Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17

For Information

S.93-47

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

OFFICE OF THE VICE-PRESIDENT, ACADEMIC

J.M. Munro, Vice-President, Academic

Date: ?

September 1, 1993

Subject: ?

External Review - Cognitive Science Program

The Senate Committee on Academic Planning received for information the report of

the External Review of the Cognitive Science program and the response prepared by

• the Program. The executive summary of the report is forwarded for the information of

Senate. Members of Senate who would like to review the full text of the External

Committee Report and the Program response should contact Secretariat Services.

The external review of Cognitive Science was undertaken by Dr. Tom Wasow, of the

Linguistics Department at Stanford University.

External Review Report on the Cognitive Science Program

Simon

Fraser University ?

Thomas Wasow

Stanford University ?

March 15, 1993

1. Executive Summary

SFU's Cognitive Science program is remarkably strong, given the very low level

of institutional support it receives. Founded in 1986, much of its early financial

resources came from the Centre for Systems Science, but that support has

been shrinking and is likely to disappear completely in the near future.

Consequently, the BA program in Cognitive Science is largely a volunteer

operation. A major annual cognitive science conference does receive some

financial support from SFU (and from SSHRC), but that too has been reduced.

The program's greatest strength is that .its faculty is strong and is dedicated to it.

Butit needs more institutional support if it is to realize its potential.

I recommend:

At least one half of one faculty position from each of the four participating

departments be- assigned to the Cognitive Science program.

Compensation be provided for service as Coordinator of the program

Secretarial support be provided for the program.

• At least one office be assigned to. the program.

• Internal funding for the annual cognitive scienceconferénce be restored to

level as close to its past level as is feasible.

• Program faculty develop a brochure for prospective students.

• Future appointments in the Psychology Department include some in the area

of cognitive psychology.

• Plans for the development of graduate degree programs in cognitive science

be deferred but not abandoned.

Memorandum

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

Cognitive Science Program

TO:

Alison Watt

FROM: Thomas A. Perry, ?

(11

Assistant to the Vice-President, Aca-

Cognitive Science Program

dem.ic

SUBJECT: Review report

DATE: ?

June 29, 1993

Attached please find the Cognitive Science Steering Committee's response to the External Review

Report of Dr. Thomas Wasow. The response itself is relatively short, as the committee found itself in almost

complete agreement with the report.

cc:

Dr. E. Alderson, Dean of Arts

'Oj.

sOMESvc

0 ?

Response to the External Review Report

Cognitive Science Program

General Response

The Cognitive Science Steering Committee endorses the overall conclusions and recommendations

found in the External Report of Dr. Thomas Wasow, and finds the report to be a vindication both of the ef-

forts of faculty and students in building the program, and the Committee's representations to the Univer-

sity about future directions for the program. The Committee urges that the university act, through one

administrative arm or another, to implement all the recommendations contained in the report, without ex-

ception.

The most important recommendations contained in the report revolve around one course of action

the Steering Committee has been advocating for some time: establish the program as a distinct, ongoing

unit within the university. This means giving the program a clear institutional profile, divorced at least in

appearance from the departmental custôdianships it has existed under until now, and consequently giving

the Committee assured resources to operate the academic program on a par with other undergraduate pro-

grams into the future. The Committee emphasizes that the resources required are minimal, and that a pro-

gram that has been evaluated as 'remarkably strong,' in the words of the report, is a deserving recipient of

such support.

The Committee has made representations to the administration and to the Centre for Systems Science

about the necessity of providing ongoing funding to assure the future success of the program. In fact, when

it became evident in September 1992 that the CSS research budget was going to be converted to program

support, including faculty and staff positions, the Steering Committee proposed that Cognitive Science be

included in this process, as Cognitive Science was originally one of the five critical areas supported by the

original Funds for Excellence in Education (FEE) grant that established CSS. This suggestion rejected. Those

proposals have been placed in the addenda for information. (see

Addenda

on page 3).

The Committee accepts suggestions contained in the report for improvement in the curriculum, in the

way the program is administered, and in the visibility and accessibility of the program as an academic op-

tion. The Committee will make its best efforts to implement these wherever feasible. Indeed, work on these

improvements has already been undertaken.

In the section of the report on

'Strengths and Weaknesses of the Program'

(pp. 3-4), it was suggested that

better 'marketing' of the degree programs might help attract more students. The Steering Committee is al-

ready planning to improve publicity through a new brochure and timely advertising in the coming months.

