FF1

T1 IE

Vl0->l'

':S

lDENT

\])I'

C A

N]) I'1\OV

8888 Unin'_';l),

Drin

Burn~b

n~d~

V5,\

1:;(,

.: i7

82.J92

l'M

',778.782

MEMORANOUM

FRO

AE:

lle

Jon Drivcr,

]>r

idclll,

:\cade

~nd

ProvosI,

~lld

h:lir,

SCU

DATE

PAGE

Fdmmr

9, 20

ponsc

Rcport of

Adviso

ommiT lee on

olle

ges (S

P 10

.1)

S.10-38

\'p~

wW\\'

fu ,<:

lc~

dcl11ic

At its

Janu

;lry

2010

!llectil1~

SCU

revi

ewed

the atta

hed

ltc

ponse to

t..:porl of the Adv

ory

ommittee Oil

Colleges.

repo

is alt'aclH

filr

the

inforlllalioll ofSen;lt

IMON

RASER

IVER

INKING OF

WORLD

... ':,; '," ("\"

SCUP 10-14

)

SFU

OFFICE OF THE VICE-PRESIDENT, AC\DEl\IIC AND PROVOST

8888

Ulllvcr~ity

Drive, Burnaby,

Can:lda \'5'\ tS6

TEL: 778.7823925

FAX: 778.782.5876

vp:lcad@sfu.ca

www.sfu.ca/vpacadcmic

MEMORANDUM

ATTENTION

FROM

SCUP

Jon Driver, Vice-President, Academic and

DATE

PAGES

January 12, 2010

1/2

Provost

RE:

Response to Report of the Advisory Committee on Colleges

The Phase 2 Task Force on Academic Structure reported in December 20 7. 0 e of the

recommendations was that the University consider the creation of a College

-ifclong and Experiential

Learning, an integrative unit that would house Illuch of what is now in Continuing Studies, as well as

interdisciplinary credit programs and a support unit fin- experiential learning. As the first stage in

investigating this proposal in more detail, I formed a small adVIsory committee in

(III

2008 to consider the

general idea that creatIOn of colleges would (lCilitate the admirustration and support of .tctlvlties that cut

across the roles and responsibilities of the Faculties.

The committee provi(il'd a report to me owr the summer of 200Y, and this is attached It)r SCUP's

ilIfnrmation. I have taken some time to consider my response to this report, for a numher of reasons. The

Task Force on Teaching and Learning produced a draft final rep0I"l in September, and it also included

recommendations abollt

the support for various teaching and lcarmng at:tivities, and the organization of

support units, \Ve conducted a search for til(' Dean of Continuing Studies during the (;111 semester of

2()()9, and this provided

;III

opportunity to review the activities of thaI unit, to listell to the advice of

Continuing Studies sLlfr members, and to dISCUSS future directions f<')r CominulIlg Stmites WIth det:anal

candidates. I also wanted to discuss some of the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on

Colleges with the ))eallS, especially as they WtTl' developing

t11l~ir

three-year plans in conjunction with lIly

"Vision, Outcomes and Goals" document that resulted [rom a consultation process with (\Culty, staff and

slUllents in early

2009.

As I had requested, the Advisory Committee has written a rdatively brief repon that

~ulIllllarizes

their

findings and recommendations. I thank the committee members for the research and thought that they

brought to this process, .lOd particularly for theIr summary of concerns about current admmistrative

structures at the University.

They have recommended that we consider using a college structure as a way

of Identifying learning approaches or interdisciplinary themes that cut across the current Faculty structures.

I have decided that I will

not support their recommendations at this time, for the [ollowing reasons:

1. \Ve have recently undergone sigmfic.lOt restructuring of F,ICUltlcs, and I do not think it would be

ide.u

for the UlI1versity as a \vholc to hegIn another restructuring process,

2. The creation of a college structure IS likely to add administrative costs, at a time when we have to

cope with a structural deficit in our budget and should be trying to reduce administrative costs.

3. We could create greater permeabIlity between Faculties and greater collahuratIon across all units

by policy revisions, rather than new administrative structures.

4. Having expenenced significant growth in student numbers over the last uecade, the University

will be enterIng a period of stability

III

student numbers ,\lid the funding associated \\'ith those

students. PrevIOusly, Faculties tended to compete WIth e.ICh other for ne\v studel\t spaces (and

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

THINKING OF THE WORLO

hence new funding) in order to create new programs. We arc now entering a period in which

new progr.ul1s can only he funded by reallocation of reSOllrces, itnd this will be an incentive for

collilboration between Faculties and greilter interdisciplinary activity.

5. Some

of our new Filculties, notahly FeAT and Environment. arc inherently intenlisciplinary. We

should give all Faculties the opportunity to move towards greater collahoration.

Once again. I would like to tlmnk the committee members [or their work. Their report identified and

clarified some important issues, and has helped mc think through some of the problems of brcilking down

biu.ricrs within thc University. As I develop the three-year academic plan ilnd review the

recommendations

of thc Task Force on Teaching and Learning, the committee's comments ahout the

need for greater

Collilhoration and cooperation within the University will he an importilnt consideration.

