be evaluated by the Admissions Committee to

whether

determine

an

if

internship

the student

is necessary

requires preparatory

(see next section).

course work and.to

establish

The rationale for the above procedure is that it will provide more flexibility in the

admission of students originating from outside SFU's Gerontology Diploma program

as well as enable us to meet the changing needs of the program. Dr. Friedsam

understood that students will still be expected to have the basics (among them, what

he termed in the quote above "the psychosocial cluster") which most definitely is the

intention of the SFU Gerontology Graduate Committee.

Dr. Dobbs also feels that Master's students need more training in research

methodology and recommends extending the number of weeks covering multivariate

statistics in the course outline for GERO 802 Advanced Research Methods in

Gerontology. In response:

a)

Dr. Wister has revised the outline for GERO 802 (see Appendix 1) in line with Dr.

Dobbs' suggestion. The recent addition of GERO 301 Research Methods in

Gerontology (offered both by distance independent study and on campus) as a

required course for the Gerontology Diploma Program provides training in the

fundamentals

802.

of gerontology research and has facilitated the upgrading of GERO

b)Older

GERO

Persons

831 -

and

Development

GERO 832

and

- Epidemiology

Evaluation of

of

Health

Aging

Promotion

contain extensive

Programs

instruction

for

?

S

in research methodology. We have revised the program requirements (see p.9) such

-7

---

that now students selecting the Non-Thesis option must take either GERO 831 or

GERO 832 as part of their course load (seven courses). Furthermore, both required

courses in the Built Environment concentration have a strong research focus.

While it might be desirable to have another research methods course in addition to

GERO 802 that all students must take, it is not feasible given the course load (five

courses) for students taking the Thesis option. Also, we are in disagreement with Dr.

Dobbs that research training is not gained during the undertaking of a Master's

thesis. In fact, the opinion of most faculty is that writing a Master's thesis affords

students an opportunity to integrate and extend their educational skills, especially

the design, implementation and presentation of original research. It should also be

recognized that most Master's programs in the Faculty of Arts require only one

graduate level methods course.

In his summary, Dr. Dobbs expresses some doubt that skilled researchers are a likely

outcome of the proposed M.A. in Gerontology, but that skilled professionals are a

likely outcome. We are offering an applied program that we feel has a strong

research base. Regardless of the type of work or work setting in which graduates of

the proposed program are employed, they will have the basic skills to conduct,

administer, report and critique research relevant to their sub-field of gerontology. It

is also our conviction that students, especially those choosing the thesis option, will

have the necessary grounding to undertake a Ph.D. should they so choose. Further,

the proposed program builds on the active and expanding research agenda of SFU's

Gerontology Research Centre, which is poised to support graduate level research on

•

?

a wide variety of topics.

In support of the proposal, Dr. Dobbs notes that the concentrations that have been

selected "are the strengths of the Centre and its affiliates". He states that "the

quality of the core staff seems acceptable, both interms of teaching and graduate

supervision". He also speaks positively about the Director, stating that:

Dr. Gutman herself is well known and vigorous and as Director of the program

I have little doubt that she will continuously improve the program. To my

mind, this is very important. Few new programs, especially interdisciplinary

ones, the leader is probably as important as is the early draft of the program.

Dr. Gutman is competent, dynamic and a builder. She will make it work.

Dr. Connelly's Review

Dr. Connelly raises a number of questions about the proposal, although he expresses

no doubt about the need for an MA in Gerontology at SFU. At the outset it should

be recognized that Dr. Connelly's response is coloured by his preoccupation with

budgetary decisions of universities, which he states, "have driven much of my

interest in sorting through the teaching faculty and curriculum issues."

Regarding the program's academic merit and structural integrity, Dr. Connelly

requests more information on the relationship between the Diploma Program and

• ?

relationship

the propos - d

between

M.A. Program.

the two

Section

programs.

6e of

If

the

further

proposal

elaboration

(

p

. 12)

is

addresses

required

the

it is to

point out that although a degree is required for admission, the Diploma Program is

technically an undergraduate program that offers a range of 300 and 400 level

courses. Students with a Diploma in Gerontology will not receive credit against the

---

proposed graduate level M.A. courses. They will, however, have completed all or most

of the entry requirements for the Master's program in a manner analogous to a

qualifying year in a traditional department. The Diploma Program will Continue

after the Master's program is established and will be integral to it by offering courses

that provide a basic understanding of the field of Gerontology. These points are

explicitly stated in the proposal.

It should also be noted that the Diploma Program was reviewed in Spring, 1992 by

Dr. J. Birren and Dr. A. Martin Matthews, both internationally acclaimed

gerontologists, and received a positive evaluation. The only points on which it was

faulted were the lack of a faculty-level practicum supervisor and too heavy reliance

on sessional instructors. Both of these criticisms are addressed in the Master's

program proposal. Specifically, the new CFLs would teach in both the Master's and

Diploma programs, which would satisfy Dr. Connelly's concern about over-loading

them and thereby, interfering with their progress towards promotion and tenure.

Also, one would serve as Practicum/Internship supervisor in lieu of teaching one

course.

Dr. Connelly also requests more information about the graduates of the Diploma

program. Specifically, he is interested in employment statistics. The survey of

graduates conducted in the spring of 1991 that was used to identify interest in the

three streams of the proposed M.A. in Gerontology did not include the information

that Dr. Connelly seeks. However, a subsequent survey focusing on the post-diploma

educational and employment experience of SFU Diploma students is currently being

conducted. Thus far, 37 mailed questionnaires have been returned from the 107

students who have graduated since 1983. Tracking of students who have changed

residence is still in progress. Based on the initial results, we found that:

a)

57% (21) currently work full-time, 16% (6) work part-time, 5% (2) are not

employed but seeking employment, 2% (1) are not employed and 19% (7) are not

seeking employment at the present time.

b)

A striking 84% (31) work in aging-related jobs. Aging-related jobs were defined in

the questionnaire as those in which one does one of the following with, for, or about

the elderly (over 60) population: 1) administer or plan programs; 2) provide direct

service or direct care; 3) conduct research; 4) train or teach; or 5) consult.

Approximately 62% (23) stated that they actively sought an aging-related job after

graduation from the Diploma Program in Gerontology. Some of those currently

working in aging-related jobs were in those positions before graduation.

c)

When graduates were asked how useful they found the Diploma Program

curriculum for their current employment, 49% (18) rated it as "very useful", 46% (17)

as "useful", and only 5% (2) as "not useful".

Taken together, these preliminary results clearly address Dr. Connelly's concern

recent

that Diploma

survey

students

data has

are

been

finding

integrated

jobs

into

related

the

to

proposal

their gerontological

(see page 19).

training. The

Dr. Connelly's questions about the relationship between graduates' current jobs and

the Master's program streams are best addressed by noting Diploma Program

graduates' response to the first survey enquiring about interest in the proposed

concentrations of the MA program.

?J

---

S

The argument proposed by Dr. Connelly that a research-based program requires a

Master of Science instead of a Master of Arts fails to recognize that many Arts

faculties and Social Science departments (e.g. Psychology) offer both professional and

research degrees. With specific reference to Gerontology and to Canada, it should be

noted that just last month a Master's in Gerontology similar to the one proposed for

SFU was approved at Laval University. It will be offered within the Faculty of Social

Sciences.

Dr. Connelly also questions the accessibility of pre-requisites for students entering

the SFU Master's Program. For the Aging and the Built Environment stream, GERO

401 Aging and the Environment or GEOG 490 Housing for the Elderly are required.

Dr. Connelly is incorrect in stating that GERO 401 is offered only every other year.

While initially it was offered by Dr. Gutman, since 1991, it has been offered, and will

continue to be offered, every year by Dr. Watzke, permanent Research Fellow in

Environmental Gerontology or the second permanent Research Fellow in

Environmental Gerontology who will join the Centre in June, 1994. GEOG 490

Special Topics: Housing the Elderly is also offered regularly, initially by Dr. Wilson

and currently, by Dr. Hodge. For the Health Promotion and Aging stream, students

require GERO 404 Health and Illness in Later Life and any one of four other courses

offered regularly within the Diploma Program. Again, Dr. Connelly is incorrect,

GERO 404 is offered at least twice a year, once on campus and once or twice by

correspondence. In fact, there are now six Diploma courses offered by distance

education:

CRIM 411 - Crime and Victimization of the Elderly

GERO 300 - Introduction to Gerontology

GERO 301 - Research Methods in Gerontology

GERO 404 - Health and Illness in Later Life

KIN 461 - Physiological Aspects of Aging

PSYC 357 - Psychology of Adulthood and Aging

Students taking the Administration of Services for Older Adults concentration

(offered in 1996 under the phase-in plan) require two business courses - BUS 527

Organizations and Human Resource Management and BUS 528 Accounting. Dr.

Connelly takes issue with the fact that our proposal contains a letter from Dean

Stanley Shapiro that guarantees slots in BUS 527 and 528 for Gerontology M.A.

students in years 1994, 1995 and 1996, but not beyond. Obviously, such guarantees

can only be made for interim periods.

He also is concerned that GERO 301 Research Methods in Gerontology may not be

taught each year. As suspected by Dr. Connelly, it was previously offered as GERO

412 Special Topics before becoming regularized in 1993. As indicated above, GERO

301 is available by correspondence as well as being offered once a year on campus by

Dr. Wister. All of the pre-requisite courses (or equivalent) offered in the Diploma

Program are available at least once each year for students who require upgrading

before entrance into the MA Program.

Dr. Connelly identifies several problems with respect to information presented in the

proposal concerning faculty and other university resources. First, he notes that

several faculty listed in the Calendar are not listed as Adjunct Professors of the

Gerontology Program. Second, he states that the role of the Steering Committee

members is not clear. Third, several faculty require updated CVs. Regarding the

latter,

also have

we

added

have updated

CVs for

all

flrs

of

Am

the facult

( ?

y

CVs included

.,

1

in the ori

ginal proposal. We

/0.

---

members of the Steering Committee who actually teach in the Diploma Program

(Dr. Bhakthan is out of the country and a recent CV is unavailable).

The issue of the role of Steering Committee members with respect to the proposed

Master's Program has been discussed extensively at each stage of the proposal's

development and revision. At each stage it has been pointed out that while some

Steering Committee members teach in the Diploma Program, none have the time

and/or the necessary expertise to teach the proposed Master's Program courses. It

has been argued that four new Gerontology CFLs are needed to support the

proposed M.A. Program and to correct inadequacies within the existing Diploma

Program. A high quality graduate program requires a core of committed faculty. The

Gerontology Steering Committee is comprised of full-time faculty who teach for their

respective departments. Several teach Diploma program courses as part of their

departmental responsibilities, specifically: CRIM 411 (Fattah); PSYC 357 and PSYC

456 Psychology of Adulthood and Aging (Ames; Kimball); SA 420 Sociology of Aging

(Gee); and KIN 461 Physiology of Aging and KIN 460 Cellular Mechanisms and

Theories of Aging (Bhakthan). Members of the Steering Committee have explicitly

stated that they could not commit to teach for the proposed M.A. program. The

description of their role has therefore been confined

in

all iterations of the proposal

to only include serving on thesis committees for Gerontology M.A. students. Given

this role, it was not felt necessary to include their CVs. Adjunct Professors and

Associate Members, on the other hand, may cover courses/do some team teaching

when Gerontology Faculty are on sabbatical and will also serve on thesis committees.

Most however, are employed full-time elsewhere. Dr. Connelly's suggestion that the

proposed Master's Program could be mounted by re-training existing Diploma faculty

and Steering Committee members, in other words, is totally non-feasible.

He also over-estimates existing teaching resources. In his Table 1, in addition to non-

teaching Steering Committee members, virtually everyone who has ever taught a

Diploma Program course is listed. These include graduate students appointed by

Psychology to teach the occasional course (e.g. Ashfield, Barker-Gaato, Hearn); staff

no longer with the Centre (e.g. Milstein); as well as one time only sessional

instructors (e.g. Finlayson).

Dr. Connelly's suggestion that the Diploma pre-requithtes be converted into graduate

level courses to bolster the academic credibility of the proposed MA Program in

Gerontology has been previously debated and rejected. After extensive consultation,

the originally proposed course load was, in fact, decreased to conform with other

graduate programs at SFU and other universities in Canada. In addition, the

internship was changed from mandatory to an "as-needed" basis because the

originally proposed program was deemed too heavy.

Dr. Connelly believes that most of our prospective students will originate from other

disciplines rather than from undergraduate and diploma level gerontology programs.

We, and Dr. Dobbs disagree. Other criticisms pertaining to demand and resources for

the proposed program appear contradictory. For example, on the one hand, Dr.

Connelly feels that even with additional CFLs, 30 to 40 students is more than can be

handled in the first two years. On the other hand, he believes that we could mount

the first two concentrations under the phase-in plan without any new CFLs. (In fact,

the proposal indicates an intake of 15 students in the first year, some of whom are

part-time, increasing to a total of 20 in the second year under the phase-in plan and

only 30 in total when all three concentrations are operational.)

/ I.

---

S

Dr. Connelly also is not fully convinced that the proposed program can attract 10

students in each stream. Again we disagree. Based on the volume of inquiries that we

continue to receive from very promising students from across the country and

internationally, we anticipate having the luxury of selecting from a pool of highly

qualified individuals. For example, the last inquiry came from a recent graduate of

McMaster's B.A. in Gerontology. She has a grade point average of 10.8 out of 12 and

received the award for the highest average in gerontology. This student expressed a

keen desire to enter our proposed program.

Regarding post-graduate employment, Dr. Connelly contends that there is more

demand for graduates of programs in Administration of Services for Older Adults and

for persons trained as program evaluators than there is for program planners,

developers, and health educators, at least in the United States. The Health

Promotion stream has a strong focus on evaluation (see required course GERO 831

Development and Evaluation of Health Promotion Programs for Older Persons) as

does the advanced research methods course (GERO 802). In fact, our 1991 survey

indicated greater demand for the Health Promotion concentration than for the other•

two. Furthermore, the Diploma Program continually receives requests for people

with the type of training proposed in the M.A. program. It is our firm conviction that

graduates of our applied program will be more employable than the majority of

graduate students from more traditional departments.

Dr. Connelly also believes that most of our students will be older and already

employed and that therefore the proposed program must be structured differently.

Actually, interest in the program has originated from a variety of prospective

. ?

students. Moreover, it has been tailored to accommodate both full and part-time

students as well as continuing and returning students.

Finally, the Gerontology Steering Committee acts as the "single advisory board to

provide guidance regarding the three foci." There is no need to create another

committee.

Dr. Cha

ppell's

Review

We profoundly disagree with Dr. Chappell's assessment and wish to draw attention

to several omissions and inaccuracies. These include:

a)

claiming that Drs. Parin Dossa, Michael Hayes and Wade Parkhouse all have

primary appointments at UBC.

b)

failing to note the other relevant qualifications and, surprisingly, given the weight

attributed to peer reviewed articles, the publication records of non-Ph.D.s. She is

also selective about which Ph.D.s' publications she counts.

While it is true that Drs. Dossa, Hayes and Parkhouse (and Drs. Gutman and Birch)

are held in sufficiently high esteem by UBC colleagues to have been appointed

Adjunct Professors or Associate Members of various departments at that university,

their primary appointments are clearly identified in the proposal as being at SFU,

Dr. Dossa in Sociology/Anthropology, Dr. Hayes in Geography and Dr. Parkhouse in

/c.

---

Kinesiology. All three are shown as Associate Members of Gerontology, having been

formally appointed by the Dean of Arts. Additionally, Dr. Dossa is affiliated with

Gerontology by virtue of teaching S.A.319 - Culture, Ethnicity and Aging and serving

on the Gerontology Steering Committee in 1992-93 in place of Dr. Kimball.

Dr. Chappell also contends that "it is doubtful that individuals with Bachelor's

degrees should be teaching in a Master's program." It should first be noted that the

two individuals to whom she is referring, Ms. Trottier and David Jackson, are not

shown on any of the course proposals as primary instructors for Master's Program

courses. Rather, they teach courses in the Diploma Program (Trottier GERO 403 -

Drug Issues in Gerontology and Jackson GERO 406 Death and Dying) for which they

very clearly are qualified. As indicated in the copy of her CV included with the

proposal Dr. Chappell reviewed, Trottier is an Assistant Professor (part-time) in the

Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences at UBC and also the Pharmacy Supervisor and

Clinical Pharmacy Specialist in Geriatrics at the Harry Purdy Extended Care Unit,

University Hospital's 300-bed extended (chronic) care teaching hospital. She also is a

published researcher (her current CV lists a dozen articles and chapters). David

Jackson is Director of Pastoral Care for the Pacific Health Care Society. The Society

operates Queen's Park and Feilburn Hospitals which together offer some 425

extended care beds as well as community out-reach programs.

While we may be faulted for not having up-dated the CVs included in the proposal (it

is now almost two years since it was originally submitted to the Faculty of Arts), Dr.

Chappell seems to have lost sight of the fact, clearly stated in the proposal, that four

new CFL faculty have been requested. It is these individuals who will teach the bulk

of the Master's program courses and who, together with Drs. Wister and Gutman,

will have primary responsibility for graduate instruction.

Further, and as previously explained, we did not include CVs nor show as directly

involved in the Master's Program such respected researchers as Dr. Ellen Gee and

other members of the Steering Committee because, realistically, they hold

administrative appointments and/or are otherwise sufficiently engaged in other

activities to preclude their taking on any more responsibility.