The Committee also considered the suggestion to reduce the total number of courses required. In examining

the prerequisite structure of the constituent disciplines, however, it is clear that this step is difficult without

cutting out whole streams within the program. Much of the program requirements are made up of prereq-

uisites leading through the four levels of the program. The Committee has already addressed the problem

of too many prerequisites for COGS 200 in amendments before the Faculty of Arts. The problems presented

by offering and scheduling of required courses in four different departments will be addressed through ad-

ministrative procedures to be drawn up by the Coordinator.

Specific Responses

Specific positions with respect to the itemized recommendations contained in the report are detailed

below:

At least one ha If of one faculty position from each of the four participating departments be assigned to the Cog-

nitive Science Program.

The Committee supports this step; in fact, it is a strategy the committee has discussed in the past with

the constituent departments, and sought to implement. There is already one such position in Linguistics,

with prospects for another in Philosophy. The Committee will request the chairs and deans responsible to

consider this step for the 1994/95 fiscal year.

• It should be pointed out that the Cognitive Science program itself has only two regularly-taught

courses, plus (individually-directed) honors projects. Hence there is currently little loss of teaching time to

home departments for jointly appointed faculty, even less so the more such appointments exist. Jointly ap-

pointed faculty can spend much of their time fulfilling their Cognitive Science teaching load by teaching

courses from their home department that are also listed in the Cognitive Science program (which is what

they would be doing anyway).

Compensation be provided for service as Coordinator of the Program.

This step is essential to regularizing the existence of the program. The two Coordinators who have

served the program since its founding in 1986 have done so without compensation, and it has proven im-

possible to rotate the Coordinatorship to another member of the Steering Committee without some com-

pensation for increased workload. The administrative load of the Coordinatorship is not onerous, but it is

steady and requires dedication. It is key to realizing the goal of giving the program an independent exist-

ence; as long as the coordinator is a department chair, the program will be seen as a project of that depart-

ment. A coordinator's stipend at level F according to Policy A13.04 is suggested as appropriate, together

with 1 course release per year. The latter should be managed internally, although given the lack of support

noted from Computing Science in the review report, it is probable that a member from Computing Science

- -

who was willing to be coordinator would have to have substantial buy-out funds to offer the department.

• ?

Secretarial support should be provided for the program.

This step has been advocated for some time by the Steering Committee. The original FEE-supported

funding through CSS provided for a half-time secretarial position, which was withdrawn when CSS with-

drew program budget support. Restoration of this position has been requested (and refused) for the current

fiscal year [see

Addendum 1. Proposal to CSS concerning an operating budget for Cognitive Science (September

1992).

on page 31.

•

At least one office be assigned to the program.

Since the program has no space allocation within which to negotiate, the Linguistics Department has

made a request for one or more offices on behalf of the program; there are preliminary indications that this

request could be fulfilled within a year.

•

Intern.alfi1nding for the annual Cognitive Science conference be restored to a level as close to its past levels as

feasible.

The Committee concurs with this recommendation and is making this same request as opportunities

1992).

on page 31.

•

Program faculty develop a brochure for prospective students.

The program originally had such a publication which is now outdated; the lack of resources has pre-

vented a revision. The Committee has agreed to proceed with a new brochure, using whatever resources

the Linguistics Department can provide.

•

Future appointments in the Psychology Department include some in the area of cognitive psychology.

The Steering Committee wholeheartedly endorses this recommendation.

•

Plans for the development of graduate degree programs in Cognitive Science be deferred but not abandoned.

The Steering Committee concurs, and will continue to develop plans in the background as it proceeds

to give priority to the strengthening and regularization of the undergraduate programs as suggested in the

report.

• ?

Addenda

Addendum 1. Proposal to CSS concerning an operating budget for Cogni-

tive Science (September 1992).

Proposal:

The SFU Cognitive Science program seeks support for the following:

Teaching Release for the new Director ($10K)

Conference support for the annual Cognitive Science Conference. ($4K).

Half-time secretary ($15K)

Rationale:

Cognitive Science falls under the mandate of CSS, who initially funded the academic program and

has always provided support for the annual conference.

Both directly and through leverage with the B.C. ASI, CSS has provided support for the Cognitive

Science conference. Over $20,000 has been committed in the initial four years from CSS/ASI ($8,000!