Att.1chment (1)

DRAFT REPORT:

JULY

2009

REPORT OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON COLLEGES

MEMBERSHIP OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON COLLEGES

CHAIR: MARK WINSTON, ACADEMIC DIRECTOR, CENTRE FOR DIALOGUE

PAUL BUDRA, ASSOCIATE DEAN, FACULTY OF ARTS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

COLLEEN COLLINS, ASSOCIATE DEAN, FACULTY OF BUSINESS

TOM NESBIT, ASSOCIATE DEAN, CONTINUING STUDIES

NANCY JOHNSTON, SENIOR DIRECTOR, LEARNING AND RETENTION, STUDENT SERVICES

JANE FRIESEN, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

WADE PARKHOUSE, DEAN, GRADUATE STUDIES

KATHY McKAY, GRADUATE STUDENT

SUSAN RHODES, UNIVERSITY CURRICULUM, OFFICE OF VP ACADEMIC

ALTERNATE

CONTRIBUTORS:

URSULA ARNDT, GRADUATE STUDENT

JOAN COLLINGE, DEAN

PRO THM,

CONTINUING STUDIES

C:,.

OVERVIEW

In February 2009, the Vice-President, Academic established the Advisory Committee on

Colleges

(ACC) to consider the feasibility of alternative structures that could house the

range

of units that lie outside faculties yet support the core academic mission. The impetus

for considering a college

or alternative as a new academic administrative structure at SFU

came as a result of a recommendation made in 2008 by the Phase 2 Faculty Structure Task

Force

(FSTF) for the creation of a College of Lifelong and Experiential Learning at SFU. The

college envisioned within the

FSTF recommendation would house two divisions: an

Experiential Learning Division and a Lifelong Learning Division.

The mandate

of the Advisory Committee on Colleges is as follows:

1. To examine models for administrative structures that facilitate integration of

academic services

and support across academic units;

2. To evaluate the suggestion that SFU house such services and support units in

"colleges" and, if appropriate, recommend alternative structures;

3. To develop principles for the establishment and governance of colleges (or

alternative structures), and principles for their relationship with faculties;

4. To evaluate the extent to which interdisciplinary academic units might be housed in

colleges (or some other structure), and the principles for the operation of such

units;

S. To produce a report that outlines the committee's findings and recommendations;

6. To consult widely within the university dming their work.

Goals the

VP Academic hopes the committee may reach include broadening the

recommendations made by the

FSTF regarding interdisciplinarity and proposing ways in

which

SFU's structures can expand and break through institutionalized barriers to

programming

that cuts across faculties. In particular, it is hoped consideration will be given

to a student-focused college

or colleges that have important academic goals but are

different in scope from centres

and institutes, which could include thematically based

colleges, including

but not limited to a College of Lifelong and Experiential Learning.

'J.

SFU INITIATIVES

There are a number of initiatives that have been undertaken or are in process, which the

ACC has taken into account, both as points of reference and to ensure constructive overlap.

The confluence

of these initiatives indicates that now may be the most opportune time to

address introducing a college

structure to the University.

Faculty Structure Task Force

The Faculty Structure Task Force presented a number of recommendations to the SFU

community in February 2008. Of particular interest to the

ACC

are the recommendations to

create a

College of Lifelong and Experiential Learning, and recommended changes alfowing

for

greater interdiscipIinarity across the university.

Recommendations for College of Lifelong and Experiential Learning (CLEL)

• That the CLEL be the locus and home for the encouragement, coordination,

interconnection,

and development of interdisciplinary, cross-faculty experiential

learning programs

That the Centre for Dialogue, including the Undergraduate Semester in

Dialogue, be classified as a CLEL program

That the VPA establish a Committee for Experiential Learning, with a

mandate to develop a plan for introducing experiential credit for

undergraduates

• That Continuing Studies, including the Centre for Online and Distance Education, be

housed

in the CLEL

The FSTF envisioned the Experiential Learning Division of the college as having the

following responsibilities:

• Develop, incubate, nourish and house credit (but not degree granting) programming

of an interdisciplinary, cross-faculty character within college programs;

• Develop a portal to showcase experiential programming and learning opportunities

across the university.

The Lifelong Learning Division would:

• Develop programs that provide opportunities for coherent pathways between non-

credit and credit learning;

• House continuing studies, distance education, and diverse population outreach

activities.