Finally, Dr. Chappell's views about gerontology being "a substantive area that

requires multidisciplinary exposure" and therefore not "a discipline in its own right"

are outdated and not shared by the gerontological community. There are many

departments (such as Criminology at SFU) that have developed in an analogous

manner to Gerontology. The point is further supported by the recent approval of a

new Master's in Gerontology at Laval University. Their Master's program will also

offer Thesis and Non-Thesis streams (just as in our proposal). Their program also

builds on a Gerontology Research Laboratory and a multidisciplinary Certificate in

Gerontology, at the bachelor's level, established in 1982. There will now be two

Master's Programs in Gerontology within Quebec, the other currently being offered

at Sherbrooke.

Conclusion:

Drs. Freidsam and Dobbs are very supportive of the proposed MA in Gerontology at

SFU. Dr. Connelly raises several specific issues that we have addressed. However, as

he states in his covering letter, he believes that an M.A. Program in Gerontology is

needed and that we have the expertise to establish it. In weighing Dr. Chappell's

review, we trust that the Assessment Committee for New Graduate Programs will

---

.

?

take into account the fact that Dr. Chappell is in a conflict of interest position and

that we voiced concerns at the outset at having her as a reviewer.

Respectfully submitted,

Andrew Wister, Ph.D.

Associate Professor and Chair,

Gerontology Graduate Committee

Gloria Gutman, Ph.D

Professor and Director.

cc.

S ?

Dr. Ellen Gee

Chair, Gerontology Steering Committee

Dr. Evan Alderson

Dean of Arts

.

/1/

---

EXTERNAL REVIEW FOR MASTER'S IN GERONTOLOGY

Dr. Neena L. Chappell ?

Director, Centre on Aging?

University of Victoria,

?

Victoria, B.C.

.

L

.

/c.

---

II

UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA

.

CENTRE ON AGING

P.O. BOX 1700, MS 6369, VICTORIA, B.C, CANADA VSW 2Y2

TELEPHONE (604) 721

.

6369, FAX (604) 721-6499

-

0

F

.

i ([Pflr.rrr.,

I!

I

th

DEC

=

-7 1993

r)E AN'

Of- RADJ.ATE

STUDIES OFFCE

November 30, 1993

Dr. Phyllis M. Wrenn

Associate Dean, Graduate Studies

Simon Fraser University

Burnaby, B.C. V5A 1S6

Dear Dr. Wrenn:

Attached is my review of the proposed Masters of Arts in Gerontology at Simon Fraser

University. I hope it is helpful. If you have any questions or would like to discuss anything

with me, don't hesitate to call.

Sincerely,

CL

Neena L. Chappell, Ph.D.

Director, Centre on Aging

Professor, Dept. of Sociology

NLCImh

/.

---

. ?

Review

Masters of Arts in Gerontology

?

Simon Fraser University

In reviewing this proposal, I have passed it on to Lou Costa, Dean of Social Sciences and

Gordana Lazarevich, Dean of Graduate Studies at UVic. I have had extensive discussions with

both of them regarding this proposal.

For the reasons outlined below, we cannot support this as a program which will train

future gerontological researchers in Canada. However, a vastly revised proposal which would

offer a Masters Degree for applied service professionals could legitimately be offered through

SFU.

In terms of structural integrity, it is estimated that approximately one-third of the students

would not do a thesis. Furthermore, one 4-credit course in advanced research methods in

gerontology does not make a researcher. Many topics absolutely necessary for research

competence are covered as part of one lecture when they could be trimester courses on their

own. Relatedly, there is no discussion of what research is. If we accept that research is adding

to the body of knowledge, one advanced level course is inadequate. Presumably graduates of

the proposed program would be able to take some research instruments and apply them within

an agency setting. It is doubtful that they would be able to contribute to the international body

of research.

In terms of existing faculty, their strength is clearly in working with the community

rather than in research. Research in gerontology, like research in other areas of the academy,

is generally judged by publication in peer-reviewed outlets. While there is no question that Dr.

Gutman has been active in editing books, these are edited (rather than written) and are produced

by her own centre rather than through a peer-reviewed outlet. She has marked 23 publications

in refereed journals, by my count I would give her 27 'academic" publications. Either way, that

works out to about one a year. She is clearly very strong in terms of research reports and briefs

and her activity within the community.

Andrew Wister is a strong researcher associated with the program, with 20 publications

in peer-reviewed journals and having received his Ph.D. in 1985. He is known in the

gerontological community as a good researcher and there is no question he has a lot to offer this

program. The first page of the C.V. is missing for the next individual and I cannot tell whose

C.V. it is. The others are not strong researchers and tend not to be university faculty members.

Most have an applied rather than an academic strength. Birch is the Director of Research and

Development at the Neil Squire Foundation and does have a Ph.D., Brink also has a Ph.D. and

is a senior policy analyst with CMHC in Ottawa, Crawford is the Director of Rehabilitation

Services at Pacific Health Care Society, Susan Crawford is a Ph.D. student, Doyle received her

Ph.D. in 1990, Gallagher has her Ph.D. and is at UVic, Hollander is a Ph.D. student, Jackson

. has a bachelor in Theology, Lomas has a Ph.D. and is a consultant from what I can tell, Trottier

has a Bachelor of Science from what I can tell, Watzke has a Ph.D. and is at Gerontology

Centre, Dossa has a Ph.D. in Anthropology and is at UBC, Michael Hayes has a Ph.D. and is

/7.

---

at UBC. Hayes is strong, having received his Ph.D. in '89 and now has around 17 publications.

The extent to which he is involved with the program is not clear. Parkhouse has a Ph.D. and

is in Zoology at UBC. He is also a strong researcher; again his affiliation with the program is

not clear.. In other words, the research strength is not particularly evident for centre affiliates.

It is doubtful that individuals with bachelors degrees should be teaching in a masters program.

Other researchers at the University have not included their C.V.'s and do not have letters of

support stating their involvement in the program, so it is assumed that they will not be involved

in the program. The clear strength is on community involvement and not on research activity.

In terms of the demand for the proposed program and for graduates of the program, there

are no real figures included here, but I suspect the argument is correct that there would be a

demand for individuals from an applied program. However, there is another issue which is not

discussed here. The proposal makes much of the fact that there are few programs in gerontology

offered through universities in Canada. It is not pointed out, however, that this is because the

majority philosophy in gerontology is that it is not a discipline in its own right but rather is a

substantive area which should have multi-disciplinary exposure. The clear trend has therefore

been to establish specialization in gerontology which students can take through existing

disciplines and schools. Indeed this was the explicit strategy adopted at the University of

Manitoba where they now have an established undergraduate Option in aging (not mentioned in

the SFU proposal). Students enrol in established areas (for example, social work, pharmacy,

nursing, family studies, etc.) and graduate with degrees in those areas but take a prescribed

number of core and optional courses in aging where they get multi-disciplinary exposure and

their parchment says they have an Option in Aging. This is similar to the well-established

undergraduate program at McMaster University where individuals take gerontology plus another

discipline At most universities students will enrol, for example, in sociology and major

in

sociology, plus receive multi-disciplinary exposure to gerontology. The couple of masters

programs that are available are very much applied programs for professionals working in the

field. My recent contact with American gerontolgists indicates that graduate programs carrying

the name of "gerontology" in the U.S. tend to be professional in nature. Gerontology is not

considered an independent discipline. My understanding has been and continues to be that this

is the majority opinion in gerontology.

In sum, we do not feel that we can support a research oriented masters program in

gerontology at this time. Neither the course content nor the research strength of faculty warrant

it. However, a substantially revised proposal which focuses on an applied or practice oriented

masters program could well be appropriate.

NLC/mh

/F

---

EXTERNAL REVIEW FOR MASTER'S

IN GERONTOLOGY

Dr.

J. Richard Connelly?

Gerontology Center?

University of Utah

?

25 South Medical Drive ?

Salt Lake City, Utah

S

S

.

iq.

---

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

?

Medical Center

?

500 Foothill Blvd

?

Salt Lake City UT 84148

Z5

.

December 30, 1993

660/182

In Reply Refer To:

Dean Phyllis Wren

Associate Dean of Graduate Studies

Simon Fraser University

Burnaby, British Columbia

Canada V5a 1S6

Dear Dean Wren,

Thank you for your patience with my delay in returning a review of the

proposed Master of Arts in Gerontology. I became ill with the

flu

shortly after

our telephone conversation and it has taken some time to recover.

I have completed a comprehensive and time consuming review.

?

There are

several concerns addressed in the report. These concerns are raised as

cautions which I am sure the authors of the proposal will be able to work

throu g

h and provide satisfactory approaches.

These ?

are

?

difficult

?

economic ?

times

?

for ?

higher ?

education

?

and ?

it

?

is ?

a challenging

time ?

for

gerontology ?

as ?

a ?

field

?

that

is

?

coming ?

into ?

its ?

own ?

academic

credibility

coupled

with ?

the ?

demographic ?

and

economic

?

derhand ?

of ?

an ?

aging

population.

There ?

is

no ?

question

?

in ?

my

?

mind

?

that

a MA Program is needed and

that ?

there

seems to

be ?

a

?

wide ?

range ?

of faculty

and ?

community ?

resources ?

available ?

at ?

SFU

to ?

assist

with ?

the

?

development of a

quality ?

graduate ?

program.

But, to develop a quality graduate gerontology program without answers to the

concerns raised in my report is risky.

?

Four new academic positions requested

along with space, support staff and supplies is a major investment. You are

privy to the resources of the University and of the Gerontology Diploma

Program and the Gerontology Research Center, and can determine the

feasibility of working the budgets and resources of these entities with the

proposed master's pro

g ram. The budgetar

y

decisions, though remain a

concern and have driven much of my interest in sorting through the

teaching faculty and curriculum issues.

I hope that this report proves useful to you. If you have any questions please

feel free to call or write. I am in a muchbetter position with my work load and

other responsibilities to respond in a speedy manner.

Sincerely,

Richard Connelly,

Associate Director EW'cation/Evaluatjon

SLC GRECC

Enclosure

C

o.

---

REVIEW: ?

Proposal for Master of Arts in Gerontology at Simon Fraser

University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada

REVIEWER:

?

Richard Connelly, PhD

Associate Director for Education/Evaluation

Salt Lake Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Center

VA Medical Center (182)

500 Foothill Blvd.

Salt Lake City, UT 84148

and

Assoc. Professor, Gerontology Center,

University of Utah

Tel. (801) 582-1565 Ext.

2459

FAX (801) 538-7338

INTRODUCTION:

When I was asked by Dr. Gloria Gutman if she could add my

name to a list to review the proposal, and later by Dean Phyllis Wren to review

the proposal I agreed. I was concerned, however, about the time that it would

take to do a thorough review. I have completed a comprehensive review of the

proposal which has, in fact, been very time consuming, but I hope that it will

prove useful.

I ?

am ?

in ?

agreement

of the ?

need

for ?

a

?

Masters

Degree ?

in

?

Gerontology ?

at

Simon

• ?

Fraser ?

University.

especially ?

in ?

British

Graduate

Columbia

level ?

education ?

in ?

gerontology ?

is

because

?

of ?

the ?

expected ?

increase ?

in the

needed,

elderly

population ?

in ?

that

Province.

The ?

degree ?

is

needed

?

further ?

because

of

?

the

current ?

lack ?

of ?

graduate ?

gerontology ?

programs

across

?

Canada.

Documentation provided in the proposal (pages 12-16) is somewhat

convincing, but there are several reservations. The major concern is

employability of the graduates especially those in the Health Promotion and

Aging Concentration. ?

Other concerns will be apparent to you as you read this

review. ?

Assessment of these concerns is required if wise decisions are to be

?

made about funding and support for a Master of Arts in Gerontology Program.

Dean Wrenn asked that I respond to four questions

address several concerns under each question.

A.

?

The academic

merit and structural

pr

og

ram.

• ?

I have taken the liberty to

integrity of the proposed

The Diploma Program in Gerontology began at Simon Fraser in 1983.

?

There ?

have been 107 graduates as of August 1993 which translates into an average of

10 graduates per year. Even though there are currently 101 active students in

the Diploma Program, there is no indication as to how many are likely to

graduate or if there has been a steady increase in enrollment since the

inception of the program.

The relationship between the Diploma Program and the proposed MA Program

. in Gerontology is not clear. The issue of SFU Diploma graduates enrolling in

the MA Program is not addressed. Will any of the courses taken at the Diploma

level be credited to the MA Program requirements? How many of the credit

c9/.

---

Simon Fraser University

Page 2

hours will be transferable?

?

This missing data is important in deciding on the

?

usefulness of the Diploma Program as a feed-in to the proposed MA Program.

Also missing is data regarding employment statistics of Diploma graduates.

?

We?

need to know the types of jobs these graduates are able to obtain and if these

jobs are related to the three foci of the proposed program. A

the

November/December

50

who returned

1991

the questionnaire

survey of SFU

were

Diploma

definitely

graduates

interested

indicates

in

that

applying

33

of

for the program. What is the current employment status of not only these 33,

but of the 17 others who were uncertain or not interested? And, what is know

about the 57 graduates that did not return a questionnaire?

The stated objectives of this proposed MA Gerontology Program are to (1)

"increase the supply of Canadian applied gerontology researchers," and (2)

'fill an important gap for professional persons from across the country

requiring an advanced level of training in the administration, policy and

program planning and evaluation of services.' If the number one objective is

to increase the supply of researchers and as also stated on page 4 of the

proposal that the "MA program is primarily research based..." then why is not

the program a Master of Science instead of Master of Arts? And, why is there

not a major foci or concentration devoted to methods and statistics?

It is stated that the students applying for the Master's degree will be female

who are already employed and want to upgrade their knowledge and skills to

advance their careers. Whether the students are- mostly female or male, they

will likely be employed and have time constraints that will hamper them in

making up academic deficiencies.

?

Their deficiencies will be either in the level

of their knowledge and skills and/or the area of their previous learning. The

proposal indicates under the section on entry requirements that deficiencies

will need to be made up from Diploma courses and that there are specific pre-

requisites or their equivalent that must be met before entering one of the

three foci of the MA Program. From the information provided in the proposal,

there are major problems in course accessibility required to make up

deficiencies. A number of the gerontology courses that are required as

prerequisites for each of the foci (page 8) are not offered frequently enough.

Gerontology 401 is offered every other year according to the teaching

schedule in Appendix XI and Geography 490 is not listed in Appendix XI nor is

it on Professor Hayes CV, if he is the instructor of the course. Neither one of

these courses is a prerequisite for the Aging and The Built Environment

concentration. ?

The Health Promotion and A

g

ing concentration has pre-

requisite courses that are offered about once a year which will present

difficulties for working students. Prerequisites for the Administration of

Services for the Elderly Concentration are two business courses 528 and 572

which have open slots reserved for students in the MA Gerontology Degree

program for 1994,

1995,

1996 (letter in Appendix IV from Stanley Shapiro), but

the likelihood of filling those slots by Fall of 1994 remains slim, and if the

phase-in schedule for the MA program is selected, the administration

concentration would not begin until 1996 and would the slots still be reserved?

---

Simon Fraser University

Page 3

B. ?

the

The

proposed

adequacy

program

of the faculty

for achieving

and other

its

resources

intended goals.

available to

?

There is a large number of faculty mentioned in the proposal that are

associated with both the Diploma and the proposed MA programs. But the role

of these faculty is not clear. The functions of adjunct faculty, associate

members and the steering committee are not clarified either in the Calendar

nor the proposal which are the only two documents that I reviewed.

?

I created ?

a table to attempt to understand the role of the listed faculty in the Calendar

and the proposal. The current faculty and the project new CFLs are included

(see Table I: Faculty Associated with Gerontology Program and their Roles).

There are several concerns; first, many of the faculty listed in the Calendar

are teaching faculty and yet they are not listed as Adjunct Professors; second,

several faculty need updated CVs, (in some cases the CV included in the

proposal is from

1985);

third, it is not clear as to why there are so many faculty

teaching Psychology 357-"Psychology of Adulthood and Aging" and yet not

one of them has a CV included in the proposal; fourth, what will be the role of

the faculty who are replaced in the Diploma program by the new CFLs. Is this

the best approach to hire 4 new faculty when there is indication that qualified

faculty are already on campus and have expertise in the areas being proposed?

For example, what about Gallagher, Stirlin

g

, Parkhouse and Hayes in the

Health Promotion concentration, Watzke and Brink when he is available in the

Aging and Built Environment Concentration, and Hodge, Herzog, and Stark in

• the Administrative Services concentration. From the teaching interest survey

(Appendix VII) and publication records (Appendix IX) of these faculty, it seems

that they have interest in the areas where new faculty are being proposed.

What consideration has been given to assisting current faculty with additional

professional development through attendance at conferences or sabbatical

leave to pursue gerontolo

g

ical interests with the goal that they will become

the teaching faculty in the masters program rather than hiring four new

faculty?

tenureOne

many

?

?

?

ofof

and

?

?

thethem

been

advanta

?

are

promoted

?

well

g es ?

?

?

ofestablished

to

?

?

retraining

associate

?

at

or

or

Simon

?

?

full

enhancing

?

?

Fraserprofessors.

?

?

current

and

?

?

may

?

Others

faculty

?

already

?

may

?

is

have

have

that

selected ?

the

area ?

as ?

a ?

place ?

to ?

live ?

and

would ?

be

?

most ?

interested ?

in

?

enhancing

their ?

career

opportunities ?

at ?

Simon ?

Fraser

University.

?

Otherwise, ?

to ?

hire

new

thethefaculty ?

?

Assistant

amount

?

who

of

will

Professor

?

quality

?

of ?

necessity

?

?

research

level ?

will

?