$15,000) for the conference. Oxford Press publishes selections from the conference as an annual volume and

support is identified in each volume. The conference leverages support of around $8K annually from

SSHRC.

The first two Directors had infrastructure support which they tapped from home departments. The

Dean of Arts has picked up the operational support for Cognitive Science, but provides no personnel or

teaching relief. What is required is teaching release for one course for the new director, who will not have

access to the infrastructure support enjoyed by his predecessors. In addition, clerical support for the pro-

gram is now nonexistent. It had previously been provided incidentally by the Linguistics Department,

which is now withdrawing that service for lack of their own personnel. While the clerical support demands

of the program remain modest, they will grow substantially as the proposed graduate program is estab-

lished.

The program is interdisciplinary, relying on faculty in departments who have associate membership

in the program; some new appointments are being contemplated as formally joint appointments. The Cog-

nitive Science Steering Committee is going ahead with a proposal for a graduate program, which should be

presented to the University for approval within weeks. The Cognitive Science undergraduate program con-

sists of 15 majors and honors students. It is expected that the graduate population will be higher than that,

given the precedent at other North American universities.

Addendum 2. Proposal to CSS concerning faculty resources for Cognitive

Science (September 1992).

Proposal:

The Cognitive Science program proposes creation of 2 new CFL positions to benefit the program and

the departments which participate in it. One of these positions would be assigned to the School of Comput-

ing Science, the other to the Faculty of Arts. The Computing Science position could be used by the School

to appoint a junior faculty member in any field it chooses, in return for which it would designate 2 mem-

bers, likely in AT/Knowledge representation, as jointly appointed in Cognitive Science. The Arts positions

would be used to similarly designate 2 additional faculty members in Linguistics, Psychology, or Philoso-

phy as joint in Cognitive Science. A condition could be made on these position that these appointments be

used for fields eligible for CSS membership. [Cognitive Science is not a department and therefore cannot

have full appointments].

The program is interdisciplinary, relying on faculty in departments who have associate membership

in the program; some new appointments need to be made as formally joint appointments. The Cognitive

Science Steering Committee is going ahead with a proposal for a graduate program, which should be pre-

sented to the University for approval within weeks. The Cognitive Science undergraduate program consists

of 15 majors and honors students. It is expected that the graduate population will be higher than that, given

the precedent at other North American universities.

The Cognitive Science program only offers 2 courses per year 'that is not in one of the participating

departments (plus Honors project supervision). The proposed graduate program will add only 2-4 such

courses annually, plus supervision, to that load. Therefore only a few such joint appointments will be suf-

ficient to adequately support the program. Much of the teaching time given up to Cognitive Science in a

joint appointment will in fact continue to accrue to the home department.

External Revievi Report on the Cognitive Science Program

at Simon Fraser University

Thomas Wasow

Stanford University ?

March 15, 1993

1. Executive Summary

SFU's Cognitive Science

program is remarkably strong, given the very low level

of institutional Support it receives. Founded in 1986, much of its early financial

resources came from the Centre for Systems Science, but that support has

been shrinking and is likely to disappear completely in the near future.

Consequently, the BA program in Cognitive Science is largely a volunteer

operation. A major annual cognitive science conference does receive some

financial support from SFU (and from SSHRC), but that too has been reduced.

The program's greatest strength is that its faculty is strong and is dedicated to it.

But it needs more institutional support if it is to realize its potential.

I recommend:

• At least one half of one faculty position from each of the four participating

departments be assigned to the Cognitive Science program.

• ?

• Compensation be provided for service as Coordinator of the program.

• Secretarial support be provided for the program.

• At least one office be assigned to the program.

• Internal funding for the annual cognitive science conference be restored to a

level as close to its past level as is feasible.

• Program faculty develop a brochure for prospective students.

• Future appointments in the Psychology Department include some in the area

of cognitive psychology.

• Plans for the development of graduate degree programs in cognitive science

be deferred but not abandoned.

Cognitive Science

Program External

Review

0 ?

2. Sources of Information

This report is based on a one day campus visit on March 9, 1993. In

preparation for the visit, I read the internal program review and other materials I

had been sent (relevant portions of the 92-93 Calendar and "Challenge 2001").