Recommendations for Interdisciplinarity

• Academic Policies:

o Revise Joint Appointments Policy (A11.07) to be more flexible in nature of

the relationships permitted; build in appropriate

and adequate review

mechanisms

of interdisciplinarity and multi-unit research and teaching;

identify clear

and consistent expectations of workload

o Develop a

new policy to allow for internal secondments of tenured research

faculty and

permanent teaching faculty for two- to five-year terms in centres

and institutes

o Develop a

new policy on 'Team Teaching'

o Develop

better provisions for an academic performance review process in

relation to interdisciplinary research and teaching

o Revise the

Centres and Institutes Policy to be more flexible (R40.01)

•

That the VP Academic, Deans and other VPs

eg.

o Develop a series of incentive strategies and position funding arrangements

that would substantially increase the number of joint appointments

o Review

the current enrollment-based funding allocation formula to identify

ways in which funding can effectively

support interdisciplinary course

credits offered through centres

and institutes, and new strategic and

interdisciplinary program development

Academic Planning

The Office of the Vice-President, Academic is currently in the process of developing the next

Three-Year Academic

Plan. This entails meeting with focus groups representing all areas of

the university to provide input into a new Academic Vision for SFU. The VP Academic has

asked the

SFU community to think deeply about the university's academic mission, and

about

what distinguishes SFU from other BC post-secondary institutions. Informing

development of an Academic Vision are statements made by the

President in his

"President's Agenda", which were highlighted by the VP Academic in his (anyary 2009 VPA

Planning Newsletter:

• We will diversify our teaching and research while maintaining our traditional core

strengths in liberal

arts and sciences

• We will promote and value innovation in both established and new activities

• Interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary approaches will add value to our teaching,

and strengthen the quality and relevance of

our research

• Students will learn in an environment that provides diverse experiences and

exposes them to research and researchers

Task Force on Teaching and Learning

After the Learning and Instructional Development Centre underwent an external review in

2008, the TFTL was formed to develop a vision and strategic plan for teaching and learning

at SFU. Of particular interest to the ACC are the following TFTL terms of reference. which

may inform decisions made

around the development of a college structure:

1. Develop a comprehensive vision statement on teaching and learning for SFU that

focuses on the aspirations

of students, faculty. instructors, teaching assistants, tutor

markers, educational staff

and the administration [and] recognizes the diversity of

pedagogies employed at SFU.

4. Suggest an administrative structure that will foster interaction and collaboration

among teaching and learning

support units and ensures that their strategic planning

activities

are coordinated and integrated.

Centres and Institutes Policy Revisions

Revisions are now undenvay to the Centres and Institutes Policy (R40.01). The report of

the FSTF recommended that the policy be clarified, and a review of this policy shows that

the

current definition of centres is sufficiently broad enough to cover a wide range of

research and teaching activities. Revisions to the policy will propose specific definitions for

centres and institutes,

and will revise reporting processes.

COLLEGES WITHIN THE UNIVERSITY SETTING

The committee has reviewed a number of examples of university units that provide

interdisciplinary programming by faculty members who come from a range

of disciplines.

Because British

Columbia has such a well-developed and recognized community college

system, it is important to differentiate between the intent of an

SFU college or colleges and

the mandates of Be's colleges. This is particularly

true now that many of these colleges and

university-colleges have been restructured as teaching universities. In committee

discussion around the term

"college" versus a more enhanced definition of "centre", the

term

"college" seemed to allow for a stronger influence on teaching and community

engagement than the

term "centre" at SFU, and so we chose to use that term throughout our

discussions.

A review

of colleges within the university setting across Canada reveals an array of college

types, some more relevant to

SFU than others. Some universities still maintain residential

or denominational colleges that function like faculties. A few mUlti-campus universities

identify their satellite campuses as colleges, distinct from

but linked to the main campus.

More applicable to this committee are those universities

that have established specialized

colleges

that address institution-specific needs and incorporate interdisciplinarity as part of

their mission. The term

"college" in these settings is generally consistent with the terms

"faculty" or "school". These units typically have a specific. thematic focus that is inherently

interdisciplinary, and do not function as

"umbrella" structures with administrative

oversight of loosely related

or unrelated programs or other administrative units. Most of

these college structures house programs

that are problem-/issues-oriented, utilize learning-

outcomes pedagogy, and build cohort. experiential and service learning into the academic

structure

of the curriculum. Many of the programs these colleges are built around have

specific champions

at the senior administrative level, which was critical to their

implementation.

Reporting structures vary, with

either Deans or Directors who report directly to VPs

Academic. Instructors are typically cross-appointed faculty members from a variety of

disciplines, with some specialist core faculty members who work within

the program full

time. Students may receive baccalaureate and/or graduate degrees directly through these

colleges, majoring in the program offered,

or as part of a double or joint major with another

program elsewhere in the univerSity. Enrollments are generally limited, and selected

applicants are often high achieving because the programs are designed to be intensive.

College Examples

Renaissance Colle.ge. University of New Brunswick (Fredericton

Renaissance College opened in Fall 2000 with the primary purpose of offering an intensive

leadership studies program. The college is physically located

in a Victorian mansion in

Fredericton. close to the UNB-F campus. Renaissance offers a Bachelor of Philosophy in

Interdisciplinary Leadership Studies; a Master's of Philosophy in Policy Studies (in

conjunction with Graduate Studies):

partners with UNB's College of Extended Learning to

offer

mature students a part-time Bachelor of I ntegrated Studies; and offers a non-credit

Student Leadership

Program open to all UNB undergrads and graduate students on the

Fredericton campus. The college is also home to the Undergraduate Research

Lab for

Leadership Education.

/D.