?

have

required

?

create

?

a ?

heavy

a

to

?

?

hardship

be ?

teachingpromoted

?

on

?

?

loadthem

?

and,

?

?

and

to

tenured.

?

?

find

probably

?

time

to

be ?

do

at

Curriculum Vitas for faculty teaching the core courses in the Diploma

Program should have been included in the proposal. Not one of the five

instructors of Psycholo

g

y 357/456 had their CV and there also was not a CV for

Professor Bhakthan.

?

It is difficult to evaluate the adequacy of the faculty

?

without their CVs indicating their teaching and research records.

It is evident from a review of Appendix XI, "Listing of Instructors teaching DGT

courses Fall 1989-Summer 1993," that several of the required Diploma courses

were not taught each vear or even every other year. Gerontology 301,

"Research Methods in Gerontology," which is a required course in the Diploma

Program was taught by Dr. Wister in 93-2 but was not taught prior unless

---

Simon ?

Fraser ?

University

Page 4

course

proposed

to

programprobablydiplomaGerontology

?

have

?

in

course

whotwiceseen

order

Gerontology

?

412,

?

?

are

?

the

a

to

in

year

?

"Research

judgedeficient

courseresearch

?

if

?

802,

?

its

?

it

outline

inadequacy.

is

Methods,"methods

?

?

"Advancedresearch

going

?

of

to

will

Gerontology

?

taught

?

?

methodology.

be

?

Research

?

need

accessible

?

91-3,

?

to

301,

?

92-3

Methods

be

?

?

to

?

I

?

?

?

taught

to

was

applicants

would

?

?

compare

?

?

into

?

ever'

?

?

havesuffice.

Gerontology"

?

?

of

?

?

it

?

year

preferred

?

the

?

to

?

?

?

MA

Th

and

the

as

havefromhow

who

A

over

?

?

the

semester

have

the

the

a

shown

?

MA

?

two

?

MA

Diploma

academic

?

Program.

??

by

the

year

program

?

?

semester

?

difficulty,

?

?

periodcoursesdeficiencies

within

?

?

course

?

to

?

?

intermix

if

assess

?

a

?

?

any,

two

and

schedule

the

in

year

wantwith

?

?

having

?

?

?

feasibility

period

would

to

the

?

?

complete

?

?

?

proposedpart-time

of

have

?

time.

of

?

??

been

?

entering

the

?

?

mastersmaster

?

?

This

deficiencieshelpful

?

?

?

?

andschedule

levellevel

?

?

to

graduating

students

as

indicate

courses

?

would

well

currentlyprogramneedorderProgram

All

?

?

the

?

toto

graduate

know

Director

and

outlined,represent

?

to

of

?

students

future

and

her

only

their

?

?

?

?

a

expertise

?

?

?

the

employersabilities,recognized

should

?

g

raduate

?

?

?

andhave

?

etc.,

??

?

of

?

researcher

she

students

?

?

classthese

to

?

?

likewise

?

otherexposure

?

?

?

graduates.that

?

in

?

?

?

academicians

needs

select

the

?

to

?

?

?

field,

?

?

Professorcontact

the

As

Health

graduate

who

the

?

?

with

?

Gutman.

?

?

programreview

?

Promotion

?

themstudents

?

?

?

?

the

As

in

is

have

and

?

Aging ?

track. will

?

a ?

class ?

from ?

her.

A review of the proposed concentrations indicates that students will have 6-9

credit hours of pre-requisites or have equivalent courses to take in each of the

concentrations before they can enter the 20-28 credit hour MA Degree

Program. ?

I suggest that the pre-requisite courses be listed as required courses

?

in their respective concentrations in the MA Degree Program rather than as

pre-requisites.

?

If the courses are listed as part of the concentration then it

bolsters the academic credibility of the concentration.

?

Otherwise each of the

?

concentrations do not appear very substantial.

A Gerontology Internship should be required

with

academic credit awarded.

Each graduate student should have relevant work experience in the area of

his/her concentration. Knowledge and skills acquired as a result of current

classroom instruction is what is to be applied during the required internship.

Consideration should be given, of course to prior work experience but it is

unlikely that the internship, in its entirety would be waived.

C. ?

The demand for the proposed program among prospective

students.

Justification in the proposal indicates that 33 of

50 SFU

Diploma graduates who

returned a questionnaire would apply for admission to the proposed master's

degree program.

?

In addition, reference is made to 300 inquiries to the SFU

Gerontology Center since 1983 concerning graduate level education. The

proposal also indicates that the majority of students who would apply for the

MA program would come from existing gerontology diploma or baccalaureate

programs of which there are only four (p.7).

?

I believe, to the contrary, that

?

the majority of applications will be from students who have undergraduate

degrees and even master degrees in other fields.

?

Thus, my concern is

6^ q.

---

Simon Fraser University

Page

5

providing certain diploma courses on a frequent basis in order to accommodate

students who need to correct deficiencies.

The anticipated number of students for the first year may prove to be

problematic. ?

Graduate students require more personal attention with theses

and career selections. Dr. Gutmans and Wister's administrative, research and

teaching responsibilities are formidable and if all new faculty are hired, they

may not be qualified to advise to the extent that some adjunct faculty would be

able to advise. Acceptance of a smaller number of students during the first

and probably the second year before moving to a 30-40 graduate student load

seems advisable.

Evidence presented in the proposal that current resources of the Gerontology

Diploma Program and the Gerontology Research Center are in the Health

Promotion and Aging and the Aging and the Built Environment

Concentrations is convincing. In fact, when I calculate the number of faculty

as discussed on pages 19-20 and the courses to be developed and taught that it

might be possible to begin these concentrations without hiring any new

faculty. ?

There would still need to be additional financial resources committed

?

to the master level program, but probably less than is currently requested.

regarding

concentrations.

more

I

or

?

?

am

three

?

?

not

information

?

?

?

years

employability

convinced

?

?

it ?

?

will

I ?

regarding

?

by

?

am

be

the

ofevenpossible

?

?

?

graduates

evidence

?

themore ?

?

to

number

havepresented

skeptical

in

?

?

?

each

ten

of

students

in

ofabout

?

?

thethe

?

proposalenrolledthe

specializations

?

long

?

?

that

in

?

?

?

term

eachwithin

without

of

future

?

the

two

•

years.

being

Columbia

?

developed

?

and ?

?

thewith

?

other

?

the

Provinces.employers

?

needs

It ?

isand

?

critical

desires

potential

to

for

link

?

employers

the

?

?

thenext ?

concentrations

?

?

fivein

British

to ?

ten

D.

?

The

demand for graduates of the

proposed program.

There is more of a need for masters programs in Administration of Services

and for people trained as applied evaluators of programs than as program

planners, developers and educators, at least in the U.S.

?

These needs vary by

geographic location in the U.S., but I state this as caution.

?

I am not in a

?

position to question the authors assessment of the need in British Columbia or

across Canada for people trained in the proposed concentrations.

?

But negative

?

feedback that can result from graduate students who do not find employment is

a powerful detriment to future growth. It would be the worse publicity the

Gerontology Center could receive if there is not available employment for the

first and subsequent cohorts of graduates from these three proposed

concentrations.

There

will

be a continuous need of people who are already employed in aging

and non-aging positions to expand or to enhance their knowledge and skills in

gerontology. This group of potential students differ from the younger student

who has selected gerontology at either the undergraduate or graduate level as

their primary choice for a career.

?

It is a difficult task to plan a university-

based curriculum for both of these potential student populations. I believe

that the proposed program will appeal to the older, already employed

population, but must be structured different than is currently described in the

proposal.

---

Simon Fraser University

Page 6

concentrations

employmentfeedback

fields,

require

is

Thefeasible,

?

advisable.

?

?

development

?

indicate

?

?

a

contact

?

regarding

?

single

?

?

side.

?

will

Selectioncurrent

?

?

?

?

?

advisory

of

?

remain

with

?

legislative

The

?

advisory

?

salary

?

?

?

of

?

both

?

advisory

agencies

board

the

?

?

?

levels

?

?

up

boards

?

peopleand

?

toto

board

and

provide

?

regulatoryand

date

to

for

??

?

?

?

employment

?

serve

and

?

members

each

organizations

guidance

?

?

?

attractive

?

on

changesof

?

?

?

?

the

?

the

willopportunitiesregarding

??

?

?

advisory

?

?

to

concentrations

?

in

provide

?

students.

representing

their

??

the

?

board(s)

??

so

?

continuous

?

respective

three

that

?

?

?

?

or

?

-foci

will

?

the

the

if

n

0

MW

---

P

C)

•k

C

C

C

C)

C)

C

C)

Si

C

C

c

?

-

- -

to

C

>

to

C

C)

C

C

C

=

C

C)

-

-

C

-

-

C

-

C

=

0

0

-

-

c

=

-

C)

C

0

-

• - -

<

-

-

0

,) ?

-

C)

•

•

<

<

aE

0

'-1=

C

L

,

z

—

oto

>

C

C

C

>

C

>..to

C U

C

-

<_•-

C

=

-

-

--

C)

_

-

-

>

-

>,

.--

-

'-

=

-

-

..

-

.E.E

C

CC

C)CC

ZL.

(

C

C . '-

C" C

U

x

0

C

x

X

C

<

<x

<

<

C

C

C

<

<

CIO

)(0

>(

XI x

)<

<

XI x

0

______

__

<<

<

z

0

C

U

-

..

J

C . -

C C

E

C

2

o

z<Iu

=

o

z

*

C

C C

0

X

X

C

x

x

<

C ?

1

C

x

0

L)

*

-

:2

<

C

z

.

..'.

ox

z

Z

Cl)

CC.')

o-

>

->

Z

z

20<

<

Ln

LIS

<

co

u

00

0

0

0

.<

LL

LL

C

C

---

.

Ef

I

I

I

U

L

U

•-

-

<

•

>•.

>• ?

- -

- ?

>•. -

?

U

-

>•

- ?

— =

-

U

—

-

?

U

-

ci

•

-

-

LI

- -

o ?

C)

>

C.

-

>

-'

>--

-C...

-

•

cI

U

-- ?

>.

c

._z

•-..C....

)

.—

Z

-

-'

-

..

<

r–.

1

"•I

©

—

—

• ?

E

-N

QC)

CCC)

PU..-UC.

p

S-

?

--

<

C)

c

Ln

Z-

C

0

<

>

-

C

x

CC

.-_..•._<___..___

*--

to

.<

2

C.

C

.-.

c._

—

c

0

U

C

0

>C.CU

..Cc)>

U

-

—

c

-

U

eJC.)

C

->-

u-

>>

X

0

0

C

X

C

X

C

-

X

X

Ô

C

CX

u.

U

V)

frl

<z

zo

0

O_.

r-

0

0

.<•--

J

C.)

C)

.

---

CC

0

0

0

C)

to

CC

C

CC

CC >

EiIIhI

0

CC

— ?

CC ?

—

00

>E

CC 0 C)

II

0 0

C)

* ?

**

?

***

.

.

-

to

to

0\

—

5

2

-

—

C) ?

-.

-

0

U

o

-

E

c

to

:•

-

C) ?

C)

C)

o

-

t ?

-

CC

?

C)

—

-

>

E — ?

to

-

C) ?

=00

C)

<E

sQ

-

> ?

-

CC

>

C

= ?

0

CC

>

—

C) ?

- ?

-

C

CC

Z ?

-

0

-

-

- ?

.e--

hI

CI,)CIO

!I J

I ?

I

—v

h

UP

—

?

C

N C# ?

-

00 ?

- ?

N

C C

Cc

-

C

?

N

C C

• ?

C C

C) ?

— ?

• ?

-

—

?

-

;00

— ?

-

EE,E200E2E00

E e e e ?

0

E E

C)C)

2

?

o

*C)C)

E

?

o

o

-2

?

L.

•_C)C)

o o

to

CC ?

-

2

?

2

0

C)C)Q

C)C)

UC)

••U

U

-

UCCUcCUU

2

OO

><

><

C

CC>

Ut

•

to

DO

CC

CC.)

-

C)

Ln

0

0

C)

I-

-

'•)

CF

0

—

CC

U..

CCCI

.

cn

C)

to

CC

C)

CC

Ural

---

EXTERNAL REVIEW FOR MASTER'S IN GERONTOLOGY

Dr. Allen Dobbs

Director, Centre of Gerontology

?

University of Alberta

Edmonton, Alberta

T6G2J9

E

-I

S

.

o.

---

) Centre for

Gerontology

RESEARCH ON

Allen R. Dobbs, Director

20

December 1993

Dr. Phyllis M. Wrenn

Associate Dean of Graduate Studies

Simon Fraser University

BURNABY, BC

V5A 1S6

FAX:

(604) 291-3080

Dear Dr. Wrenn:

I have read the Pro

g

ram Proposal: Mastèt.ofArts in Gerbntolo& mAtetiAls sent

to

Pe. As per

your request, I will focus my comment ônthe four categories suggested in your letter. Beëaüse

the categories concerning the program itself and

the

faôült ate centtäl to thy evalUation, I will

leave those to later in the review. Although hOt explieitly tequestêd I will begin by disussing

the need for gerontology programs more .genèally in an atteihpt

to

Ut the ëurrent proposal in

the Canadian context.

I am sure that everyone reviewing the proposal is W61 aware of the changing demographis so

I will not discuss the topic of population aging. However, the thahging dethographics and,

indeed, the changing world economics place a special emphais Oh the dfilkhges that are to be

faced now and in the future. It is my View, that we simply will ñó longer be able to 'do more

of the same". Instead, we as a society are challenged to find alternative ways to accomplish

more with fewer resources. This will require innovation and, given

my Unyielding faith in

education, the innovation will most likely come from

well

trained peisonneL The people will

have to be trained in the basics, but With a strong emphasis On how to think about the problems

in new and creative ways.

At present, I believe we have two barriers to overcome. OtieA a. very limited 'Pool of

knowledgable people to take on the ëhallenges, and the secOnd is that thOse .peOple most often

received their training outside thÔ field of gerontology. &th Dr. Gutman and I are

representatives of this self-trained geneiation, but the social and ecOnothic challehges are too

immediate and are too important to continue to rely on that type Of cothmitthent 'and "training".

I believe that it is imperative that appropriate graduate training ptograms be developed, aid,

it

seems clear that they will be developed.

..2

University of Alberta, P581, Biological Sciences Building, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2E9

Tel/Fax; (403)-492-4718 BITNET; ADOB@UALTA.MTS

_ • 1 1

---

. ?

Dr. Phyllis M. Wrenn ?

Page 2

20 December 1993

Regarding this development, it appears that there is a race to put programs in place, with some

elements of a 'fierce' competition to get programs in place early in the race. There is no doubt

in my mind that early entries will have a competitive edge in attracting students and high calibre

staff. In talking with others across the country who specialize in gerontology, many of us would

like to develop graduate programs, and be early entries. Our problem is that these are not

favourable economic times for introducing new programs. The conditions of our university,

which is facing a 25 % reduction in funding over the next three years, suggests the nature of these

hard times. Because of the times or other reasons, it might be that some would like to see the

development of other programs delayed. I would like to state categorically that I am not one of

those persons—the need for the health and advancement of our society is too great for that focus.

I do have some critical comments, but those are meant to be taken as constructive with the goal

of at least raising some issues, with the possibility of accommodation.

Please excuse the lengthy prelude, but I wished to put my comments in context. Let me begin

my comments on the proposal.

As an overview, it is clear that the proposers have done their homework. The document

addresses most of the issues and provides extensive information about the program, university

• context, instructors and how it is to accommodate current needs. I did not call or write because

all of the information I felt necessary was contained in the proposal. I will turn now to

addressing the suggested categories of evaluation.

The Demand for graduates of the proposed program. This can be addressed in two ways: In

terms of the current employment opportunities and/or in terms of the projected need. In terms

of the employment opportunities, I think that it is fair to say that the program would fill the

current opportunities within a few years. However, that is far from the whole story. The types

of opportunities are strongly related to the types of personnel that are available, especially when

talking about a "new" field. Gerontology programs are rare in Canada and administrators in

diverse fields are just beginning to understand the value of personnel with explicit training in

gerontology. This means that new opportunities will become available, and they will be filled

with appropriately trained people. This certainly has happened in my own province, where a

need was seen, a gerontology graduate was hired (from the U.S.) and subsequent job descriptions

and hirings have been shaped by that person. There can be no doubt about the importance of the

role of gerontologically trained personnel. As the unique contributions of these people become

better known, new opportunities will become available. In short, I have no doubt that there will

be opportunities for employment and that these will grow exponentially.

The demand for the proposed pro g

ram among prospective students. I find this category to be the

most difficult one to evaluate. There is no doubt that there is a growing number of students with

an interest in gerontology. I just do not know how the students who are interested in gerontology

. ?

divide up in terms of speciality areas. It clearly is the case that the Diploma program has been

in high demand and it has had similar foci. Perhaps that is the best predictor.

......3

3.

---

20

Dr.

December

Phyllis M.

1993

Wrenn

?

Page 3

The academic merit and structural inte

g

rit y

of the proposed pro

g

ram. The programs clearly have

high levels of structural integrity. In fact, the level of structural integrity is the basis for one of

my criticisms. I find it to be most unfortunate that students would graduate from this program

without at least an introductory level course in gerontology that attempted to take a broad

perspective of this interdisciplinary field. As far as I can see, the students would not receive

course material that examined and integrated the psychological, sociological and biological

aspects of aging. The prerequisites to enter the program donot accommodate this shortcoming.