The schedule of my meetings during the day is attached; unfortunately, Vice-

President Munro was unable to attend the first meeting, but the schedule

otherwise accurately reflects my activities. At my request, a meeting was also

set up with Dean Marteniuk, which took place on March 10.

3. The Field of Cognitive Science

3.1 General

In the late 1950s and 1960s, a combination of factors led to a marked increase

collaborative work across disciplinary boundaries by people concerned

- with

the nature of perception, thought, and knowledge. Those factors included the

development of digital computers, the decline of behaviorism in American

psychology, and the Chomskyan revolution in linguistics. Increasingly, the

computer came to be used as a metaphor for the mind, with theories about

mental activities formulated in terms of the sorts of representations and

operations that could, in principle, be implemented on computers. As

computing hardware and software has become more powerful, faster, and less

expensive, it has become possible actually to build computer implementations

to test theoretical ideas from psychology and linguistics.

This interdisciplinary collaboration was given a great boost in the mid-1970s,

when the Sloan Foundation launched an initiative to create a new discipline,

labeled cognitive science, on the intersection of psychology, computer science,

linguistics, philosophy, and (somewhat tentatively) neuroscience. With funding

from Sloan and other sources, cognitive science centers were established at

several institutions, and degree programs (both undergraduate and graduate)

in cognitive science were established. There is also now a large and thriving

Cognitive Science Society and a well-known journal named

Cognitive Science.

• Despite these trappings, I am hesitant to call cognitive science a discipline. Its

• practitioners are still largely trained in one of the contributing departments, and

there is no consensus regarding methodology or results. Nevertheless, it

remains a vibrant and productive area of interdisciplinary work, promising both

insights into the nature of mind and theoretical foundations for future

technological breakthroughs.

Among the best known cognitive science research centers are those at MIT,

Pennsylvania, Stanford, UC San Diego, Rochester, Western Ontario, and

Edinburgh. These universities and many others also award cognitive science

degrees at various levels (though not always under that name). While a few

institutions have separate cognitive science departments, the more common

pattern is to constitute programs out of faculty from the departments that

contribute to the field of cognitive science. There is considerable variability in

the degree of autonomy and institutional support such programs enjoy.

Cognitive Science Program External Review

There is also variation in the relative prominence given to the contributing

disciplines. Whether cognitive psychology, artificial intelligence, grammatical

theory, or philosophy of language is central to a given cognitive science

program tends to depend a good deal on the history of the particular program,

the sources of funding, and the particular personnel at the institution. It is not

uncommon for computer science departments dominated by systems specialists

or psychology departments dominated by clinicians to provide somewhat

limited or grudging support for cognitive science programs.

32 Simon Fraser's Cognitive Science Program

SFU's has some visibility in the field of cognitive science,

p rimarily because of

its annual conferences and the volumes that result from them. These

conferences have brought together many of the most distinguished figures in

cognitive science to discuss central topics in the field. Because of the

- - conferences, the anthologies, and the research reputations of some of the -SFU

faculty,

SFU is

recognized as an important locus for cognitive science.

The formal entity that carries the name cognitive science at SFU -- namely the

undergraduate degree program -- is less well known. This is in part simply a

function of the general fact that academics rarely know much about

undergraduate programs outside of their own institutions. There are, however,

a few undergraduate cognitive science programs that have drawn considerable

attention, e.g., Hampshire College's, which produced the first major textbook in

the field; Vassar's, which hosted a major conference on teaching cognitive

Science to undergraduates; and Lehigh's, which puts out a newsletter about

cognitive science programs. Under present circumstances, lack of resources

would prevent

SFU's

cognitive scientists from contemplating any such activities.

Although

SFU's

cognitive science degree program is not widely publicized, it

appears to be a good one, with the potential to be truly excellent. In the

following sections, I will explain this evaluation in terms of the four "Terms of

Reference" I was provided with as part of my preparatory materials. I will then

recommend several changes which I believe could permit the program to

realize its potential.

4. The Strengths and Weaknesses of the Program.

The program's curriculum provides students with a solid foundation in each of

the four contributing disciplines. They then go on to work in greater depth in

three of the four. This makes it a demanding major -- so much so that Prof.

Blackman described it as "elite". Faculty on the Steering Committee explained

that the major was designed to give students the greatest feasible breadth

without sacrificing depth.