The B.Phil program is an intensive three-year, two-summer program that combines

interdisciplinary experiential curriculum with a

Canadian and international internship;

graduates also complete a

minor in a discipline of their choice. The program is equivalent to

a normal four-year program,

and the curriculum includes core courses and cross-discipline

courses. Annual enrollment is limited to 25 students,

and selection is based on students

who

are academically high achieving and community-minded, who demonstrate leadership

potential

and diverse interests outside of academics.

Renaissance

College functions as a school ofUNB, and is a bi-campus interdiSciplinary

academic

unit that reports directly to the two campus VP Academics (Fredericton and St.

john), rather than through a faculty. A Dean heads the college, and the prime decision-

making body is called the College Council. Startup funding for the college came from an

external grant, which provided

terms for the type of program to be offered.

The organizational

structure originally proposed and approved included no full-time

academic appointments; faculty members were seconded from

other academic units, with

assessment procedures remaining with the member's home academic unit. After

the first

external review in

2004, both the self-study and external review recommendations called

for incorporating a core full-time faculty complement into

the organizational structure.

Since

2005, the organizational structure includes: the Dean and two full-time associate

professors; two jointly appointed faculty members; two seconded faculty members; seven

part-time stipend instructors;

and four administrative staff.

College ofExtencied Learning. Universltv

New Brunswick [Fredericton}

After 50 years as the Department of Extension and Summer Sessions, this unit went through

a restructuring process in

2000-2001 to become the College of Extended Learning. The

rationale for

the change was to broaden its academic mandate and outreach, improve

delivery mechanisms and internal partnerships, and strengthen its programming and

community connections.

UNB recognized that increasing competition from the private

sector for education and training programs required prioritizing restructuring, particularly

in light of the potential increased revenue source. A better structure required a new

business plan and a new operational plan.

An Executive Director, who reports directly to the VP-F Academic, heads the College of

Extended Learning.

An Executive Committee

oversees

the business plan, the financial plan.

and

the appointment ofthe Executive Director; members include the VP-F Academic. VP

Finance, VP Research, Executive Director, two faculty members and two external

organization members.

An Academic

Advisory

Committee oversees academic programming, learner support

services, academic policy issues, review of program proposals,

review

of existing programs,

development

of objectives and priorities for academic programming; members include the

VP-F Academic, Executive Director, UNB-F Registrar, a Senate appointee, a member from

each faculty, a librarian

and an IT staff person. two College Program Directors and two

students from the Adult and Part-Time Students organization.

Core services of the college include: a Degree Credit Division; a Professional Development

Division; a Personal

Cultural Enrichment Division; an English Language Programme

Division;

and a Conference Centre and Services Division. Programming and services include:

for-credit, part-time degree

and certificate courses; non-degree certificates and workshops;

II.

English as a Second Language; Distance Education and e-Learning; credit and non-credit

Visual Arts and Music programming; writing and math tutoring centres available to all

full-

and part-time students; and financial aid, advising, prior learning assessment and student

advocacy directed toward adult and part-time students.

The college also offers a jointly administered part-time Bachelor

of Integrated Studies

degree. The College of Extended Learning manages administrative oversight, while

academic oversight

is provided by Renaissance College.

Col/ege ofSustainabiUt,y. Dalhousie UniversifJ'

Dalhousie's College of Sustainability opens in September 2009, and will house the new

Environment, Sustainability

and Society program, a program proposed and initiated by

Dalhousie's Science faculty. It will occupy a dedicated

and purpose-built space to allow for

both

student programming and the ability to host conferences and events, and develop

partnerships and research opportunities with external community groups and

governmental agencies.

The college will offer a major

(ESS) as part of a double major/combined honours

undergraduate degree in one

of Bachelor of Arts; Bachelor of Community Design; Bachelor

of Management; Bachelor

of Science; or Bachelor of Computing Science; future degree

combinations may include Faculties

of Engineering and Health Professions. Master's and

PhD programs and classes in ESS are under development.

The organizational

structure is focused on team teaching; cross-appointed faculty members

come from Science, Arts, Architecture and

Planning, Management, Engineering, Health

Professions and Law. The college is headed by a Director, with separate Associate Directors

of Undergraduate Programs, Research and Graduate Programs (all cross-appointments).

Global College, Un;versifJ' ofWinniveg

Global College was created in 2005 as a thematic academic unit that "provides students,

faculty, staff, visiting scholars, dignitaries, and the community with a place to interact to

share their diverse perspectives about issues of global citizenship, human rights, and issues

affecting the planet". The college houses seven institutes

that make up its foundation of

academic learning.

Global

College offers a three-stream thematic major in Human Rights and Global Studies

(BA). This program incorporates courses from diverse departments and disciplines, as well

as core courses developed within the college. Additionally, each institute helps to fulfill the

mandate

of Global College by offering Summer Institutes, teach-ins, symposia, conferences,

and lecture series, as well as by encouraging trans-disciplinary education

Principal, who reports to the Deputy Provost/AVP International, heads the college. The

Institute Directors all have home

departments in varying disCiplines.

College

Graduate Studies and Research, UniversifY

Saskatchewan

The College of Graduate Studies and Research was founded in 1946 and renamed in 1971

(to include Research). It is a separate academic unit and functions like a Faculty of Graduate

Studies. The Dean of

the college reports to the VP Academic/Provost.

lel.