In this sense, gerontology is disadvantaged because the students will not be coming from

undergraduate programs in gerontology where this type of training would already have been

accomplished (such as would be the case in chemistry, mathematics, psychology, etc.). I

strongly believe that this is of considerable importance. Gerontology is an interdisciplinary field.

That is what makes it different from the sociology or psychology of aging. I believe that this

interdisciplinary perspective needs to be accommodated beyond what is proposed. Although the

staff come from diverse fields, the range is much more restricted within a speciality area.

Moreover, any interdisciplinary flavour will be restricted to the specialty topic, without any

opportunity to acquire a perspective of the field. Perhaps I am a traditionalist, but I do not see

how a person can have a degree in gerontology without a single course in gerontology that takes

a broader perspective of the field than is offered by the course syllabi. This shortcoming can be

accommodated and I think that it should be.

The second shortcoming concerns the training of researchers. I am sceptical of just how well

0

researchers can be trained within this program, or for that matter, within the confines of any

masters level program. Their data analytic training will be minimal. The course syllabus for

the Advanced Research Methods... (Gero 802-4) can not possibly "train" in the methods listed.

One of 13 sections of the course is devoted to Factor Analysis, Ordinary Least Squares

Modelling, Logistic and Polynomial Regression, Structural Modelling in Multiple Occasion

Research and LISREL. If each of the 13 sections is a week, then even a cursory examination

of all the techniques listed for this section would be impossible within a week. Without the

statistical tools, the researcher would be compromised. In addition, it seems that most of the

"real" research training comes throug

h

the apprenticeship method. I do not see how this would

happen in the program, and a thesis is not a substitute.

Having provided criticisms, let me also acknowledge the strengths. Although I am sceptical

?

about the program turning out researchers, I do think it is very well suited to turning out

?

qualified professionals. I would like their training to be broadened to include a perspective of

?

the field of gerontology, but beyond that it seems that the course selection is justifiable for the

?

specialities that have been selected. Moreover, the specialities that have been selected are the

?

strengths of the Centre and its affiliates. The specialities and orientation within those specialities

?

are a narrow slice of the field of gerontology, but the field is too broad to be accommodated?

within the staff limitations. Thus, I do not see the limitations of the specialities as problematic.

?

Given the breadth of the field and the limitations of staffing, the narrowness of the specialities

?

may be a positive attribute, enabling more in-depth, albeitnarrow, training for professionals.

?

.

..

......4

33.

---

Dr. Phyllis M. Wrenn

?

Page 4

W ?

20 December 1993

The adequac

y

of the faculty and other resources available to the proposed program for achieving

its intended g

oals. Ideally, the faculty all would be full-time members of a "department" of

gerontology. This is unlikely to happen anywhere in Canada. The more feasible option is to

have staff who are from a variety of departments participate in the program as is proposed. In

fact, the proposed program goes one step better in having a subset of the staff supported directly

from Gerontology Funds. I think this is workable. At our university we have an M.Sc. and a

Ph.D. program in Neurosciences. Only the Division Director is "on staff" in the Division of

Neurosciences. The rest of us are from other departments. The program is successful and

growing. There are problems that are being worked out, most of which are not addressed in the

proposal. These concern reimbursement to departments for courses taught by their staff in

another (neuroscience) program, which department gets "credit' for scholarships held by students

in neurosciences but supervised by staff from, say, psychology, evaluation of staff from one

department who are teaching in the interdisciplinary program in terms of teaching, graduate

supervision, etc.

The quality of the core staff seems acceptable, both in terms of teaching and graduate

supervision. Some of the adjunct staff do not appear to be qualified to supervise

g

ZP

raduate

research and some evaluation of staff for that purpose needs to be put in place.

I have no doubt that as the program develops, recruitment opportunities will be enhanced. This

would be the case for positions that might become available within the gerontology program.

But, it will also aid traditional departments that are interested in persons with expertise in

discipline relevant aspects of gerontology (e.g., Psychology of Aging, Sociology of Aging,

Biology of Aging).

In short, although I believe that the accolades given to some staff in the proposal are

unwarranted, the staff are of a sufficient quality to initiate the program. Dr. Gutman herself is

well known and vigorous and as Director of the program I have little doubt that she will

continuously improve the program. To my mind, this is very important. For new programs,

especially interdisciplinary ones, the leader is probably as important as is the early draft of the

program. Dr. Gutman is competent, dynamic and a builder. She will make it work.

Summar

y

. I find the proposal to be of sufficient merit to recommend acceptance of the program.

It is narrow, but at the same time that is one of its strengths. I doubt that skilled researchers are

a likely outcome of the program as it is currently structured. Skilled professionals are a likely

outcome. Those professionals are needed now and the recognition of the need will continue to

increase. The implementation of the program would be another unique feature of Simon Fraser

University and it could grow to be as noteworthy as specialties such as your Criminology

program. It would be unreasonable to expect a new program to have all the strengths of a

program established and developed over many years. The proposed program has limitations, but

it will develop as long as it is nurtured and the appropriate leadership is in place.

5

2LI

---

.

Dr. Phyllis M. Wrenn

20 December 1993

Page

5

I hope that my comments prove to be useful. Please call or FAX if

any further

information is

needed.

Sincerely,

Allen R. Dobbs

Director

.

S

3^.

---

EXTERNAL REVIEW FOR MASTER'S IN GERONTOLOGY

Dr. H. J. Friedsam, Professor Emeritus?

Center for Studies in Aging?

University of North Texas

Box 13438, N.T. Station

Denton, Texas

USA 76203

.

.

S

310.

---

University of

of North Texas

Center for Studies in Aging

November 23, 1993

Phyllis M. Wrenn

Associate Dean of Graduate Studies

Simon Fraser University

Burnaby, British Columbia

CANADA V5A 1S6

Dear Dean Wrenn:

I am pleased to have had the opportunity to review the proposal for a Master of Arts in

Gerontology at Simon Fraser University. The organization and content of the proposal indicate

that the authors have devoted a great deal of time, effort, and planning to its preparation. It is

more comprehensive and more detailed than similar proposals that I have reviewed for

institutions in the U.S. My comments with respect to the four points listed in your letter of

October 14 follow.

1. Academic merit and structural integrity of the proposed program.

Virtually all existing Master's programs in gerontology are applied in Orientation, and

many have a core/multi-concentration structure similar to that in the proposed program. The

particular concentrations offered can and should vary from one institution to another depending

upon an assessment of the needs of the institution's service area (in a broad sense of that phrase)

and the limits imposed by the institution's resources. The proposed concentrations appear to rest

upon such an assessment and, in large part, to represent an extension of a program area to which

the institution is already allocating significant resources.

The proposal also demonstrates an awareness of the standards and guidelines for Master's

programs in gerontology set forth by the Association for Gerontology in Higher Education. The

proposed structure reflects those standards and guidelines. There are some differences between

recommended required areas in the AGHE guidelines and the proposal, but the differences point

to a higher standard in the proposed program. The "psychosocial cluster," for example, will

presumably have been met or be required to be met as prerequisite to admission to the Master's

program.

I have three suggestions for Professor Gutman and her associates to consider but none

is essential to my endorsement of the proposal. The first is to consider making GERO 812-4

Practical Issues of Administering Services for Older Persons a core course for all concentrations

or at least a required course for the Administration of Services and the Built Environment

concentrations. The issues listed in the course outline are likely to require daily decisions in

3-7.

P.O.

Box 13438 • Denton. Texas 76203-3438

ci-'ic

"Ifc ?

r'

---

0 ?

Phyllis M. Wrenn ?

-2- ?

November 23, 1993

administering services and, in my opinion, are equal in importance to managerial and financial

principles.

My second suggestion is related to the first. The Practical Issues course outline correctly

includes a section on ethics, but it would be desirable to indicate that relevant ethical

considerations will be included in all courses. As one example, research participation is listed

under ethics in the Practical Issues outline but the Research Methods outline does not mention

ethical issues (e.g. informed consent). Although I am confident that the instructor will discuss

such issues during the course, making them explicit in the outline (or the calendar description)

is still desirable.

My third suggestion relates to the plans for institutional and future external evaluation.

My understanding of these sections of the proposal is that they are consistent with current

practices at Simon Fraser University. I have no quarrel with that, but in addition I believe that

a formal mechanism for securing "feedback" from graduates and their employers and from

internship preceptors should be established. Our Center, for example, has surveyed each of

these groups to ask for their opinions of the adequacy of the curriculum in preparing students

• ?

for aging services and over time we have modified the curriculum as a result of their responses.

2. ?

Adequacy of the faculty and other resources.

I have no question whatever concerning the faculty who are listed in the proposal. Their

resumés reveal appropriate backgrounds, extensive experience, and excellent records of

professional activity related to their roles in the proposed program. The program director has

an international reputation in gerontology.

It is obvious, however, that the quality of the program will depend in no little part on

the qualifications of the additional FTE faculty requested. It is not likely to be difficult to

recruit gerontologists, but it is sometimes difficult to recruit ones who have experience and

interests that are desirable in an applied program.

Good practicum sites are essential to the program. Although I am not familiar with those

that are listed in Appendix III, that Appendix and the several letters of support from heads of

service agencies indicate that finding practicum sites will not be a problem.

The library resources described appear to be quite adequate. In addition, the high level

of activity of the Gerontology Research Centre should prove to be a valuable resource for

students who select the thesis option and possibly as a source of student support.

0 ?

3.

?

Demand for the program.

The estimated numbers of students who will enter the program are modest and are likely

---

Phyllis M. Wrenn

?

-3-

?

November 23, 1993

to be reached without difficulty. Students who are or have been in the diploma program are an

obvious recruitment pool for the graduate program. Furthermore, the experience of many

applied programs in the U.S. is that they attract many already-employed-in-the-aging-services

persons who wish to upgrade their knowledge and skills. Applied programs in gerontology also

tend to attract some persons from other fields who are interested in a career change or who

believe that gerontology is an important adjunct area for their professions.

4. ?

Demand for graduates of the program.

Because I am not familiar with aging programs in the program's probable service area,

I can only speculate about this. Given that some students will be drawn from those already

employed, the number of graduates seeking employment will not be excessive. They are likely

to be those students who are required to complete an internship, and our experience has been

that a student who performs well in that role is not infrequently offered a position in the agency.

We have also found that faculty can be helpful in placing graduates through their professional

contacts. Over time a program can feed upon itself in placin

g

graduates. That is, graduates

who can influence employee selection in an agency may turn to the program as a source of new

employees.

In summary, my evaluation of the proposal is very positive. Despite the careful

planning, implementation will undoubtedly reveal some unforeseen problems and the program

will change as it matures. I am confident that the director and faculty can meet those challenges

when they occur.

Sinceri',

iram J. F

?

sam

Professor Emeritus

HJF/nd

.

3q

---

0

.

.

---

.

PROGRAM PROPOSAL:?

MASTER OF ARTS IN GERONTOLOGY

AT

.

?

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

January

1995

.

I/o

---

1 ]

CONTENTS

I ?

GENERAL INFORMATION

.

II ?

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION ........................................ 4

1.

2.

Rel

Other

RelObjectives.............................................4

ationship

ationship

Of

Degree

the Universityto

and

of

Other

Program

Diploma

Gerontology

..................................5

to

P

rograms

Role and

Programsin

Mission

Ge

rontology

?

......5

............6

7

Entry

Req

uirements

......................................

ProjectCredit

Curriculum

Hours

?

and

?

..........................................

Description ............................

10

7

10

..............................................

Thesis...............................................

RelThe

ationship

M.A. in Gerontology

Between the

Internship

G

raduate and

...................

Dipl

.

oma P .

?

10

rogram

Related Graduate Courses in Other Departments ........11

NEED FOR THE PROGRAM

3.

4.

5.

6a

6b

6c

6d

6e

6f

6g

II'

..............................

12

C

ultural, Societal and

Professional

Need for

the Program ......................................12

Type

Enrolment

of Jobs

............................................16

for Which

G

raduates will

-

be Suitable ....i

PRESENT AND PROJECTED RESOURCES

20

.........ative Personnel

2

?

4.3.2.1.

Library

Projected

ExistingAdministrand

Resources

and

?

Sequence

Enrolment

Required

of

for

Course

Faculty

l

the.............................

?

First

Offerings,

Resources

?

S

Six

S

Semesters

e

............

Instructors

?

......

..20

0

?

?

..................................

23

5.

Capital

Costs

?

?

........................................26

26

7.6.

Budget

External

...............................................

Funds:

?

and

nd Received .............27

............27

V ?

EVALUATION................................................28

VI ?

SENATE COURSE PROPOSAL FORMS AND COURSE OUTLINES ..........32

VII APPENDICES

1.

2.

3.

Iv

Appendix I

Appendix II

Appendix iii

Appendix iv

Appendix V

AGHE Guidelines for Master's Programs and

Survey of U.S. Gerontology MA Programs

Calendar Entry

Practicuin Sites

Letters of Support

Letters of Student Interest

r

?

Available upon request from Senate

I

Secretariat Services

4"

---

CONTENTS

?

(Continued)

Appendix

VI

Theses Concerned with Aging and the Aged

Appendix

VII

Faculty with Teaching/Research Interests

in Gerontology

Appendix

VIII

Submissions for Funding - 1990-91,

1991-92 & 1993-1994

Appendix

IX

Publications of Faculty, Staff and

Students in the Area of Population Aging

Appendix

X

Faculty Curriculum Vitae

Appendix

XI

Updated Library Report

Available upon request from Senate Secretariat Services

S

y

---

I

?

GENERAL INFORMATION

1.

Title of Program:

Master of Arts in Gerontology

2.

Credential to be awarded to Graduates:

M. A. in Gerontology

3.

Program awarding the degree:

Gerontology Program, Faculty of

Arts

4.

Date of senate approval:

5.

Schedule for Implementation:

September, 1995.

II PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

1. ?

Objectives

The proposed M.A. program will build upon the existing

Gerontology Diploma Program and the expertise, research

activities and reputation of the associated Gerontology

Research Centre. It will also utilize teaching and supervisory

expertise of faculty within other departments.

The M.A. in Gerontology is aimed at preparing students to fill

professional roles

with a high level of current knowledge of

. the field, and substantial competence in the kinds of research

tasks necessary to undertake those roles. It is also intended

to provide focused, interdisciplinary training for individuals

within occupations that provide services to older adults.

Furthermore, the program will develop in students an

appreciation of the complex ethical issues that are likely to

be faced by persons working within the field.

The program leading to the Master of Arts in Gerontology is

designed to offer advanced study in two defined areas within

the field of gerontology. The two concentrations are: Aging

and the Built Environment, and Health Promotion and A

g ing. The

program is tailored to facilitate part-time study (such as by

offering evening courses), since some of the prospective

students will be employed.

a) Aging and the Built Environment

This concentration will train students in the

conceptualization, planning, research and evaluation of

working, living, and recreational environments for older

persons. Students will be taught the necessary research skills

to conduct community needs assessments, environmental

assessments, and post-occupancy evaluations. Instruction will

cover person-environment theories, as well as planning

.

?

?

frameworks and models of social policy. Students attracted to

this concentration will have backgrounds in architecture,

---

interior design, urban and regional planning, social/human

ecology, recreation and leisure studies, human factors, human

geography, occupational therapy, sociology, or environmental,

or social psychology.

b) Health Promotion and Aging

This program branch is designed to train students to

conceptualize, plan, research and evaluate health promotion

programs for aging persons.; It will necessitate knowledge

building in behavioural, educational and participatory models

of health promotion, health resources and constraints, health

potential, empowerment and social marketing. Students with

degrees in psychology, sociology, demography, medical

geography, social work, nursing, health education,

physiotherapy, and physical education or kinesiology would be

candidates for this concentration.

2.

Relationship of Program to Role and Mission of the University

The proposed M.A. program responds to several key points

articulated in the planning agenda of Simon Fraser University

described in Challen

g

e 2001:The President's Strategic Plan.

Specifically, the development of a Master's Program in

Gerontology will support: 1) the expansion of a nationally

recognized cross-disciplinary program; 2) stimulate

professional training in a growth field; 3) increase the

number of graduate students; 4) recruit female graduate

students; 5) attract high calibre graduate students to SFU for

further study; and 6) build the graduate curricula at the

Harbour Centre campus and help to meet its enrolment targets.

To date, approximately 85% of the graduates from the Diploma

Program in Gerontology are women. A similar pattern would be

expected for the proposed Master's Program. The emphasis on

training female professionals in the field of gerontology is

appropriate given the fact that the client base is also

primarily comprised of women.

The M.A. program is also consistent with the university's

commitment to serving the needs of the community by upgrading

the qualifications of persons already employed.

3.

Other Degree and Diploma Programs in Gerontology

a) British Columbia

Since 1973, the University of British Columbia has had a

Committee on Gerontology. Located administratively under the

aegis of the Dean of Graduate Studies, the Committee assists

students in identifying courses with gerontological content

offered by the various departments and schools within the

---

university. UBC, however, does not offer a credential in

gerontology (graduate, undergraduate or diploma); it is only

within the Faculty of Medicine (Geriatrics; Rehabilitation

Medicine) that a formal program of studies leading to

specialization in work with older people has been established.

The University of Victoria offers a concentration in

Gerontology (but not a credential) within the

Interdisciplinary Master's Program in Human Services. Within

the Department of Psychology, students may specialize at the

graduate level in Life Span Developmental Psychology.

b) Elsewhere in Canada

In Canada at the present time,

only one

English language

university offers a graduate degree in Gerontology. The

University of Waterloo offers two types of Master's degrees,

both within the Faculty of Health Sciences: a "Discipline

Oriented Degree" in which Gerontology is taken in conjunction

with another subject such as Biology, Psychology, or

Recreation Studies, and a "Professional M.A. in Gerontology"

which is usually taken by professionals in the field who wish

to obtain additional qualifications. A Master's degree in

Gerontology targeted at Francophones is offered by the

• ?