The difficulty of the major can be viewed as either a strenth or a weakness. On

the one hand, only ambitious, highly motivated students attempt the major. My

all-too-brief conversation with five of them (and the attached letter from a sixth

who was unable to attend) confirmed what the faculty had told me: they are

impressively bright, articulate, and self-assured. On the other hand, it keeps

Cognitive

Science Program External Review

the number of majors down, because some students are intimidated and others

don't discover its existence until it is too late to start. The students I met with all

felt that the program had the potential to draw a great many more students.

but the faculty might also want to consider whether the total number of courses

required could be reduced without compromising the integrity of the program.

prerequisites.

Students complained of a few structural problems that sounded very familiar to

me (as the director of Stanford's undergraduate cognitive sc1ence program).

One was that the courses, while individually stimulating and challenging, were

so diverse that it was hard to draw them together into a cohesive unit. A

covered Jft several -

departments often met at the same time, forcing students to choose between

two courses they needed for their major. The first of these is largely a function

of the fact that cognitive science is not yet a single discipline; hence, it is at

present not fully solvable. Nevertheless, it might be tackled head-on in CogS

400, which all majors must take. The second problem is unavoidable in a

curriculum pieced together from courses taught in different units, but it can be

minimized through good communications among faculty. Similarly, scheduling

that should be performed

to be basically sound, though

5. The Faculty Connected with the Program

The program's faculty I met with made a strongly positive impression. Their

CVs show that they are productive researchers, and the students I spoke with

expressed satisfaction with their teaching.

The areas of specialization covered by the program's faculty is quite diverse.

Like other cognitive science programs, SFU's is particularly strong in some

McFetridge, and Fred Popowich) from two departments and substantial external

funding, which suppoils a laboratory employing four additional researchers.

The central project of that lab is to build a usable natural language system for a

private company based on theoretical .work in linguistics; knowing from

experience how difficult such projects are, I was very impressed with the SFU

project. The area in which coverage appears to be thinnest is cognitive

psychology. I met only one psychologist in the program (Richard Wright), and

several people mentioned the need for additional strength on the psychological

side. (hasten to add that the problem is quantity not quality: while Wright

seems to be doing exciting work and involving cognitive science

Cognitive Science Program Exter,zczl Review

The quality of the current program is remarkable, given the dearth of resources

provided for it. Indeed, the only support it receives from the university is one

support only by virtue of the fact that he also serves as Chair of the Linguistics

Department -- contributing to overload on the Linguistics staff. There is no office

or other space devoted to the Cognitive Science Program, leading to the

perception deterred some potential majors from exploring the program further.

The program also has no budget for such things as supplies, copying, or

postage, so that it has been impossible to produce a brochure for potential

majors or to create a newsletter.

I was told that the lack release time and clerical help for the Coordinator is a

relatively recent development -- and that, without it, the program probably never

would have been founded But that funding formerly came from the Centre for

Systems Science, and has since been withdrawn. The university needs to find

a way to restore this minimal level of support.

Computing Science has expressed willingness to become the new Coordinator,

Thus, the proposed change of Coordinators would beneficial in a number of

chair of Computing Science and the Dean of Applied Science seemed reluctant

to have members of their faculty doing anything for Cognitive Science that

took

...

time away from their service to Computing Science. The lack of support for the

program from these two key administrators seriously jeapordizes its long-term

Prospects at SFU. Some of my recommendations below are designed to

SFU.

counter their unfortunate reluctance to nurture the growth of cognitive science at

The annual cognitive science conferences are likewise suffering from a

internal funding from the Dean of Arts and from CSS. All three sources appear

Cognitive Science Prograni External Review

poised to reduce the level of funding, and it is probable that CSS support will be

eliminated altogether; the total amount available could drop by as much as a

third. While the continued existence of the conference series is not in

immediate danger, the reduced funding would require changes in the format

and character of the conferences, making it unlikely that it would be able to

draw the world's top cognitive scientists, as it has in the past.

In sum, the resources of the Cognitive Science program have shrunk in recent

years to the point where they are almost nonexistent today. The program is

increasingly run as a labor of love by a few dedicated faculty. In the long run,

the absence of even the most rudimentary institutional support for the

instructional program is simply incompatible with the goal of offering a first-rate

cognitive science degree.

fectiveness of Organizational Structure & Administration

As indicated in the previous section, the organizational structure of the

Cognitive Science program suffers from its administrative overlap with the

Linguistics Department. Lack of resources makes effective administration

One other topic needs to be addressed, however. The internal review

advocates the establishment of a graduate program (both MA and PhD) in

cognitive science. This would require the development of at least five new

courses to be taught on a regular basis, plus seminars on current topics.