The mission of the college is to provide support to graduate students and graduate

programs. Faculty members hold membership in the college for the purposes of furthering

the education

of graduate students and/or the enhancement of research, scholarly or

artistic work at University of Saskatchewan. Members must have an academic appointment

and

are nominated for membership by their academic units. The college can appoint

Adjunct Professors

at the recommendation of academic units. Any supervisory issues that

come between students and their faculty member supervisors are dealt with by the college

rather than at the departmental or faculty level.

Graduate

students apply first to the department in which they want to pursue studies, but

formal graduate admission is through the college. Additionally, the college administers

Independent Interdisciplinary Program admissions.

CollMe ror Interdisciplinary Studies. University orHC Vancouver

USC's College for Interdisciplinary Studies was created in 2008 through a split of the former

(and increasingly unwieldy) dual role of its Faculty of Graduate Studies. The

FGS is now

solely responsible for the provision and

support of graduate students and graduate

programs, while the

CFIS is a new governance unit for USC's interdisciplinary centres,

institutes and schools formerly housed within the

FGS.

The aim of the organizational structure is to foster research and teaching, and enhance

interdisciplinary scholarship widely across the university in collaboration with the existing

faculties. The college differs from a faculty in

that it has a university-wide mandate and

responsibility, a university-wide governance committee, and no

permanent academic

departments. However, some faculty members in centres and institutes who do not have an

academic

apPOintment in a faculty or a leader who is a Dean call the CFIS their home and in

some

cases

may be directly appointed by the college. The CFIS has as its academic and

administrative head a Principal who

is an additional member of Senate. reports to the

Provost and

is a member of the Committee of Deans. As a cost-saving measure,

administrative

support and resources were redistributed between the FGS and the CFIS.

At present, the college maintains current graduate academic activities and has yet to

develop new ones,

but it is designed to encourage creation of new centres and institutes,

and eventual expansion into undergraduate programming.

/3.

STRUCTURAL ISSUES AND CONCERNS AT

SFU

While the college examples above have arisen to meet specific perceived needs for thematic

programming

or unit restructuring at each given university, they also attend to some more

universal concerns

that afflict academia, in terms of flexible faculty cross-appointments and

cross-disciplinary curriculum development. None of the examples

attempts to provide pan-

university programming

or house entities that support the academic goals of other

structures within those universities.

The committee has identified a

number of barriers to more flexible, innovative, university-

wide programming

at SFU. Many of these issues were previously identified by the Faculty

Structure Task Force, were

brought forward by the Task Force's working groups and other

submissions, and are interrelated:

• Mobility: it can be difficult for faculty members to

move

outside of programs and

faculties (tenure and promotion issues)

• Mobility: it can be difficult for students to move between and across programs and

faculties

• Resource issues, both in terms of funding and people, inhibit the development of

programs

that cross faculty boundaries

• Geography-three campuses in different communities

• Rigid architecture of the university academic structure results in a silo affect that

hinders university-wide

programming-programs must be attached to a

department

or faculty

• Ambiguous homes for new cross-faculty programs during incubation

• Significant population of transfer students and credit-recognition issues within SFU

• Pressures faced by graduate students in multidisciplinary graduate programs who

encounter conflicting program requirements

A college structure could provide one solution to these ingrained issues, coupled with policy

changes. Still, the Faculty Structure Task Force recommendations left many Senate

members and others in the university community concerned that creating

yet another

administrative structure might produce more problems than resolution. Some in the

community believe

that policy rather than structural changes could alleviate many of the

concerns; others believe a restructuring

or full academic recognition of existing units would

greatly enhance the

student and faculty experience.

Some

ofthe concerns raised by the

ACC

when contemplating a college structure include:

• Difficulty conceptually discussing 'college' as an answer to issues not yet fully

articulated

• The cohesiveness of a college unit at SFU if it is perceived as simply grouping

disparate entities. This was a perception held

about the former Faculty of

Interdisciplinary Studies, accurate

or not

• Investing time and resources in a thematic college could be wasteful in terms of

faculty member time and energy, and financial resources, if the theme was trendy

but not long lasting

• 'Theme' suggests curriculum and topics of investigation, rather than a disciplinary

focus, perhaps distracting from

SFU's traditional department/faculty structure

1'-/

• A thematic college structure might not increase enrollment. but rather redistribute

existing students and resources. The financial concerns of existing units are

heightened by the implications

of adding new units

• Depending on the operational structure of a college, any implied equivalency

between a teaching-only unit and the teaching-research faculties remains a sticking

point for some faculty members. who perceive teaching-only units to hold lesser

value than those

that include teaching and research

• The evaluation paradigm used to evaluate faculty members seconded to colleges at

SFU would need to be expanded

• If sunset clauses were introduced on thematic colleges. stability would be in

jeopardy:

what would entice students to enroll. and what would happen to those

who were

part way through a program that was discontinued?

The college structure we propose below for

SFU attempts to reconcile the potential for

colleges to enhance

student and faculty experiences while addressing concerns expressed

by the committee and previous reports and discussions.