University of Sherbrooke.

As in the Psychology Department at the University of Victoria,

several other universities allow graduate sub-specialization

within another discipline (e.g. in Family Studies at the

University of Guelph).

Additionally, several universities (including Simon Fraser

University, the University of Toronto, and the University of

Alberta) offer post-baccalaureate diplomas in Gerontology.

McMaster University offers a combined B.A. and Honours in

Gerontology and another subject. The University of Waterloo

offers an undergraduate minor in Gerontology.

4. Relationship to Other Gerontology Programs

The SFU Post-Baccalaureate Diploma Program, other Diploma

Programs and the various undergraduate Gerontology Programs

recently developed across the country will feed the proposed

M.A. Program. The Program will also enable students with

training in other areas (e.g. nursing, physiotherapy,

occupational therapy, architecture, urban planning) to gain

specialization in gerontology.

There are currently no universities in Canada offering Masters

level gerontology training in Aging and the Built Environment,

which represents the principal research strength of the SFU

Gerontology Research Centre. The Centre's second area of

I11/5

---

strength, which is encompassed in the Health Promotion and

Aging stream, is also not reflected as a concentration in

graduate curricula elsewhere. The two areas of concentration

proposed for the SFU Master's Degree are, in other words,

unique and fill an important educational gap in the field of

gerontology in Canada.

5. Entry Requirements

The proposed program will conform to the General Regulations

for graduate studies described in the SFU Calendar. The

minimum requirements include: 1) a Bachelor's degree with a

cumulative grade point average (CGPA) of at 'least 3.0 from a

recognized university, or the equivalent; and 2) submitted

evidence, usually in the form of references from qualified

referees, of the student's ability to undertake advanced work

in the area of interest (see pages 249-250 of the 1994-1995

Calendar).

Students may be required to complete some of the courses from

the existing Diploma Program in Gerontology as a condition of

admission, or to register as a Qualifying Student before

consideration for admission to the M.A. program. A detailed

educational and work biography will be required as part of the

admissions procedure. This information, in conjunction with a

personal interview in some cases, will be evaluated by the

Admissions Committee to determine if the student requires

preparatory course work and to establish whether an internship

is necessary (see next section).

equivalent,

In addition,

are

the

needed

following

for each

specific

concentration:

pre-requisites,

or their

A

gin g

and the Built Environment

GERO 401-3 Aging and the Environment,

or

GEOG 490-4 (Special Topics) when offered as Housing for

the Elderly or Geography of Aging

Health Promotion and Aging

GERO 404-3 Health and Illness in Later Life,

and one from

GERO 402-3 Drug Issues in Gerontology

GERO 403-3 Counselling with Older Adults

GERO 411-3 Health Promotion and Aging

GERO 407-3 Nutrition and Aging

L

S

6a. Curriculum and Description

There are five components to the program:

I Core Courses, II

Required Courses for each Concentration, III Electives, IV

Project, and V Internship.

[1

IL/

---

Students must complete six courses: two core courses, two

required courses from their stream, and two electives. They

must also complete a project. Under special circumstances,

students may complete a thesis in lieu of the project (see

section 6d.).

The structure and rigor of the curriculum is consistent with the

Association for Gerontology in Higher Education (AGHE) guidelines

and a survey conducted of Master's Programs in Gerontology offered

at American universities (see Appendix I).

M.A. PROGRAM IN GERONTOLOGY

I Core Courses

These courses will be required of all students.

GERO 801-4 Health Policy and Applied Issues in

Gerontology

GERO 802-4 Development and Evaluation of Health

Promotion Programs for Older Persons

Students who complete a thesis will also complete the

following course (see section 6d.).

BA 857-5 Research Design seminar

(Or any other approved graduate research

methods course.)

II Required Courses Specific to Concentration

These courses are required of students within each of the

streams.

A ging

and the Built Environment

GERO 810-4 Community-Based Housing for Older

People

GERO 811-4 Institutional Living Environments

Health Promotion and Aging

GERO 820-4 Principles and Practices of Health

Promotion

GERO 821-4 Epidemiology of Aging

0

---

I ?

•

6b.

111 Elective Courses

Students may fulfil elective credit requirements by selecting

from the following courses, completing required courses from

another stream, or from outside the program if approved by

their graduate advisory committee.

GERO 830-4 Human Factors, Technology and Safety

BA ?

886-5 (Selected Problems in Social analysis) when

offered as: Social Policy in a Changing

Society

GERO 889-4 Directed Studies

All seven of the GERO course offerings are new courses.

IV GERO 898 M.A. Project/GERO 899 Thesis

Students will be required to complete a project. The M.A.

Project is described in Section 6c. Under special

circumstances, students may complete a thesis in lieu of the

project (see section 6d).

V ?

Internship

The internship is described in section 6e.

A complete calendar description can be found in Appendix II.

Credit Hours

Completion of the Master's Degree in Gerontology will require

24 credit hours.*

2 core courses

?

8 credits

2 courses in concentration

?

8 credits

2 electives

?

8 credits

Project/Thesis

?

0 credits

Total ?

24 credits

* Students who complete a thesis will replace the two elective

courses with BA 857-5 Research Design Seminar (or any other

approved graduate research methods course.) This will total 21

credit hours for these students.

0

---

It should be noted that the Sociology/Anthropology Department

has agreed to allow Gerontology Masters students into

BA 857-5

Research Design Seminar

and BA

886-5

(Selected Problems in

Social Analysis) when offered as

Social Policy in a Changing

Society.

6c. Project

All students will be initially admitted into the project

stream. Students will normally present a written project

proposal to a faculty member chosen as a supervisor. After

consultation with the project supervisor, a second member will

be selected to complete the supervisory committee. Following

approval of the project proposal by the supervisory committee,

the student proceeds to conduct the project. Examples of

projects include: evaluations of programs for older adults;

design and implementation of environments or services for

elderly persons; and analyses of secondary data. A project

report will be evaluated by the supervisory committee and a

qualified External Reader. The project requirement must meet

the guidelines set out by Graduate Studies.

6d. Thesis

A small number of highly qualified students who wish to

prepare for advanced graduate training may be permitted to

elect a thesis option after one semester in the program.

Students who are allowed to complete a thesis will replace the

two elective courses with SA 857-5 Research Design Seminar (or

any other approved graduate research methods course).

The thesis will provide an opportunity for students to

undertake a focused research study of high quality. Students

will be encouraged to engage in original and innovative

research to meet this requirement. Committee selection and

approval of the thesis proposal will follow the same steps as

the project. The thesis requirement must meet the guidelines

set out by Graduate Studies.

6e.

The M.A. in Gerontology Internship

It is ..

anticipated that more than half of the students will

have

S

had significant experience working with seniors in

settings and positions relevant to their concentration, and

therefore, will not require an internship.

. Students lacking prior or concurrent relevant work experience

will be required to supplement their program of study with an

internship. Determination of the need for an internship will

.

S

---

be based on the student's biographical

information

submitted

to the Admissions Committee and, if deemed necessary, a

personal interview with the student. The length of the

internship will normally be no longer than one semester of

full-time work.

Where an internship is required, the student will work for an

agency or organization in a position of responsibility. The

student will gain from this experience the skills, knowledge

and contacts necessary to work successfully in a similar work

environment if they so choose. Students will normally be

placed after they have completed all or most of their course

requirements. Possible sites for the internship are: long term

care facilities, community-based services targeting elderly,

and government

organizations.

There are currently over 40

practicuin sites available for the Gerontology Diploma Program

of which many would be appropriate for the M. A. internship

(see Appendix III).

An Internship Coordinator will act as a liaison and will be

involved in the placement, monitoring and documentation of the

internship. The person at the site overseeing the student will

produce a written report on the student's work experience.

Given that some students may gain access to information and

data appropriate for the completion of a project or thesis,

the student's senior supervisor is a logical choice for the

final evaluation (satisfactory or unsatisfactory).

6f.

Relationship Between the Graduate Program and Diploma Program

The Diploma in Gerontology offers a wide range of courses that

are equivalent to undergraduate 300 and 400 level courses. The

proposed graduate courses are more specialized and cover

content at a significantly higher level than the diploma

courses. Some of the diploma courses are

•

necessary for

specific stream courses and are listed as pre-requisites (see

Entry Requirements). In addition, some general gerontology

diploma-level courses are necessary to ensure that students

entering the graduate program have a basic understanding of

the field. These entry requirements are equivalent to a

qualifying year in a traditional department for students with

little or no formal training in their field of graduate study.

The Diploma Program is therefore integral to the proposed M.A.

in Gerontology.

6g.

Related Graduate Courses in Other Departments

A systematic review of graduate courses offered at Simon

Fraser University related to the field of aging generally, and

to the program streams specifically, has been undertaken. The

S

S

2.

---

results indicate that there are few regular graduate courses

that deal explicitly with topics in gerontology. Kinesiology

806-3 (Special Topics) Biology of Human Aging deals with the

human aging process, but does not fit within the proposed

program curriculum. It is also not offered on a regular basis.

III NEED FOR THE PROGRAM

1. Cultural, Societal and Professional Need for the Program

It is well known that Canada's population is aging at a fast

pace. The median age increased from 22.6 years in 1901 to 33.5

years in 1991. It is projected to increase to 41 years by 2006

and to 48 years by 2031 (Statistics Canada, 1985). At the top

of the age pyramid, people 65 years of age and over comprised

11.6% of the population in 1991. It is estimated that by the

turn of the century, this same group will comprise between 13%

and 14% of the Canadian population. The proportion will rise

to approximately 24% by 2031 when the bulk of the baby boom

generation retire. It is also important to note that within

the 65 and over population, the fastest growing segment are

persons aged 80 and over, a group with special health and

social service needs.

. These dramatic demographic shifts in the age structure of our

country have profound consequences for the demands placed on

society to provide adequate financial and social support,

housing and living environments, health care, leisure and

recreation, and generally, the opportunity to maximize well-

being for an aging population.

As recommended by the Canadian Medical Association's Committee

on the Health Care of the Elderly (1987), there is a need to

broaden our current knowledge base through more extensive and

innovative applied research into the aging process and to

identify ways to ameliorate its effects on function and

autonomy. Further, it is stressed that continuity in support

and services must be made available when needed to facilitate

better use of the health care system and to promote self-

confidence and security (p. 48).

Recently, we have witnessed an expansion of research, policy

and programs that attempt to address these issues. This, in

turn, has generated a need to train and upgrade the expertise

of professionals working with or on behalf of the elderly. To

date, colleges and universities have concentrated on filling

this gap at the lower levels. As indicated in section II, only

two other Canadian universities offer a graduate level degree

in Gerontology, one in French and one in English. Responding

to a similar need in the United States, the number of American

educational institutions offering a Master's degree in

---

Gerontology increased from 19 to 40 between 1984 and 1990

(Rich,

Connelly &

Douglass, 1990).

To ensure an adequate quality of life for older Canadians

today and in the future, it is important that our universities

parallel this trend. It is particularly appropriate that a

B.C. university should play a leadership role in the training

of professionals within the multidisciplinary field of

gerontology, since it is projected that between 1984 and 2006,

this province will experience the most

significant

population

aging of all

Canadian

provinces (Statistics Canada, 1985).

The existing Gerontology Diploma Program can only meet this

need to a limited extent. A higher level of training is

necessary for persons wanting to advance in their job or

specialty. For example, within the health care and social

service fields, a Master's degree is often required for

professional advancement to upper level positions. There is

also a need for professionals with multi-disciplinary

training who are able to interact with the various and diverse

professional groups that provide service to older persons.

Additionally, there is a demand for persons with research

training

who are able to merge academic and applied skills and

apply them to gerontological problems in their work settings.

The need for graduate level

training

in Gerontology has grown

since the establishment of the Diploma Program in Gerontology

and is reflected in the August 14th, 1991 letter written by

Judy Gaudin-Riese, then Co-ordinator, Community Services, New

Vista Society and President of the Alumni Association for

SFU's Diploma Program in Gerontology in support of the

proposed Master's Program in Gerontology (see Appendix IV).

Over the last decade, the number of long term care facilities,

and the types of care offered (for example, multi-level care

and care for persons with dementia) have increased

significantly in Canada, particularly in British Columbia,

which represents the "highest level of co-ordination and

formalization" of long term care of any province (Kane and

Kane, 1985:169-170). There were 390 residential care

facilities for older people in British Columbia in 1989 (B.C.

Ministry of Health, 1989) and over 2,400 facilities in all of

Canada (Statistics Canada, 1984); numbers which certainly will

continue to increase in the next century.

In tandem, we have seen a proliferation of community-based

support services aimed at keeping the elderly in their homes

for as long as possible. These include homemakers, home

nursing, adult day care, peer counselling, etc. In British

Columbia alone, there are 195 agencies providing homemakers,

adult day care and group homes (B.C. Ministry of Health,

1989 .

). There is an urgent need to train new administrators and

---

to upgrade the training of those who currently manage these

services, however, no systematic graduate program designed to

meet these goals is in existence in Canada. Deficiencies in

the training of professional staff have been highlighted as a

major issue in the 1990 Report of the Federal/ Provincial/

Territorial Subcommittee on Long-Term Care (Health and Welfare

Canada, 1990).

The need for the Aging and the Built Environment concentration

is extensive. It is widely recognized that issues pertaining

to housing an older population transcend the provision of

shelter. The living environment is fundamental to older adults

and shapes their lives in a number of significant ways. In

response to 'deinstitutionalization' and the concomitant view

that we need a range of innovative housing and support options

so that elderly may realize their frequently articulated

desire to remain in the home for as long as possible, living

environments have become central research foci. In addition,

research into institutional design, especially for the

cognitively impaired, has arisen as another key need.

Remarkably, there is no graduate level program in Canada

offering training in this sub-field of gerontology. The

Gerontology Program has received many inquiries into graduate

• level programs from architects, planners, and interior

designers who have received their education in traditional

departments and now desire specialized training in

gerontology. These enquiries emphasize the need and demand to

educate and retrain students and professionals from planning,

architecture, interior design, environmental psychology,

physiotherapy, occupational therapy, sociology and demography

so that they can make more meaningful contributions to their

specialized fields. The Gerontology Research Centre at SFU is

renowned nationally and internationally for its expertise in

this field. Three edited volumes by Gutman and Blackie

entitled, Innovations in Housing and Living Arrangements for

Seniors

(1984),

Aging in Place

(1986), and

Housing the Very

Old

(1988), one by Gutman entitled,

Shelter and Care of

Persons with Dementia (1992),

and one edited by Gutman and

Wister titled

Progressive Accommodation for Seniors:

Interfacing Shelter and Service (1994)

represent the principal

Canadian books in this field and originate from our

Gerontology Centre. Further, Drs. Wister, Gutman and Watzke,

all affiliated with the SFU Gerontology Program and Centre,

are currently collaborating on a new book entitled,

Living

Environments of Older Canadians

for which there is an

interested commercial publisher.

Currently proposed by the Gerontology Research Centre, in

. partnership with the British Columbia Institute of Technology,

is a state of the art simulated residential environment for

the testing of new design and related technology for assisted

5 C3

---

living. The

Living Lab

will allow for detailed assessment of

a variety of environmental products and conditions targeting

specific subgroups. This project will provide excellent

research opportunities for students in this concentration. It

also reflects an important need for innovative research and

training in this expanding field.

The Health Promotion and A

g

ing stream responds to a national

impetus to disseminate knowledge about healthy living for the

purpose of improving the health status of Canadians and

producing cost savings in health care. We begin with the World

Health Organization's definition of health promotion as "the

process of enabling people to increase control over, and to

improve, their health" and extend it to "healthy communities"

and "empowerment," concepts that reduce the onus placed on the

individual for inequalities rooted at the system level. This

theme is useful because it encompasses a much broader meaning

of health and health care than has previously been the case;

one that stresses overcoming inequality and improving quality

of life, as well as specific health outcomes. It also provides

an excellent forum for evaluation and critical analysis of our

health care system and of specific health promotion

strategies. One common thread running through the

proliferation of federal and provincial health promotion

initiatives is the need for health educators.

Although older people (especially those disadvantaged

economically and socially) have beenidentified as a group at

risk, health promotion initiatives are only beginning to

recognize the unique health-related circumstances that older

people face. The University of Toronto and the University of

British Columbia have established institutes for health

promotion research, but these encompass the entire life span.

The SFU Gerontology Research Centre is one of three partners

in the British Columbia Consortium for Health Promotion

Research (BCCHPR). The BCCHPR is one of

six

Centres of

Excellence in health promotion research funded by Health

Canada. Its activities provide opportunities for graduate

students to obtain training in participatory research, which

is the major methodological approach of the Consortium. A need

remains, however, to offer graduate level training in program

and policy evaluation of health systems from a gerontological

p ersp

ective and to provide health professionals a critical

understanding of the health care system as it

pertains

to an

a g

ing

p

opulation. Health promotion is seen as an excellent

vehicle upon which to disseminate health care knowledge as it

pertains to older persons. Drs. Gutman and Wister have

recently edited a book entitled:

Health Promotion for Older

Canadians: Knowledge Gaps and Research Needs (1994), which

forges new ground in this expanding field.

0

---

0

?