Clearly, such a move would demand new faculty resources in the program,

either through new appointments or through the transfer of existing faculty

appointments (or fractions thereof) from departments into Cognitive Science.

My initial reaction to such a proposal was skeptical. I personally feel that it is

best for graduate degrees to be in established disciplines, rather than

Interdisciplinary areas. After discussing this with the program faculty, however, I

could understand their desire to offer graduate degrees. They pointed out that

they currently receive a substantial number of inquiries and requests to do

Some of the interested

on the part of both the students and their advisors) or as "special arrangement"

students. Providing a regular mechanism and advanced curriculum for such

students would clearly fill a need. People with graduate cognitive science

degrees from other institutions are getting jobs (e.g., Fred Popowich in the

Computing Sciences Department), and training a generation of such people

prerequisite for the establishment of cognitive science as a discipline

I hasten to add, however, that the establishment of a graduate program should

be given lower priority than the consolidation and support of the existing

undergraduate program. (Nobody on the Cognitive Science Steering

Cognitive Science Program External Review

Committee argued against this sentiment, by the way). I endorse it as a long-

term goal, but one that is probably not feasible in the foreseeable future.

8. Recommecjat0flS

At the beginning of our interview, Dean Alderson asked me, "What is the future

of cognitive science at Simon Fraser?' The answer depends on what level of

resources the university is willing to provide. The most important ingredient of a

university resources to facilitate such collaboration is seriously hindering the

program's progress. A modest increase of support could turn SFU's program

a huge investment to make it the leading center of cognitive science in Canada.

It would be a terrible waste to starve SFU's Cognitive Science program into

mediocrity, but I believe this would be the consequence of continuing on the

present Course. On the other hand, I recognize the fiscal constraints facing the

are an attempt to reconcile the

the four participating

program. One

suchshared position with Linguistics already exists, and another with

Philosophy may develop (depending on Akins's decision about whether to

come to SFU full-time). Such appointments allow the individuals who hold

them to devote more of their time (both teaching and administrative) to

Cognitive Science, without having to seek the approval of their departmental

chairs. Because Psychology and Computing Science have been the least

supportive of the contributing departments, it is especially desirable to have at

one computing Scientist with such a partial

program faculty, by agreement, to offer course relief to the Coordinator.

Alternatively, the home department of the Coordinator should be provided with

the normal buyout funds, so that the Coordinator could get a reduced teaching

load, and the department could hire a replacement.

• Secretarial support (half-time should suffice) must be provided for the

etc.

Program, along with some minimal budget for supplies, telephones, copying,

gram, more clearly identifying the program as an autonomous entity.

Cognitive Science Program External Review

• Internal funding for the annual cognitive science conference should be

restored to a level as close to its past level as is feasible.

• Program faculty should develop a brochure for prospective students, and try to

publicize the existence of the program to incoming students.

• Future appointments in the Psychology Department should include some in

the area of cognitive psychology.

• Plans for the development of graduate degree programs in cognitive science

should be kept alive, but implementation should be deferred until additional

faculty members can be hired.

March io, 1993 

RE: Ealu p 

tj p 

n of SFU Co 

g

nitive Science Program. 

I w

ill be unable to attend the meeting with undergraduate 

students this afternoon; however, I would like to give some input 

on the program. 

I am in my final year of an Honours Degree in Cognitive 

working 

L

Science. 

inguistics, 

mostly 

?

The

and

within 

three 

Philosophy.Psychology. 

areas 

?

I

At

have 

the

chosen 

Honours 

are: 

revel, 

Psychology, 

I have been 

?

I think the Cognitive Science Program is an excellent idea, 

and I like the fact that SFU has chosen to implement th Prorám 

Cognitive 

u

with 

niversities 

a 'brOad' 

P

sychology 

are

scope. 

invariably 

or Al. 

People 

?

surprised 

There 

I have 

is so 

talked 

that 

much 

we

more 

to

do

from 

that 

more 

other 

is

than 

of

d

importance 

isciplines is 

that 

essential. 