Overall, the ACC's proposal was guided by:

• The chorus of reports. task forces. focus groups. and our committee discussions that

consistently indicated a

strong desire at SFU to promote university-wide academic

programming and simplify establishment of innovative. highly interdisciplinary

learning environments;

• Discomfort with establishing any overly cumbersome or grandiose new academic

structures;

• The principle that any new structure should enhance and not detract from

department and faculty functions. through collaborative models supported

primarily by secondments, teaching buy-outs. joint appointments. and other shifts of

teaching and programming responsibilities.

rather than new hirings;

• The need to respond proactively to changing student demographics. In particular. to

ensure

SFU's programs and services are attractive to. and acknowledge the needs of.

lifelong learners;

• Consistency with the learning objectives being developed through SFU's upcoming

three-year academic plan

that will require a wide range of policy and curricular

changes. of which colleges are one of many initiatives;

• Recognition that well-conceived colleges could enhance student experiences at SFU.

PROPOSED SFU COLLEGE STRUCTURE AND POLICIES

Definition

A Simon Fraser University college is an academic unit that fosters wide collaboration

around an identified learning approach

and/or theme among faculty members

staff,

students

and/or the external community across disciplinary boundaries that are not

addressed

by current faculty structures.

There was considerable committee discussion around the name "college." In the end, we

suggest retaining

that title, as our proposal is most similar to widely accepted "college"

terminology as used at other universities in Canada and internationally. Also, UBC has

established a precedent for using the term

"college" within a Be university.

Nevertheless, the term "college" has other meanings in the British Columbia post-secondary

system.

An alternative nomenclature would reallocate the SFU titles of "Centre" and

"Institute," so that our proposal becomes the university definition of"Centre," and the term

"Institute" be used for the current structures housed under both "Centre" and "Institute"

titles.

Characteristics/Criteria for Colleges

Colleges at SFU are unique

being learning (process) and/or strongly theme (content)

based, generally combining innovative learning approaches with defined themes, and

with content that crosses faculty

and disciplinary boundaries.

A new college structure at SFU should provide a learning environment unique and not

already represented within departments and faculties.

Colleges should provide cohesive

academic programming

that represents more than simply joint programs between two or

three departments, an option already available at SFU.ln addition, we hope that colleges

will provide novel interactions

that may generate opportunities for vibrant research outside

of the colleges.

The concept we propose here, focused on theme

rather than discipline, presented through

an innovative learning approach, with

a breadth that goes beyond current disciplinary

boundaries as defined by faculties, provides a novel combination

of traits that could become

an exciting signature element

of SFU's institutional brand, and a centrepiece for our

upcoming academic plan.

Colleges may serve as vehicles to incubate new programs, but may grow to permanent

components

of the university if successful. A college/program may migrate into

department status within

faCUlties, remain within the college structure,

be dissolved

appropriate.

Any adjustments to the structure of a college or program, whether via migration or

dissolution, will need to carefully consider the affect on students, staff and faculty members,

and accommodations built in to any program changes.

/(P.

Colleges will have a 10-year mandate prior to review, with programs within a college

undergoing advisory reviews after five years. A program review would recommend that

a program:

1) contlnuei

2) revise Its structure andfunctiom

3) move as a department or program to a facultyi or

4) be terminated.

One rationale for a college structure is to provide an organizational element with greater

flexibility and more opportunity for innovation and risk-taking than in more highly defined

units. But along with risk comes a higher possibility

that a college's programs might need

revision, movement into a different structure,

or termination. We spent some time

wrestling with

the issue of what to do with the college programs that did not succeed, and

those

that were successful. Our suggestions above provide a clear set of options for college

programs, with the expectation

of rigorous and scheduled review leading to decisions about

whether and where programs might continue.

Colleges may serve as one of many mechanisms for moving university priorities

forward.

Meetings of various university task forces, focus groups, and committees in recent years

have consistently heard complaints concerning how administratively difficult

it can be to

initiate a new program

at SFU. The time lag between idea and implementation can

discourage and stifle intriguing innovations.

Our proposed college structure provides the

opportunity to incubate new programs

in which new university priorities and directions

can quickly establish a beachhead,

and be tested before full implementation.

Colleges will provide students and faculty members with venues

engage

different

types of learning processes tllan are available in tlleir standard

1I0me

faculties.

The intent of college programs is to provide unique pedagogical experiences for students.

with increased opportunities to engage with the wider community on a for-credit basis, and

to provide for a

greater array of programs that will foster transference of knowledge

between students, instructors and the community. With a proactive renewal

of themes,

programs will continue to remain topical, current, and relevant, and will offer a range of

multidisciplinary perspectives. Faculty members will have opportunities to develop new

teaching models

that can be brought back to and shared with their home departments and

faculties, and broaden their teaching, research, and service opportunities without having to

change their

permanent appointments.

College faculty members will

appointed primarily from existing

departments/faculties, tlJrough

long-term secondments (generally two- to five-year

terms), teaching buy-outs, and other shifts of teaching and programming

responsibilities.