2. Enrolment

a) Evidence of student interest

The development of a Master's Program in Gerontology stems

from continued enquiry and demands by students and by persons

working in the field of gerontology for such a program. Since

its inception at SFU in 1983, the Gerontology Diploma Program

has received over 375 phone calls and letters from current or

prospective students living across the country who are

interested in a Master's level education. The characteristics

of these prospective students tend to be as follows: they are

mature students between the age of 25 and 40, mostly women,

and many work in full-time or part-time positions in the

fields discussed under section 1 above.

It is anticipated that about

one third

of the students will

enrol part-time so that they may continue in their current

job. In addition, some of the candidates for our program will

be employed in the field of gerontology but will choose to

return to school full-time. Another pool of prospective

students will come from existing programs in Gerontology

across the country. For example, to date, the SFU Gerontology

Diploma Program has graduated 117 students. There are

• currently 101 active students in the Diploma Program (ie.

students who have taken courses over the last year). It should

be noted, however, that most Gerontology Diploma courses are

open to students in other programs as well. As a result, total

enrolment in Gerontology Program courses has been between 800

and 1,000 students per year over the last five years (see

Figure 1). The University of Toronto Diploma Program in

Gerontology has also graduated over one hundred students. It

is anticipated that students will also come from among

graduates of gerontology undergraduate degree and minor

programs offered at universities in

Canada,

the U.S. and

in

other countries.

Additionally, students will come from

traditional departments in universities across Canada offering

bachelors degrees in nursing, social work, psychology,

sociology, planning, etc. A selection of letters reflecting

interest of students from SF13 and elsewhere is in Appendix V.

Further evidence of demand is reflected in the fact that two

Ph.D. dissertations and two Master's degrees have been

completed by Special Arrangements via the Gerontology Program.

Another Ph.D. candidate is currently enroled. It should also

be noted that since the establishment of the Gerontology

Centre in 1982, 31 students have completed an M.A. or a Ph.D.

with a gerontological focus within the departments, schools,

or faculties of Biological Sciences, Business Administration,

• Communications, Criminology, Education, Geography,

Kinesiology, Psychology and Sociology. A list of all SFtJ

Ph.D., Master's and Honours theses concerned with aging or the

31

6.

---

C,)

C

a,

Co

0

E

LL

co

co

a)

C,)

C,)

oI

Q)

-

• . -

CI

CD

•

a)

E

-

w

><

x

at

><

><

>

>

>

>

>

>1

=. 0

Ci)

a)

0)

=

d)

E

a)

Co

-

0

.

.

-

o

o

?

?

00

0 ???

0

co

0

0

0.1

(0

??

?

00

??

0

0

c'J

??

0

V

1

CO

CU

m

.

,

5.

---

aged (including those by special arrangements) is presented in

Appendix VI.

A mail survey of student interest in the proposed Master's

Program in Gerontology at SFU was conducted in November and

December, 1991 among all current and graduated Diploma

students. A total of 50 questionnaires were returned. Of

these, 33 (66%) indicated that they were definitely interested

in applying to the program, 10 (20%) indicated that they were

uncertain and 7 (14%) stated that they would not be interested

in the proposed Master's Program in Gerontology.

b) Enrolment predictions

Fourteen students, approximately 7 students in each stream,

would be admitted for the initial year of the program. An

additional 3 per stream, plus replacements for students who

complete the program in one year, would be admitted in the

second year.

It is anticipated that about one-third of the

students will be part-time, and that an enrolment of 20

students in total will be maintained. The part-time/full-time

ratio

strengths

will

of

be

the

determined

program.

by

the student market and

the

0 ?

Example Year 1 Enrolment:

Year 1 - 14 students (10 full-time, 4 part-time)

10 full-time - about 53 GERO course selections; about 4 SA

course selections

4 part-time - about 6 GERO courses; about 2 SA selections

This would result in a total of approximately 56 GERO course

selections divided into 7 GERO courses, and an average GERO

course size of 8 students. This assumes that most full-time

students take all 6 courses in their first year, and that the

four part-time students each take 2 courses in their first

year. Also, it is assumed that there will be only 3 thesis

students.

Example of Year 2 Enrolment:

Year 2 - 20 students (13 full-time, 7 part-time)

In addition to the assumptions stated above, it is anticipated

Gerontology

that one-third

in

of the students will com

p lete their

MA

in

semesters and

semesters. With

. ?

an average GERO

predictions for

one year, one-third will complete in 4

?

the final third will complete in 5 or 6

?

replacement of graduands, this would result in

?

class size of S. A detailed set of enrolment

?

the first six semesters is shown in the

---

Projected Sequence of Course Offerings (page 23-24).

3.

?

Types of Jobs for Which Graduates will be Suitable

The correspondence from prospective students suggests that

many will already be employed in a position and/or setting

relevant to their area of concentration. The Master's in

Gerontology will provide the training needed for career

advancement. The Gerontology Research Centre and Diploma

Program regularly receive requests from a variety of

organizations interested in persons with gerontological

knowledge, and applied research and/or administration skills.

The internship will also facilitate employment of graduates.

The Agin

g

and the Built Environment concentration will produce

graduates who could assume research and professional positions

in government planning and housing departments, architecture

firms,- institutional and housing development companies,

interior design companies, as well as private consulting

firms. Generally, these students will leave the program with

skills that are widely marketable.

Students graduating with a concentration in Health Promotion

and A

ging

can be employed by governments, care facilities,

hospitals or community programs with an emphasis on health

promotion and disease prevention. For example, they may be

employed by agencies to design, develop, implement and

evaluate health promotion programs. Day health care, clinical

or community outreach programs and seniors weliness centres

are also probable employers of these graduates.

A survey focusing on the employment experience of graduates of

the Diploma Program in Gerontology was conducted. Thus far, 37

mailed questionnaires have been returned from the 107 students

who graduated between 1983 and 1993., Tracking of students who

have changed residence is still in progress. Based on the

initial results, we found that:

a)

57% (21) currently work full-time, 16% (6) work part-time,

5% (2) are not employed but are seeking employment, 2% (1) are

not employed and 19% (7) are not seeking employment at the

present time.

b)

A striking 84% (31) work in aging-related jobs. Aging-

related jobs were defined in the questionnaire as those in

which one does one of the following with, for, or about the

elderly (over age 60) population: 1) administer or plan

programs; 2) provide direct service or direct care; 3) conduct

research; 4) train or teach; or 5) consult. Approximately 62%

(23) stated that they actively sought an aging-related job

11I6.

---

.

S

after graduation from the Diploma Program in Gerontology. Some

of those currently working in aging-related jobs were in those

positions before graduation.

c) When graduates were asked how useful they found the Diploma

Program curriculum for their current employment, 49% (18)

rated it as "very useful," 46% (17) as "useful," and only 5%

as "not useful."

IV PRESENT AND PROJECTED RESOURCES

1. Administrative Personnel

The proposed Master's in Gerontology will be guided by the

Director of the Gerontology Research Centre and Gerontology

Diploma Program, Dr. Gloria Gutman. Day to day administration

of the Program will be the responsibility of Dr. Andrew

Wister, Associate Professor (Gerontology). He will be guided

in policy ,

matters

by a graduate subcommittee of the

Gerontology Steering Committee comprised of Dr. Meredith

Kimball (Associate Professor, Department of Women's Studies),

and Dr. John Herzog, Professor (Economics and Business

Administration), or by suitable replacements from the Steering

Committee. The department graduate committee for the Master's

Program will consist of Dr. Andrew Wister (Chair), Dr. Gloria

Gutman, Dr. Ellen Gee and the two new CFLs (see next section).

The existing support staff for the Diploma Program consists of

one full-time Program Assistant who will function in this

capacity for the Master's Program as well.

2.

Existing and Required Faculty Resources

The Master's Program in Gerontology will build on existing

resources within the Gerontology Diploma Program, the

Gerontology Research Centre and elsewhere in the university.

It is worth noting that in the twelve years since the

Gerontology Research Centre has been established, a total of

$6,562,000 in grants and contracts have been awarded to SFU

researchers working in the area of aging (see Figure 2).

A list of Gerontology faculty is given in the Calendar Entry

(Appendix II). In the A

g in g

and the Built Environment

concentration, students will be supervised and/or courses will

be taught by Professor and Director, Dr. Gloria Gutman;

Associate Professor, Dr. Andrew Wister; and Research Fellow in

Environmental Gerontology, Dr. James Watzke, all of whom have

nationally recognized expertise in this area. Newly appointed

^ d -

---

0)

0

a)

U)

Ix

(1)

U.

X

L

r'CI)

Uc,(1)

CTJ

-D

LL

a)>-

LO

(v)

0-

C)

fft

co

c

?

?

OD

00

Cf) ?

LO

co

LO

73 ?

m

LO ?

0

>-

.

1;'

---

(August 1994) Research Fellow in Environmental Gerontology,

Mary Ann Clark, MAIBC, M Arch., will serve as an additional

resource. It should be noted that the Research Fellow

positions are permanent positions within the Centre, funded by

an endowment provided by the Real Estate Foundation of B.C.

($600,000), which has been matched by the provincial

government. The terms of reference of the endowment permit

each Fellow to teach one course per year.

Drs. Gutman and Wister also have expertise in the Health.

Promotion and A

ging

field. They are SFU's principal and co-

investigator, respectively on a project funded by NHRDP/SSHRC

in December, 1992 that established a British Columbia

Consortium for Health Promotion Research (BCCHPR). This is a

collaborative endeavour with the University of British

Columbia and the University of Victoria. The Consortium's

letter of intent was one of 15 selected from 53 to go to the

second phase of the competition and was one of only six

actually funded

($100,000

for each of five years). The project

supports a full-time Research Associate in Health Promotion

who is housed at the SFU Gerontology Research Centre. In

conjunction with one other member of the BCCHPR, and two

community researchers, Drs. Wister and Gutman have recently

(Nov. 1994) been awarded a $580,000 Seniors Independence

. Research Program grant through Health Canada, to study

seniors' independence through self-care, self-help, and mutual

aid.

Additional existing faculty resources in this area include:

Professor Michael Manley-Casimir who has already supervised

several Master's theses within the Faculty of Education that

have focused on the health promotion and aging field and

Associate Professor Michael Hayes, a medical geographer, who

is a recognized scholar in the health promotion area.

Professor Ellen Gee, a renowned expert in the gerontological

community, will teach

BA 886-5 Social Policy in a Changing

Society,

which will be offered through the Sociology and

Anthropology Department.

Additionally, members of the Gerontology Steering Committee,

and a number of other individuals at SFIJ who have taught

courses, conducted research, supervised theses and/or have

interest in gerontology, could serve on project and thesis

supervisory committees for the proposed Master's Program in

Gerontology. A list of SFTJ faculty who have teaching and/or

research interests in Gerontology is provided in Appendix VII.

A complete listing of the research grants applied for and

awarded to associated Gerontology faculty over the last three

• years is provided in Appendix VIII. A list of publications by

faculty, staff and students in the area of population aging is

provided in Appendix IX. Finally, the faculty curriculum vitae

---

3.

can be found in Appendix X.

The following resources are required, at minimum, to initiate

the proposed Master's Program:

1.0 new full time equivalent faculty position in Health

Promotion; 0.5 new

p

racticum/internship coordinator; 1.0

sessional instructor for the first year.

In order to support the M. A. program and to respond to the

external reviewers' criticism of the large number of Diploma

courses taught by sessionals (6 per year), the following

additional resources would be required:

A second new full-time equivalent faculty position in Health

Promotion or Environment and Aging in the second year.

See page 25 for rationale for additional faculty and staff.

Projected Sequence of Course Offerings, Instructors and

Enrolment for the First Six Semesters

Based on the enrolment predictions discussed earlier, we plan

to have 20 students in the program at any one time. It is

assumed that of the 20 students, 13 will be full-time and 7

will be part-time. It is estimated that the 7 GERO graduate

courses would draw, on average, about eight students (see page

17). A larger number of students will take the two required

courses: GERO 801 Health Policy and Applied Issues in

Gerontology and GERO 802-4 Development and Evaluation of

Health Promotion Programs for Older Persons.

YEAR I (14 STUDENTS)?

TERM 95-3

GERO 801-4 Health Policy and Applied Issues in Gerontology

Dr. Gutman (12 students)

GERO 810-4 Community-Based Housing for Older People

Dr. Wister (7 students)

GERO 820-4 Principles and Practices of Health Promotion

Health Promotion CFL #1

(7

students)

*8k 857-5 Research Design Seminar

Dr. Gates (3 GERO students)

0

---

0 ?

TERN 96-1

GERO 802-4 Development and Evaluation of Health Promotion

Programs for Older Persons

Dr. Wister (12 students)

GERO

811-4 Institutional

Living Environments

Dr. Gutman (7 students)

GERO 821-4 Epidemiology

of Aging

Health Promotion CFL #1 (7 students)

**SA 886-5 (Selected Problems in Social Analysis) when

offered as: Social Policy in a

Changing

Society

Dr.

Gee (5 GERO students)

TERN 96-2

GERO 830-4 Human Factors, Technology and Safety

Dr. Watzke (7 students)

GERO 889-4 Directed Studies

YEAR II (20 STUDENTS)

?

TERN 96-3

GERO 802-4 Development and Evaluation of Health Promotion

Programs for Older Persons

Dr. Wister (12 students)

GERO

811-4 Institutional

Living Environments

Dr. Gutman (7 students)

GERO 820-4 Principles and Practices of Health Promotion

Health Promotion CFL #1 (7 students)

*SA 857-5 Research Design Seminar

Dr. Gates (3 GERO students)

TERN 97-1

GERO 801-4 Health Policy and Applied Issues in Gerontology

Health Promotion CFL #2 (12 students)

GERO 810-4 ?

Community-Based Housing for Older People

Dr. Wister (7 students)

•

?

GERO 830-4 Human Factors, Technology and Safety

Dr. Watzke (7 students)

X6,3.

---

TERM 97-2

GERO 821-4 Epidemiology of Aging

Health Promotion CFL #1

(7

students)

GERO 889-4 Directed Studies

*

Only taken by thesis students.

** Offered every second or third year.

Including Drs. Gutman and Wister, there will be a total of 3

FTES with Gerontology appointments to instruct and supervise

20 Master's students in the first year, and 4 PTEs in the

second and subsequent years. This ratio is reasonable, given

that about one third will be part-time students, and that

supervisory support is expected from members of the Steering

Committee (e.g., Drs. Gee, Manley-Casimir, and Kimball), as

well as other faculty at SPU with expertise in aging.

During the first year, the new health promotion CFL will teach

two graduate courses and two diploma level courses. The

Diploma level courses will be GERO 300-3 and GERO 400-4,

currently taught by Dr, Gutman. Dr. Gutman will teach GERO

801-4 and GERO 811-4 in support of the graduate program. Dr.

Wister will teach GERO 802-4 and GERO 810-4, and two of the

four courses that he currently teaches in the Diploma Program.

One of his current DGT courses is Sociological Aspects of

Aging, which is being phased out. A correspondence version of

SA 420-4 Sociology of Aging is under development and will

continue to be offered by Sociology/Anthropology. The other

DGT course taught by Dr. Wister, GERO 411-3 ST - Health

Promotion and Aging, will be taught by the second new CFL. Dr.

Watzke, a permanent research fellow with the centre, will

teach GERO 830 Human Factors, Technology and Safety, instead

of GERO 401 Aging and the Built Environment, which he has

taught for three years for the DGT program. One sessional

stipend will be needed for the graduate program to cover the

instruction of GERO 830 by Dr, Watzke. Under this arrangement,

Diploma courses currently taught by sessionals must continue

to be funded by Faculty of Arts/Continuing Studies stipends.

Alternate instructors can be drawn from the list of Adjunct

Professors in the Calendar Entry (Appendix II).

The Diploma and Masters Program will share a half-time

practicuin/internship coordinator. The addition of this

position responds to criticism voiced by the external

reviewers.

The additional CFL to be added in the second year of the

program will provide support for both the Diploma and Master's

Programs. Currently, 6 sessionals are used in the Diploma

---

Program each year. The 7 sessionals required to support the

two programs during the initial year of the Master's Program

can be reduced to 3 after the addition of the second CFL. The

second CFL will teach one core course for the Master's Program

and 3 courses for the Diploma Program. This will allow Dr.

Gutman to teach 1 course for each program.

4.

Library Resources

The Gerontology Research Centre library currently houses 1,200

books, monographs and reports. The Centre library also holds

20 serials. The SFU library system has an additional 90

journals on topics relating to aging and can access another 40

through the SFU/UBC loan system. The SFU library system also

has a large collection of books on aging and the aged, which

were purchased through the assistance of a $25,000 grant

awarded in 1982 by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research

Council of Canada under the Programme for the Strengthening of

Specialized Collections. An updated report from the SFU

library system has been completed and is in Appendix XI.

5. Capital Costs

No additional space will be needed beyond that which was

planned in the move into Phase III of the SFU Harbour Centre

campus.

The Gerontology Diploma Program currently has 1 micro-computer

(MAC) and 1 laser printer (HP laserjet II). The Gerontology

Research Centre has eight micro-computers (2 MACS, 6 IBM

compatible), 3 laser printers (1 HP laserjet II and 2 Okidata

400s), 4 dot matrix printers (Roland and Toshiba), 1 fax

machine and 1 photocopier. The Gerontology Research Centre

will share some of its resources with the proposed Master's

Program in Gerontology (e.g. photocopier, receptionist, fax,

etc.). However, the new faculty members and the half-time

internship/practicum supervisor will each require a new

computer.

One-time only equipment needed in years one and two is as

follows:

3 MAC computers ?

7,200

Software ?

3,000

Total ?

$10,200

2/u'

---

6. ?

External Funds:Anticipated and Received

No external sources of funding are anticipated at this time.