I feel a broad grounding in a varIety of 

One major problem within the program right now 

,

is the lack 

Of

resource people. So far as I am aware, most of the people who 

coordinate, run, and advise on the program all work primarily in 

Ot

her areas, and cogsci is 

j

ust something "extra" they have 

•

?

?

agreed 

often, r 

to

have 

out

found 

of interest, 

myself explaining 

on top of 

the

their 

program 

regular 

to those 

duties. 

I have 

Too

?

gone to to ask questions. In some cases, this is because the 

People are-new to SFU -- it's 

p

erfectly understandable that they 

don't have. a complete grasp of the whole program by the day they 

arrive on campus. In 

?

cases, it i because the people have 

only a minor Interest in the program or are too busy with other 

things, but they are all we have to help us. 

The lack of faculty within the program and the small 

e

nrolment also make it difficult to complete the required CogSci 

courses (COGS 200 & 400). Nancy Hedberg has taught the 200 level 

course 

r

easonably 

several 

standard 

times, 

curriculum 

and I know 

for

she

the

is

course. 

working 

Good. 

to achieve 

The 400 

a

level course is offered much more 

sp

oradically. One consequence 

of this is that when it is offered students feel they have to 

take it if they are reasonable far along in their degree, even if 

would 

presta 

they 

requisite 

ndardized 

do

ensure 

not actually 

that 

problem 

200

-students 

level 

at

have 

course 

the

the

are

400

"required" 

will 

at

level. 

a

help 

similar 

?

The

to

prerequisites. 

level 

take 

200 level 

careof 

within 

course 

?

any

the

A

??

general field of Cogsci, while each would still bring specialized 

knowledge from particular areas.. 

As for the interrelatedness of course materials, I have 

found many areas of overlap between Psychology, Philosophy, and 

S ?

Computer Science courses (although' I can only speak of first year 

Comp Sc!). What i have difficulty finding is the relationship 

between the. 2nd and 3rd year Linguistics courses and the rest of 

a

.c

?

•

S

the Program. The Introductory Linguistics course that ± took (1t 

has changed considerably since 1988, however) has come In very 

useful in other courses, but higher level Linguistics courses 

seem to be completely separate from the rest of the Cogsci 

Program. .1 think the Cogsci Steering Committee should take a 

closer look at how they expect theses course to be integrated 

Into the program and at whether these expectations are being met. 

More 

v

isibility would certainly help the program to increase 

its numbers. Perhaps this, in turn would help us acquire more 

faculty and staff, but perhaps we need more faculty before we can 

increase our numbers considerably. For Cogsci to be a viable 4 

year program (a..3 opposed to, for example, Biochemistry, which I 

believe requires students to take almost everything but Bioc) 

7

jem

at the lower levels, and then kicks in to provide -courses for 

students who want to specialize at the 300 & 400 levels), we need 

and

to increase 

the

fr

equency 

the number 

of CogSci 

of faculty/staff, 

course offerings. 

the number 

If there 

of students, 

were more 

students in the program, or if we encouraged non-majors to take 

the Cogsci CoUrSC, the increased numbers might make it feasible 

to offer the Course more often. 

I would also like to see a graduate program In CogSci. I 

know such a program is under cons ider.Lion, arid I would like to 

see

unde 

rgraduate 

It become 

work 

official 

in CogSci is 

as

so

soon 

Varied, 

as

students 

possible. 

come 

Because 

out ;w 

ith

a very good 

g routding 

?

a lot of interrelated material, but few 

?

have the chance to really explore the significance of this 

Opportunity. 

knowledge in depth. 

?

A graduate program would provide that 

?

I would also like to see more information about post-degree 

B.A. or M.A.) ioh opportunities for Cogsci students. This could 

Include liaising more with employers in appropriate fields. 

Perhaps we could specifically focus on finding Co-operative 

wo

education 

nderful o 

jobs 

p

portunity 

specifically 

for CogSci 

relevant 

students 

to CogSci. 

to learn 

Co-op 

how

would 

to apply 

be a 

their diverse knowledge outside of the classroom. Right now, 

there are few, if any, Co-op jobs that are particularly relevant 

to CogScj. Certainly, all of my previous Co-op employers have 

hired me for my English Minor and have ignored the main focus of 

my degree! 

I look forward to hearing your evaluation of the SF1) CogSci 

program. 

Sincerely, 

?

-

Tracey Leacock 

Unde 

r

g

raduate Honours student, 

Cognitive Science, 

SF1) ? 

-