We considered carefully whether colleges should be populated with faculty members and

staff through new appointments,

or by reallocating existing resources. A primary

motivation for a college

structure is to allow students, faculty members, and the community

to interact

in novel combinations not well covered by existing structures. and so the idea of

reallocation

rather than new appointments seemed obvious and beneficial.

1'7.

If so, SFU would need to develop clearer policies and appropriate budgets to encourage

secondments and buy-outs.

One innovative policy change that would encourage greater

faculty

member mobility might include reducing required coursework for majors and

minors, and thereby demands on faculty member teaching loads within departments, a

recommendation

that is already being pursued actively through other committees and the

upcoming academic plan. Another policy change might involve having

FTEs follow a faculty

member; for example, a physics professor teaching a college course could have all the

FTEs

applied to Physics Department

We also need to examine policies around tenure, promotion, and salary review for faculty

members whose primary responsibilities may have shifted from their departments into a

college for

an extended period of time. College faculty members would still be evaluated by

their home departments, but broader guidelines defining performance would encourage

faculty members to participate in colleges. Perhaps additional input from experts in the

college themes and learning approaches might be appropriate to allow

TPCs to better

evaluate unconventional activities.

Some concern was expressed within the committee

that continuity in colleges might be

compromised if there

were no dedicated tenure-track faculty members appointed uniquely

to colleges, outside

of any department or faculty. Such an appointment does not exist at SFU

now, and we concluded that establishing a college-only appointment in the current limited

hiring environment would stimulate considerable resistance, impeding

or even preventing a

college structure from being approved. We suggest

that this issue be revisited after the first

five-year program advisory evaluations have been completed. For now, a few long-term

secondments would provide reasonable continuity

in college programs.

We use the term "primarily" in the above recommendation to allow for occasional hiring of

limited-term assistant professors, and program

or executive directors in colleges, budget

permitting.

New colleges and/or college programs

will

be proposed tllrougll tile Office of tile Vice-

President, Academic to Senate tllrougll SCUP or SGSC, and

approved will report

directly to

tile VP Academic or designate (e.g. tile Associate VP Academic). Colleges

comprising solely graduate programming will report tllrougll tile Dean of Graduate

Studies to

tile VP Academic, and responsibility for all graduate programming

regardless of whether it Is housed in a faCUlty or college will be regulated by SGSC.

There may be one or a few colleges at SFU, and colleges may include one program or a

number of related programs.

We recommend

that colleges be headed by a Principal, who will be included where

appropriate

at Chair and/or Deans meetings. There may be one Principal for each

co/Iege,

or one Principal for all colleges, depending

the extent, focus and size of

co/Ieges. The Dean of Graduate Studies will serve as the Principal for graduate colleges.

Since colleges are university-level academic units rather than at a department or faculty

level. the

VP Academic's office seemed the most appropriate place for college proposals to

be developed, proposed to Senate, and to

report if approved.

I~.

We considered whether to create one SFU college with many programs, or a number of

colleges.

One concern was that a single college might develop with too many unrelated

programs, creating a lack

of cohesion. We recognized that different colleges with diverse

functions might develop,

some with a number of related programs and others with just a

single focus. Rather than overly anticipate

what might be proposed in the future, we

decided to recommend flexibility in the number and style

of colleges. We anticipate that

there will only be a few colleges at anyone time, although we decided not to suggest any

particular number as optimal.

We also recognize that colleges would need a strong voice around the Deans' tables once a

number of colleges have been established, but the head of colleges would not have the same

functions as a Dean. Thus, we recommend

that a new category of PrindpaJ be established,

who will direct the first college or colleges, report to the VP Academic or designate, and

when appropriate attend high-level administrative meetings.

Once colleges reach sufficient

scale, it would be useful for

the Principal to join the Deans' Council. Colleges will grow

slowly, and while it might be useful to revisit the

Principal position after the first reviews,

the committee felt this structure would function well for the foreseeable future. Further

definition of the

Principal's roles and responsibilities should accompany the first college

proposal submitted to Senate.

Colleges may offer undergraduate and/or graduate credit or non-credit courses,

grouped as a

set of courses around related themes and/or learning styles, or as

certificates

or diplomas. Faculties and departments will retain responsibility for

allocating credits towards electives, minors,

and degrees.

Two elements underlie our position on curriculum and credit. First, we felt that

departments and faculties should retain decision-making authority on whether coursework

could be applied towards minors

or majors, although 5FU college courses should be

universally acceptable as electives. This system has worked well for the IS-credit

Undergraduate Semester in Dialogue; departments have been granting anywhere from zero

to 15 credits towards

students' majors/minors, depending on how appropriate the

coursework has been to

their disciplines, but have always been willing to allow elective

credits.

The second element was

our reluctance to have colleges offer degrees, at least during the

formative years.

5FU has well-defined certificate and diploma designations that would

function well to organize college offerings, and theme-related suites of courses such as the

Semester

in Dialogue would allow additional flexibility.

Colleges will require: faCUlty member time through long-term secondments (generally

two- to five-year terms), teaching buy-outs,

and other shifts o/teaching responsibility;

limited-term

faCUlty appointmentsj program and/or executive directorsj

administrative/clerical resourceSj space; programming funding;

and other costs

typically associated with academic programs.