Attempts will be made to solicit support for the Program from

available sources.

7. ?

Budget

The following is a list of the operating costs per annum for

initiation of the proposed graduate program:

YEAR 1

RECURRING DIRECT OPERATING COSTS:

1 FTE Appointment ?

$50,000

Internship/Practicuin Supervisor

?

17,000

Sessional Stipend

?

6,000

Library Resources ?

5,207

TOTAL DIRECT RECURRING COSTS

?

$78,207

FTE'

S

1.0

0.5

NON-RECURRING COSTS:

Equipment ?

$6,800

Library Resources ?

18,853

TOTAL NON-RECURRING COSTS:

?

$25,653

YEAR 1 TOTAL NEW PROGRAM COSTS

?

$103,860

YEAR 2

RECURRING DIRECT OPERATING COSTS:

2 FTE Appointments ?

$100,000

Internship/Practicum Supervisor

?

17,000

Library Resources ?

5,207

TOTAL DIRECT RECURRING COSTS

?

$122,207

FTE

Is

2.0

0.5

[1

---

NON-RECURRING COSTS:

Equipment

?

$3,400

TOTAL NON-RECURRING COSTS:

?

$3,400

YEAR 2 TOTAL NEW PROGRAM COSTS

?

$125,607

V ?

EVALUATION

1.

?

Internal and External Consultation

The course development for the proposed Master's in

Gerontology was assisted by consultations with persons having

expertise in each of the concentrations.

For the Aging and the Built Environment concentration, Ann

McAfee, Associate Director, Planning Department, City of

Vancouver; Cheryl Kathier, Planner, Social Planning

Department, City of North Vancouver and Scott Gordon,

• ?

architect, were consulted.

For the Health Promotion and Aging

Director, UBC Institute of Health

Nancy Hall, North Shore Health;

Promotion Directorate, Health and

Michael Hayes, Geography Department

stream, Dr. Larry Green,

Promotion Research; Dr.

Margot Palmer, Health

Welfare Canada and Dr.

SFU were consulted.

We are also interested in introducing a third stream entitled

Administration of Services for Older Adults, possibly in

conjunction with the Faculty of Business Administration.

However, this concentration will be postponed until such time

as it will be economically feasible. The following persons

were consulted for the courses under Administration of

Services for Older Adults: Dr. Betty McGill, Administrator,

St. Judes Anglican Care Home; Drs. Ronald Davidson, Lawrence

Pinfield, Lois Etherington and John Richards, Faculty of

Business Administration, SFTJ; Marcus Hollander, Continuing

Care Division, B.C. Ministry of Health and Ph.D. candidate,

Public Administration, University of Victoria; Elaine

Freedman, Ph.D. candidate, Faculty of Business Administration,

University of Alberta; Joanne E. Eschauzier, M.H.A., Care

Facility Development Consultant; Keith Anderson, President and

C.E.O. and Betty Lee Moore, Vice President, Financial

Services, Pacific Health Care Society;

?

Darren Kopetsky,

• Coordinator, Advisory Services, B.C. Health Association; and

Ann Jarrell, Administrator, Crossreach Adult Day Care Centre

and President, Adult Day Care Association of B.C.

---

Subsequent to course development, copies of the full proposal

were sent to the following individuals at other B.C.

institutions: Dr. Larry Green, Director, Institute of Health

Promotion Réseãrch'; Dr. Sandy Hirshen

1

Director, School of

Architecture; Dr. Charles Christiansen, Director,

Rehabilitation Medicine; Dr. Godwin Eni, Director, Health

Services Planning and Administration Program, Department of

Health Care and Epidemiology; and to Dr. James Thornton, Adult

Education Research Centre at the University of British

Columbia, and to Dr. Jim McDavid, Dean, Faculty Of Human and

Social Development at the University of Victoria.

As well, the proposal was sent to the National Advisory

Council on Aging in Ottawa; Madame Vezina, Federal Minister of

State for Seniors and Elizabeth Cull

.

, B.C. Minister of Health

and Minister for Seniors. See Appendix IV for their written

reviews.

Additionally, copies were sent to the two individuals who

conducted a site review of the Gerontology Research Centre and

the Program in March, 1992: Dr. Ann Martin Matthews, Director,

Gerontology Research Centre at the University of Guelph and

Dr. James Birren, Director, Anna and Harvey Borun Centre for

Gerontological Studies at the University of California at Los

Angeles.

Based on the above consultations,

•

a number of significant

revisions were made to the proposal. In particular, major

changes were made to the admissions criteria and the weight of

the program, providing greater flexibility and rendering it

more comparable to programs offered by other academic units.

2.

Proposed External Reviewers

The following experts in the field of education in gerontology

were recommended as referees for the Gerontology Master's

Proposal: Dr. J. Richard Connelly, Director, Intermountain

West Geriatric Education Center at the University of Utah and

President, Association for Gerontology in Higher Education;

Dr. Hiram J. Freidsam, Professor Emeritus, Center for Studies

in Aging at the University of North Texas; and Dr. David A.

Peterson, Director, Leonard Davis School of Gerontology at the

University of Southern California.

3. Institutional ?

Evaluation During, and Subsequent

?

to,

Implementation

S

The Gerontology Program Graduate

consultation with the Graduate

Gerontology Program Steering Committee

N

R,

Faculty Committee in

Sub-Committee of the

will be responsible for

---

0 ?

evaluation of proposed courses and program policies.

4. ?

Plans for Future External Evaluation

The Master's in Gerontology program will be reviewed on a

periodic basis - at least once every seven years, as is the

practise at Simon Fraser University. The invited reviewers

will conduct a thorough evaluation of the curriculum, student

theses, faculty research, and program policies with the

purpose of making recommendations for change or improvement.

REFERENCES

B.C. Ministry of Health. (1989). Continuin

g

Care. Continuing Care

Division, Vancouver B.C.: B.C. Ministry of Health.

Gutman, G. (Ed.). (1992). Shelter and care of persons with

dementia. Vancouver, B.C. :The Gerontology Research Centre,

Simon Fraser University.

• Gutman, G. & Blackie, N. (Eds.). (1984). Innovations in housing

and livin g

arran g

ements for seniors. Burnaby, B.C.: The

Gerontology Research Centre, Simon Fraser University.

Gutman, G. & Blackie, N. (Eds.). (1986). Agin

g

in

p

lace: Housing

adaptations and o

p

tions for remainin g

in the community.

Burnaby, B.C.: The Gerontology Research Centre, Simon Fraser

University.

Gutman, G. & Blackie, N. (Eds.). (1988). Housin

g

the ver y

old.

Burnaby, B.C.: The Gerontology Research Centre, Simon Fraser

University.

Gutman, G. & Wister, A.V. (Eds.). (1994). Health

promotion for

older Canadians: Knowled g e

g

aps and research needs. Vancouver,

B.C. :The Gerontology Research Centre, Simon Fraser University

at Harbour Centre.

Gutman, G. & Wister, A.V. (Eds.). (1994). Pro

gressive

accommodation

for seniors: Interfacin g

shelter and services. Vancouver,

B.C. :The Gerontology Research Centre, Simon Fraser University

at Harbour Centre.

Health and Welfare

Care.

?

Report

Subcommittee on

is

Services.

Canada. (1991). National Issues on Long-Term

of ?

the

?

Federal/Provincial/Territorial

Long-Term Care, Ottawa: Ministry of Supply and

ri

---

Kane, R.A. & Kane, R.L. (1985). The feasibility of universal

long-term care benefits: Ideas from Canada. The New England

Journal of Medicine, 312 (21), 1357-1364.

Rich, T., Connelly, J.R. & Douglass, E. (1990). Standards and

g uidelines for

g erontology

pro grams,

2nd ed. Washington D.C.

Association for Gerontology in Higher Education.

Statistics Canada. (1984). Hos

p

ital Annual Statistics, 1981-82,

Tables 1 and 2. Ottawa: Ministry of Supply and Services

Canada.

Statistics Canada. (1985). Po

p ulation Pro

j

ections for Canada and

Provinces and Territories. 1984-2006. (Catalogue No. 91-520).

Ottawa: Ministry of Supply and Services Canada.

The Canadian Medical Association. (1987). Health Care for the

Elderly: Toda

y

's Challenges

Tomorrow's Op

tions. Report of the

CMA Committee on the Health Care of the Elderly. Ottawa:

Department of Communications and Government Relations.

.

S

3X

7

0.

---

0

P-.^

---

COURSE OUTLINES FOR MASTER'S PROGRAM IN GERONTOLOGY

.

.

[]

---

Master of Gerontology

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

New Graduate Course Proposal Form

CALENDAR INFORMATION:

Department:

_GERONTOLOGY

?

Course Number:

801-4

Title:

Health Policy and Applied Issues in Gerontology

Description:

The aim of this course is to examine linkages between long term care

and other service sectors as well as to compare programs and services across

community, provincial and national boundaries. A number of key policy issues will be

discussed that pertain to the provision of health-related services to older adults.

Credit Hours: 4 Vector: 0-4-0 Prerequisites:

Estimated Enrolment: 12 When will course first be offered: 95-3

How often will the course be offered:

once per year

ir

it .i

iui': is one

01

the core courses, GERO 801-4 covers essen

concerns in gerontology with which all students must be familiar.

Which faculty member will normally teach the course:

New CFL #2

What are the budgetary implications of mounting the course:

see proposal

Appended: a) Outline of the course: attached

b)

Indication of the competence of the faculty member to give

the course:

see Appendix X

c)

Library resources:

see proposal

.

Dep't Grad. Studies Committee:

Faculty Grad. Studies Committee:

?

<)

L'

.

?

acuiy._

14- .-'

?

-

Senate Grad Studies Committee:

Senate:

Date:—

Date:_______

Date:

Date25_2T

j2ç

Date:

26Q.

J41••

Date:_______

---

GERO 801-4: HEALTH POLICY AND APPLIED ISSUES IN GERONTOLOGY

Calendar Description:

?

S

Employing a broad conception of health, the aim of this

course is to critically analyze the Canadian health delivery

system as it pertains to seniors. This will entail examining

linkages between Long Term Care (LTC) and other service

sectors as well as comparing programs and services across

community, provincial and national boundaries. The course

will also address ways in which a wide range of system and

individual factors, from changing demographic and client

characteristics

,

to organizational arrangements and

provincial and federal regulations, impinge on the roles and

responsibilities of the program planner, administrator and

environmental designer.

Grading:

Student grades will be comprised of the following:

1)

Seminar presentation(s) - 20%

2)

Paper requirement - 40%

3)

Final exam - 40%

Week by Week Outline:

1.

SOCIO-HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM

IN CANADA

?

0

2.

THE CANADIAN HEALTH CARE SYSTEM: LINKAGES BETWEEN LTC AND

OTHER SERVICES

Interrelationships of Government Bodies

Provincial Variations

International Comparisons

3.

CHANGING CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LTC FACILITY AND

COMMUNITY ELDERLY POPULATIONS: IMPLICATIONS FOR SERVICE

DELIVERY

4.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN ADULT PROTECTION LEGISLATION

5.

REGULATORY BARRIERS IN HEALTH, HOUSING AND OTHER SERVICES

6.

CHALLENGES IN ASSESSMENT FOR LTC AND COMMUNITY SETTINGS

7.

DEMENTIA AND HEALTH POLICY

8.

ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN IN HEALTH CARE

---

I

?

9. POLICY ISSUES IN HEALTH AND TECHNOLOGY

• ?

10. PUBLIC POLICY AND FAMILY CARE OF THE ELDERLY

11.

WOMEN, POLICY AND THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM

12.

HEALTH PROMOTION AND HEALTH POLICY

13.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS IN HEALTH POLICY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Available from Senate Secretariat Services upon request

0

1 ]

71/

---

Master of Gerontology

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

New Graduate Course Proposal Form

CALENDAR INFORMATION:

Department: GERONTOLOGY

?

Course Number: 802-4

Title: Development and Evaluation of Health Promotion Programs for the Elderly

Description:

This course deals with the design, implimentation and evaluation of

health promotion programs and services for older persons. Students will participate

in the development and critical analysis of a variety of health initiatives aimed at

healthful aging.

Credit Hours: 4 Vector:

0-4-0

Prerequisites: GERO

301-3

ENROLMENT AND SCHEDULING

Estimated Enrolment: 12 When will course first be offered: 96-1

How often will the course be offered:

once per year

J

u

I IF

IUA

i

I'JIN:

. i .

nis course teaches students strategies of implimenting health

promotion programs targeting elderly, as well as methods of evaluating such

• ?

programs. It is one of the core courses for all of the students in the program. GERO

802-4 instructs students to undertake applied research.

RESOURCES:

Which faculty member will normally teach the course: Dr.

A. Wister

What are the budgetary implications of mounting the course:

see proposal

Appended: a) Outline of the course: attached

b) Indication of the competence of the faculty member to

give the course:

see Appendix X

c) Library resources:

see proposal

Dep't Grad. Studies Committee:

Faculty Grad. Studies Committee:

?

i

Faculty

• ?

Senate Grad Studies Committee:

1 I ?

. ?

-

Senate:

Date:

L # t)

-

Date:

Date-

Date:z

Date:

b.

---

GERO 802-4: DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF HEALTH PROMOTION

?

PROGRAMS FOR THE ELDERLY

Calendar Description:

This course deals with the design, implimentatjon and

evaluation of health promotion programs and services for

older persons. Students will participate in the development

and critical analysis of a variety of health-related

programs aimed at healthful aging. Epidemiological,

demographic, behavioural and cost-benefit approaches to

evaluation will be covered.

Grading:

Student grades will be comprised of the following:

1)

Seminar presentation(s) - 20%

2)

Paper requirement - 40%

3)

Final exam - 40%

Week by Week Outline:

1.

THE GOALS OF HEALTH PROMOTION

Health Promotion and Aging

Prevention - Blaming the Individual

Changing Life-Styles

Changing Health Habits

Self-care & Mutual Aid

Community Development

Healthy Environments

Focused Health Programs

Implications for Health Costs

2.

MODELS OF COMMUNITY-BASED PROGRAMS

Structured Programs

Wellness Centres

Social Empowerment

New Horizons

Healthy Environments

3.

DESIGNING INSTITUTIONAL PROGRAMS

Challenges and Issues

An Institutionally-Based Exercise Program

Rehabilitation Programs

S

'-'I

---

4.

STRATEGIES OF HEALTH PROGRAM IMPLIMENTATIOM

. ?

Organizing Structured Programs

Training and Monitoring

Counseling Programs

The Mass Media

Home Visitation

Senior's Social Action

Innovative Approaches for the Elderly

Individual & Structural Barriers

5.

HEALTH PROMOTION EVALUATION APPROACHES

Individual-Level. Methodologies

Aggregate-Level Methodologies

Qualitative & Descriptive Approaches

Process Versus Outcome

6.

RISK FACTOR ANALYSIS

Isolating Independent Effects

Cumulative Effects

Statistical Approaches

7.

PROGRAM EVALUATION

Designing Program Evaluations

Special Problems in Data Collection

Measurement Issues

Internal and External Validity Threats

Length of Program Effect

8.

HEALTH ECONOMICS AND AGING

Concepts and Models

Economic Analysis

9.

COST-EFFECTIVENESS AND COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS

Nonmonetary Outcomes

Economic Outcomes

Limitations and Critique

10.

GOAL-ATTAINMENT AND IMPACT MODELS

Strengths and Limitation

Program Decision-making

11. QUALITATIVE METHODS OF EVALUATION

---

12.

CLINICAL TRIALS & CASE CONTROLS

13.

EVALUATION & REDESIGNING OF PROGRAMS

Suggested Texts:

1.

Rossi, P.H. & Freeman, H. (1989). Evaluation: A systematic

Publications.

a pp

roach (4th edition).

—Newbury

Park, California: Sage

2.

Shadish, W.R., Cook, T.D. & Lenton, L. (1990). Foundations of

Program evaluation: Theories of practice. Newbury Park,

California: Sage Publications.

3.

Drummond, M.F., Stoddart, G.L., & Torrance, G.W. (1986).

Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programs.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Available from Senate Secretariat Services upon request

S

S

S

1c

---

Master of Gerontology

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

New Graduate Course Proposal Form

CALENDAR INFORMATION:

Department:

—

GERONTOLOGY

?

Number:

810-4

Title: Community-Based Housing for Older

People

Description:

This course presents an in-depth examination of theory, research and

policy related to planning, designing, developing and managing housing for

independent and semi-independent older adults.

Credit Hours:

4

Vector:

0-4-0

Prerequisites:.

ENROLMENT AND SCHEDULING

Estimated Enrolment: 7 When will course first be offered: 95-3

How often will the course be offered: once per year

JUS

r

FIFICATION: rfhis course covers intbrmation integral to community-based

housing for older adults. It is a required course for students in the Aging and Built

Environment stream.

RESOURCES:

Which faculty member will normally teach the course: Dr.

A.

Wister

What are the budgetary implications of mounting the course:

see proposal

Appended: a) Outline of the course: attached

b) Indication of the competence of the faculty member to

give the course:

see Appendix X

c)

Library resources:

see proposal

Dep't Grad. Studies Committee:

Faculty Grad. Studies Committee:

./

Faculty:

( )

Senate Grad Studies Committee'?'c-,\'

0

?

Senate:

Date:_______

Date:(

t

,..

A ?

f

Date7. r

Date:

L ?