Col/ege budgets should be Included as

stable, recurring budget lines in the university's budget, similar to departments and

faculties.

Colleges will not succeed at SFU unless they are viewed as central to the university's

mission and don't suffer from insufficient resource allocation, a problem

that has plagued

interdisciplinary programs

at SFU. Colleges will not require huge budgets, and there will not

11.

be many colleges, but resources will not be zero, either. The resource issue is a simple one:

colleges should

not be approved unless sufficient, and stable, resources are available to

conduct quality programs.

Departments

and faculties will need to view colleges as being compatible with, and

enhancing,

their academic missions, not as competing for students or degrees. Thus, themes

in college coursework should be attractive for other academic units, as their collaboration

and interest in seconding faculty members will be a key element in the success

of colleges.

Examples of Potential Colleges at SFU

The ACC's mandate was to consider a generic structure for colleges at SFU rather than any

particular college submission.

Still, we repeatedly found ourselves testing structural ideas

against some of the specific college concepts

that have been raised at SFU in recent years,

and ideas

that emerged during committee discussions. We thought it would be useful to

provide examples of possible colleges

at SFU, in addition to the examples we provided from

other institutions. The list below is not exhaustive, nor does it suggest committee support,

but rather is a sample of proposals we might expect:

of Experiential and Lifelong

Learnin~

This college would develop, incubate, nourish

and house credit

but not degree-granting programming of an interdisciplinary, cross-faculty

character; develop a portal to showcase experiential programming and learning

opportunities across the university; serve as a reference, resource, and

support centre for

members of the university community seeking to develop new experiential programming;

and coordinate experiential credit administration and adjudication processes where

appropriate. Most experiential learning courses, however, would be offered through

departments and faculties, through existing courses whose curriculum is modified towards

"experiential," or new courses with departmental designations. This type of college would

also allow the university to

better respond to changing student demographics by focusing

on the particular needs

of adult learners. It would coordinate and develop SFU's educational

provision to adult and

other non-traditional and under-represented learners, encourage

and

support pedagogical and curricular innovations for these groups, and promote and

extend the university's community outreach and engagement activities.

Current university programs that might be a part of a College of Experiential and Lifelong

Learning include the

Centre for Dialogue (including the Undergraduate Semester in

Dialogue), co-op, work study, service learning, field schools, exchange programs, research

semesters, and practica. For more detail, see the Phase 2 Faculty

Structure Task Force final

rru2QJl.

lli.a.lQgue Program: The Centre for Dialogue

(http://www.sfu.ca/djalogue/study+practice/index.html) has needed an administrative

home since it was founded in

2002, and a Dialogue Program within a College of Experiential

and Lifelong Learning would resolve

that long-standing concern. The Dialogue Program

would offer the Undergraduate

Semester in Dialogue

(http://www.sfu.ca/dialogue/undergrruLO which is a suite of undergraduate courses that

explore a different topic of civic importance each semester, using dialogue to focus student

attention on public issues

and effect positive change through interdisciplinary actions in the

community. The program also would convene dialogue events on

important public issues,

offer a graduate

Certificate or Diploma in Dialogue, present non-credit public courses,

provide leadership training, house Fellows from the community conducting research and

outreach programs on significant and contentious public issues, and offer facilitation

services for university and community groups, among

other activities.

College of Graduate Studies: This college might offer a small number of programs focused

on graduate education

that cannot be accommodated by joint degrees. These programs may

have action-oriented research developed

in partnership with communities, business,

industry and the public sector as a theme. They could also

share pedagogy in that the

programs could be delivered through a combination of short, on-campus residencies and

on-line learning

in a cohort model.

Burnaby Mountain

College (http://www.sfy.ca/college/) A residential or virtual college on

the Burnaby campus has been proposed for

Canadian and international graduate students,

faculty members and visiting scholars. It would serve as a place for dialogue and collegial

activities

that address international, regional, and local interests, as a centre for multi-

disciplinary interaction

at the university, as an intellectual and social home for SFU's

doctoral students, and as a university-oriented institution with a special welcome for

nearby residents of

UniverCity.

SUMMARY

We have attempted to balance concerns about new administrative structures and budget

constraints with the idea

that colleges could add appreciably to SFU's learning culture,

enhancing the experiences

of students, faculty members and staff, and providing increased

opportunities for

SFU to grow its fine tradition of community engagement. Our intention

was not to detract from

or diminish the role of departments and faculties, but to probe

whether a new university-level college structure would augment the overall mission of SFU

while being compatible with current structures.

implemented, colleges should have substantial positive impact on student experiences at

SFU, by providing unique learning environments, the opportunity for broad exposure to

interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary approaches, innovate and diverse skills useful for

solving today's complex problems, exposure to community perspectives

that will support

wise career choices, and a sense of civic responsibility that emerges from a strong

university-community interaction.

The recommendations above provide a college structure

that would allow flexibility and

nimbleness while providing administrative oversight, and would encourage colleges to

become a high-impact and signature component of learning

at SFU.

ACCj

ACC reporc.doc

oJ/.