._

Date:

4,r7q

---

GERO 810-4: COMMUNITY-BASED HOUSING FOR OLDER PEOPLE

Calendar Description:

This course presents an indepth examination of theory,

research and policy related to planning, designing,

developing and managing housing for independent and semi-

independent older adults. Topics will cover the range of

housing alternatives available to these client groups;

reasons they move;

?

factors mediating housing/living

arrangement preferences and choices; key design

considerations; factors faciliating and impeding delivery of

new construction; retrofitting to enable aging in place;

needs assessment and post-occupancy evaluation.

Grading:

Student grades will be comprised of the following:

1)

Seminar presentation

?

20%

2)

Paper requirement - 40%

3)

Final exam - 40%

Week by Week Outline:

1.

REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENT AND AGING THEORY

The Reciprocity of Theory, Policy and Practice

Ecological Theory as it Applies to Housing for Independent

and Semi-Independent Older Adults

Behaviour Setting Theory

Competence- p

ress and the Environmental Docility

Hypothesis

The Phenomenology of Housing and Home for Older People

2.

PSYCHOLOGICAL AND HEALTH FACTORS IN HOUSING FOR OLDER PEOPLE

Psychological Well-Being and Housing

Residential Satisfaction

Attachment to Home

Environmental Cognition

Functional Health

3.

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC FACTORS IN HOUSING FOR OLDER PEOPLE

Housing as Social Intervention

Housing economics and public policy

Social and Political Changes and Trends

Housing Needs and Expectations

Review of Current Federal and Provincial

and Policies

Selected International Comparisons

Influencing

Housing Programs

0

---

S

.

r

4.

CURRENT HOUSING AND LIVING ARRANGEMENT OPTIONS, PREFERENCES

AND CHOICES

Review of Available Housing Forms, Tenure

Arrangements

Seniors Responses to These

Factors Mediating Preferences and Choices

5.

CHANGES OVER TIME: PEOPLE AND BUILDINGS

Nature of Changes

Implications of Aging in Place Policies

6.

RESPONSE TO CHANGES I: "STAYING PUT" OPTIONS

Home Modifications and Adaptations

Needs Assessment Tools and Techniques

Funding Mechanisms and Implementation Strategies

Reverse Annuity Mortgages

Other Ways to Age in Place with Income

7.

RESPONSE TO CHANGES II. RESIDENTIAL RELOCATION

Relocation Issues and Assessments

Factors Mediating Choice of Options

Barriers to Residential Change

8.

NEW CONSTRUCTION I:ISSUES AND OPTIONS FOR DEVELOPERS

AND DESIGNERS

New Design Concepts in Housing for Seniors

Neighbourhood Planning: Site, Neighborhood and Community

Amenities and Services

Residential Interiors

9.

NEW CONSTRUCTION II:ASCERTAINING AND MATCHING LOCAL NEED AND

DEMAND

Supply and Demand Analysis

Programming, User Participation and Assessment

Financial Analysis

Marketing Strategies

10.

OUTCOME ANALYSIS: TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES TO ASSESS THE IMPACT

OF HOUSING CHANGES/MODIFICATIONS

Critical Review of Selected Qualitative and Quantitative,

Objective and Subjective Tools and Techniques and Research

Designs Used in Post-Occupancy and Post-Home Modification

Evaluation and in Residential Relocation Research.

11. CURRENT ISSUES

The Growing Numbers of Homeless Elderly

The Disappearance of SRO Hotels

Meeting the Need for Emergency Shelter

---

12.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR RESEARCH AND POLICY

13.

PRESENTATION OF STUDENT RESEARCH PROJECTS

Suggested Texts:

?

0

1.

Gutnian,G.M. & Wister, A.V. (Eds.) (1994). Progressive

accommodation for seniors: Interfacing shelter and services.

Vancouver:Gerontology Research Centre, Simon Fraser

University.

2.

Windley, P.G. (forthcoming 1992). Handbook on housing and the

elderly. Westport,cT: Greenwood Press.

3.

Regnier, V. & Pynoos,J. (Eds.)(1987) Housing the aged: Design

directives and

p olic y

considerations. New York: Elsevier

Publishing Co.

4.

Newcoiner,R.J. ,Lawton, M.P. & Byerts, T.O.(1986) Housing an

a g

ing society: Issues, alternatives and

p

olicy. New York:

Van Nostrand Rinehoj.d.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

*

?

0

Available from Senate Secretariat Services upon request

is

---

Master of Gerontology

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

S

New Graduate Course Proposal Form

CALENDAR INFORMATION:

Department:

—

GERONTOLOGY

?

Number:

811-4

Title:

Institutional Living Environments

Description: This course focuses on design issues, theory, research and policy

relevant

dependent

to

adults.

planning, developing and managing institutional living environments for

Credit Hours:

4

Vector:

0-4-0

Prerequisites:

ENROLMENT AND SCHEDULING

Estimated Enrolment:

7

When will course first be offered:

96-1

How often will the course be offered:

once per year

d U1IFIUA'fjON:

This course covers the essential literature on institutional

living environments for dependent adults complimenting GERO 810-4. It is a

required course for the Aging and Built Environment

stream.

•

?

RESOURCES:

Which faculty member will normally teach the course: Dr.

Gloria Gutman

What

see proposal

are the budgetary implications of mounting the course:

Appended: a) Outline of the course: attached

b)

Indication of the competence of the faculty member to

give the course:

see Appendix X

c)

Library resources: see proposal

Dep't Grad. Studies Committee: -i--

L->>__

Faculty Grad. Studies Committee:___________________

Faculty:

Senate Grad Studies Committee:"i

Senate:

Date:

Date:

If

?

/

Date26 ?

c-

Date:

2

Ca ?

4i

Date:_______

---

GERO 811-4: INSTITUTIONAL LIVING ENVIRONMENTS

Calendar Description

This course focusses on design issues, theory, research and

Policy relevant to planning, developing and managing

institutional living environments for dependent adults.

Topics include the range and characteristIcs of these

settings and their residents; service elements; techniques

for identifying need and demand; programming and design

needs of special groups; and environmental evaluation

measures.

Grading:

Student grades will be comprised of the following:

1)

Seminar presentation(s) - 20%

2)

Paper requirement

?

40%

3)

Final exam - 40%

Week by Week Outline:

1.

INTRODUCTION

The Definition of Institutional Care

History of Institutional Care

Changes in the Health Care system

The Impact of Demographic Changes

2.

ORGANIZATION OF INSTITUTIONAL LONG-TERN CARE

Federal, Provincial and Community Roles

Levels of Institutional Long-Term Care

Types of Long-Term Care Facilities

Provincial Comparisons

3.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE INSTITUTIONALIZED ELDERLY

A Comprehensive Demographic, Health and Functional Status

Profile

Predictors of Admission

Placement Problems and Issues

Changing Levels of Disability

4.

ENVIRONMENT AND AGING THEORY IN INSTITUTIONAL SETTINGS

Co

mpetence-Press and the Docility Hypothesis

Ecological and Behaviour Setting Theories

Stress, Control, Coping and Hyper-Habituation

The Phenomenology of Place and Place Transitions

5.

EVALUATING INSTITUTIONAL SETTINGS

Post-Occupancy Evaluation

Cost Benefit and Cost Effectiveness Analysis

Relocation Effects

---

I

S

6.

FUNCTIONAL, BEHAVIOURAL, PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIAL PROGRAM

DEFINITIONS

Adjustment/Adaptation

Independence

Control

Privacy

Safety and Security

Awareness and Orientation

Stimulation and Challenge

Social Interaction/Relationships with Family and Friends

Recreation and Exercise

Sexual Behaviour

7.

DESIGN STRATEGIES: INTERIOR SPACES

Shared Spaces

Private Spaces

Spaces for Staff, Visitors and Volunteers

Spaces for Community Outreach Programs (e.g.adult day care)

Circulation Spaces and Patterns

Environmental Legibility

Orientation and Wayfinding

8.

DESIGN STRATEGIES: EXTERNAL SPACES

Orientation and Wayfinding

Therapeutic Functions

9.

FURNITURE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCTS

Responsiveness

Safety and Security

Monitoring Systems and Other New Technology

10.

ACCOMMODATING SPECIAL NEEDS GROUPS

Younger Adults in Long-Tterrn Care Facilities

Dementia Patients

Persons with Severe Sensory Impairment

Ethnic, Religious, Cultural Subgroups

11.

KEY STEPS AND OPTIONS IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

Mission and Philosophy (including range of services to be

offered, resident groupings and special populations to

be served)

Development Size and Type (unilevel versus multilevel)

Site Analysis: The Neighborhood and Community Context

Supply and Demand Analysis

The Approval Process

Financial and Marketing Considerations

---

12.

SOCIAL ,POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC FACTORS

E

conomics and Public Policy

Changing Family .Systems

Social and Political Trends Influencing i t±tütional Needs

and Expectations

13.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR POLICY AND RESEARCH

Suggested Texts:

Selected readings in lieu of text

bfttIO(jRAj?HY

Available from Senate Secretariat Services upon request

o

40

---

Master of Gerontology

.

??

SUSION FRASER UNIVERSITY

New Graduate Course Proposal Form

CALENDAR INFORMATION:

Department:

—

GERONTOLOGY

?

Number:

820-4

Title:

Principles and Practices of Health Promotion

Description:

This course is designed to cover and critically evaluate concepts,

models and theories of health promotion and wellness in the aging population. These

methods of implimentation will be discussed in relation to individual and structural

health system issues facing the aged.

Credit Hours:

4

Vector:

0-4-0

Prerequisites:

ENROLMENT AND SC11EDULJIG

Estimated Enrolment: 7 When will course first be offered: 95-3

How often will the course be offered:

once per year

d U1fl1UA'11UN:

This

course provides the student with a critical appraisal of

concepts, theories and models of health promotion applied to an older population.

GO

820-4

is a required course for students in the Health Promotion and Aging

concentration.

RESOURCES:

Which faculty member will normally teach the course:

New CFL

#1

What are the budgetary implications of mounting the course:

see proposal

Appended: a) Outline of the course: attached

b) Indication of the competence of the faculty member to

S

.

give the course:

see Appendix X

c) Library resources:

see proposal

Dep't Grad. Studies Committee:

Faculty Grad. Studies Committee:_______________

Faculty:

?

-

?

-

Senate Grad Studies Committee>

?

-

Senate:

(

Date 'j'-

/Ao,

yj

Dateç7

3_

Date:2

Date:

---

GERO 820-4: PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES OF HEALTH PROMOTION

Calendar Description:

This course is designed to cover and critically evaluate

concepts, models and theories of health promotion and

wellness in the aging population. These methods of

unplimentation will be discussed in relation to individual

and structural health system issues facing the aged.

Grading:

Student grades will be comprised of the following:

1)

Seminar presentation - 20%

2)

Paper requirement - 40%

3)

Final exam - 40%

Week by Week Outline:

1 ?

CONCEPTIONS OF HEALTH AND HEALTH PROMOTION

What is Health Promotion?

Health Promotion and Disease Prevention

Medical and Social Models of Health

Wèllness and Illness Models

Social & Personal Empowerment

Community Health

Measurement of Health

Chronic Versus Acute Health Problems

2.

THE HEALTH BELIEF MODEL AND PREVENTATIVE HEALTH

BEHAVIOUR

Origins of the Health Belief Model

Sick Role, Illness and Health Behaviour

Implications for Health Promotion

Contributions and Critique

3.

CURRENT APPROACHES TO HEALTH PROMOTION

The Life-Style Perspective

Social Class and Life Chances - The Black Report

Self-Care, Mutual Aid, Healthy Environments - Lalonde, Epp

and the Ottawa Charter

Community and Empowerment Models

4.

WELLNESS PROGRAMS

Developing Personal Skills

Growing Younger

Fully Alive

B.C. Wellness Programs

---

5.

SUPPORTIVE ENVIRONMENTS AND GOOD HEALTH

..

?

Social Support Research

The Tenderloin Project

Peer Counselling Programs

Senior Volunteers

Accommodating Independence

Social Marketing Approaches

6.

INDIVIDUAL AND SOCIAL EMPOWERMENT

Taking Control of Personal Health

latrogenic Illness Among Older Adults

Poverty and Health Promotion in Canada

Older Women and Health

Ethnic Elders and Health

7.

CREATING AND SUSTAINING HEALTHY ENVIRONMENTS

Environmental Threats

Building Healthy Cities

Global Perspectives

8.

ARTHRITIS AND CHRONIC DISEASE MANAGEMENT

9.

MENTAL HEALTH, WELL-BEING AND STRESS MANAGEMENT

10.

EXERCISE, FITNESS AND WELLNESS

11 ALTERING LIFE-STYLES AND PREVENTION

Nutrition and Dental Health

Alcohol, Smoking and Medication

Cardiovascular disease, Stroke & Hypertension

Prevention

Cancer Prevention and Education

Accident and Injury Control

Screening Programs

12. HEALTH PROMOTION IN LONG-TERM CARE

Challenges and Issues

Programs for the Cognitively Impaired

Designing Healthy Environments

.

?

13. HEALTHY PUBLIC POLICY

Prerequisites for Health

Income Support Policies

Housing Policies

---

Suggested Texts:

I. Heckheimer,

in the CommunitE.F.

(1989).

y

. New York:

Health

W.

p

B.

romotion

Saunders

of

Company.the

elde

rl

y

0

2.

Fallcreek, S. & Mettler, M. (1984). kjealthy old age:A

sourcebook for health Promotion with older adults, (rev

ed.). New York: The Haworth Press.

3.

Gutman , G. & Wister, A. (Eds.) (1994). Health Promotion for

older Canadians: Knowledge

g

aps and research needs.

University.

Vancouver: Gerontology Research Centre, Simon Fraser

4.

Kane, R.L., Evans, J.G., & Macfadyen, D. (Eds.) (1990).

Iiiroving

University

the

Press.health

of older

p eo

p

le. New York: Oxford

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Available from Senate Secretariat Services upon request

?

0

---

Master of Gerontology

.

S

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

New Graduate Course Proposal Form

CALENDAR INFORMATION:

Department:

—

GERONTOLOGY

?

Number:

821-4

Title:

Epidemiology of Aging

Description:

This course is required for students in the Health Promotion and

Aging stream It examines epidemiological methods and approaches to the study of

aging and the care of the aged. Students will survey and critically evaluate current

epidemiological literature addressing health and health care issues associated with

individual and population aging.

Credit Hours:

4

Vector:

0-4-0

Prerequisites:

Estimated Enrolment: 7 When will course first be offered: 96-1

How often will the course be offered:

once per year

fj

u

n

i ir JUAl

iur'i:

Inis is a requirea course tor students in the Health From(

and Aging stream. It provides students with an understanding of aging from an

epidemiological perspective.

RESOURCES:

Which faculty member will normally teach the course:

New CFL

#1

What are the budgetary implications of mounting the course:

see proposal

Appended: a) Outline of the course: attached

b)

Indication of the competence of the faculty member to

give the course:

see Appendix X

c)

Library resources:

see proposal

Dep't Grad. Studies Conmilttee:_____________________

Faculty Grad. Studies Committee:__________________

Facult

Senate Grad Studies Coinmittee:\ ..'.

Senate:

Date:

Date:7t27tc

Date:______

/

Date

2L

5S

Date:

z ,

'

?

C

Date:_______

---

GERO 821-4: EPIDEMIOLOGY OF AGING

Calendar Description:

This course will examine

epidemio

logicalmethods and

approaches to the study of aging and the care of the aged.

Students will survey and critically evaluate current

epidetniological literature addressing health and health care

issues associated with individual and pçpulátion aging.

Grading:

Student grades will be comprised of the following:

1)

Seminar presentation(s) - 20%

-

2)

Paper requirement - 40%

3)

Final exam - 40%

Week by Week Outline:

1.

THE GOALS OF EPIDEMIOLOGY

2.

EPIDEMIOLOGICAL METHODS

3. CO

NCEPTUALIZATION AND MEASUREMENT OF HEALTH STATUS

4.

ANALYSIS OF AGE-RELATED HEALTH TRENDS

5/6 DETERMINANTS OF HEALTH RISK FOR THE ELDERLY

7.

DETERMINANTS OF HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION BY THE ELDERLY

8.

APPLICATION OF EPISTEMOLOGY TO HEALTH SERVICES ISSUES,

9.

NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND HEALTH PLANNING'

10.

EVALUATION OF SCREENING PROGRAMS

11.

EVALUATION OF THE QUALITY OF HEALTH

12.

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF HEALTH PROGRAMS

13.

EPISTEMOLOGY AND HEALTH POLICY

"

A

---

ri

. ?

Suggested Text:

1. Brody, J.A. & Maddox, G.L. (Eds.) (1988). Epidemiology

aging: An international

p ers p ective. New York: Springer

Publishing.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Available from Senate Secretariat Services upon request

.

---

Master of Gerontology

.

.

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

New Graduate Course Proposal Form

CALENDAR INFORMATION:

Department:

—

GERONTOLOGY

?

Number: 830-4

Title: Human Factors, Technology, and Safety

Description:

This course covers theoretical, research and industry literature

pertaining to designing home, work, institutional, and public environments that are

ergonomically functional, safe, and satisfying to the older

adult.

Credit Hours: 4 Vector: 0-4-0 Prerequisites:

ENROLMENT AND SCHEDULING

Estimated Enrolment: 7 When will course first be offered: 96-2

How often will the course be offered:

once per year

eL

iuiir1uiiiiu1N:

As

an elective course,

U1KU 3U-4

will provide students with

essential knowledge regarding the relationship between aging, personal functioning

and environmental design.

RESOURCES:

Which faculty member will normally teach the course: Dr.

J. Watzke

What are the budgetary implications of mounting the course:

see proposal

Appended: a) Outline of the course: attached