MEMORANDUM

A

TIENTI

O

N

FROM

AE

:

OFF

I

C

i

i

O

F

T

H

h V

I

CE

-

P

I

U

;S

I

D

I

':N

T

,

ACi\I)EM

I

C

l

IND

P

R

O

VOST

8888

U

n

i

v

c

r~it

y

Driv

e,

Bur

n

aby

,

B

e

Ca

nada

VSA

156

Scnat<.:

TEl

.:

778.782

.

392

5

"

,

",778

.

782.5876

DA

TE

OCro

b

l:f

8

,

20'10

S.10-135

\

'

paC;l(.I@~fll.C;l

\vww.:-;

f

u

.

ca/ vp:lcldcm

i

c

Jon Driver

,

Vicc-President,

;

\caucmi

c

:Jlld

P

AG

E

S

1

/2

~

Provost, a

n

d

C

h

air

,

SCUP

I

'nc

ulty

of Ar

ts :lnti

Social Sci

e

n

ces

:

EXlcrnal Review

R

e

p

o

rt

o

f [h

e

Department

of

Soc

i

olo a

,

,

\nthropo

l

og

y (S

CU

ll

1

0

-66)

Th

e

Senate

Committee on

U

ni

v

e

r

s

i

ty Priorit

i

es (SCUP)

ha

s

r

ev

i

ewe

d

t

h

e

E

ten]" I Revi

e

w Repo

r

t

o

n th

e

D

e

partm

e

n

t

of So

ciolog

y

and

Anthrop

ology

,

toge

th

e

r

with

r

cs

p

ons s

fn

III

th

e

Department

,

the

Dc;m

of

Arts

&.

Social Sciences

and

i

nput f

i

'olll the

A

ssoc

ia

te

V

i

ce

Pr

es

ident

,

I\.

,

dcm

i

c.

Motio

n:

T

h

a

t

Se

n

a

t

e

a

pp

r

ove t

h

e

r

eco

mm

e

nd

at

i

o

n f

ro

nl

t

h

e Se

n

ate CO

lTIllli

tte

e on

U

ni

ve

r

s

it

y

Pr

i

o

ri

t

i

e

s t

o i

nlpl

e

n

lC

l1

t t

h

c Act

i

o

n

P

l

a

n f

or

th

e De

p

a

r

t

t

ne

n

t of Soci

ol

og

y

a

nd

A

n

t

h

ro

p

o

l

og

y

t

ha

t

result

e

d f

ro

m it

s Ex

tern

a

l

Review

.

Fo

ll

ov

..

:ing the sit.e

visit t.h

e

Report

of

the

Ex

tcn1.d

r

Z.

c

vi

e

w T

c

am*

fo

r

th

e

Dep

a

rtment of

Sociology

and An

t

hropo

l

ogy

was

suhmitted

in Apri

l

20

.

1

0.

Aft

e

r

the

R

c

port wa

s

rece

i

ved a

r

ne

et

i

ng Violas held with t

h

e

D

e

an

of

Arts

&.

Socia

l

Sciences,

t

h

e

C

ha

i

r or

the

D

e

par

t

m

e

nt and

the Directo

r

of

A

c

ad

c

wi

c

Pl

an

ning

(VPA) to

cons

id

e

r the r

eco

mm

e

ndation

s.

Th

e

Department

t

hen pr

e

pared an A

ct

ion Plan ha

sed o

n

the

r

~

e

port

;-lJ1

d

t

he

se disc

ussion

s

. Th

e

Act

i

o

n plan

was

th

e

n

suhmitted

to th

e

Dean on

J

u

l

y 9,

20

.

1

0

.

T

h

e

D

ea

n

e

ndor

se

d

this

Action Plan.

The Revi

e

w Tearn memhers

stated

dut

'o

ver,l

lI

t

h

e

Departrnent i

s

functioning

v

e

r

y well.

I

t

h

as

a

s

upe

r

h

un

de

rgraduate program,

m

uch

r

non.

;

i

nt

e

rd

i

scip

li

nary

and

wr

i

tin

g-

int

e

n

s

i

v

e

dun J1l0st; a p

r

oductive

faculty,

man

y

with national

and in

te

rnati

o

nal reputation

s; an

d

a lev

el

of

co

ll

egia

lity,

coope

rativ

e

n

ess

and

gcnerosity

of

spir

i

t t

h

at

\

vou

l

d serv

c

as

a

m

o

del

fo

r

d

e

pa

r

tments

across

Ca

nada.

I

t

s

g

r

aduat

e

p

r

ograms,

part

i

cularly the

PhD

,

<Irc

exper

i

encing growing:

p

;.

tin

s

rc

s

u

l

ting:

fr

o

m a

level of expans

i

on

t

b

at

leap

t

ahe

a

d

uf

funJing

and

t:1Cu

l

ty

re

so

ur

ces

,

co

i

n

c

iding

<I

S

it did

with

c

u

t

hacks

and

l

o

ss

of ElCu

l

t

y

(pr

i

mari

l

y po

si

tion

s

lef

t

va

ca

nt hy r

e

t

i

rCITl

C

llt

S

)'.

SCUP

re

co

mmend

s

to

Senate

t

h

at

Departm

ent

of Sociology and

Ant

hr

opo

l

ogy

h

e

,tdvi

sc

d

to

pursue t

h

e

A

ct

ion P

l

a

n.

S

I

MON FHASER UN

I

VERS

IT

Y

TH

IN

K

ING OF

THE

WORLD

---

Attachments:

1. Department of Sociology and Anthropology External Review - Action Plan

2. External Review Report - April. 2010

*

External Review Team:

Sally Cole,

Professor of Anthropology

&

Associate Dean

Concordia University

Neil Gerlach,

Professor of Sociology

&

Associate Chair

Carleton University

Laureen

Snider,Professor of Sociology

Queen.s University

CC

John Craig, FASS Dean (Pro Tcm)

Jane

Pulkingham - Director, School of Criminology.

2

---

Report of the External Review Committee on the Department of Sociology and Anthropology

Simon

Fraser

University

Sally Cole

Professor of Anthropology

&

Associate Dean

Concordia University

Neil Gerlach

Professor of Sociology

&

Associate Chair

Carleton

University

Laureen

Snider

Professor of Sociology

Queen's University

April 2010

3

---

I: Introduction and general overview

To arrive at its conclusions, the External Review Committee consulted the following

written sources: 1. The Self Study Report of the Department of Sociology and Anthropology

SFU prepared by the Department Chair, Dr. Jane Pulkingham, with input from the Department's

main committees and staff;

2. The different appendices attached to the Self-Study; 3. The

SFU

2009-2010 Calendar;

4. The Faculty's curriculum vitae; 5. The President's Agenda, the SFU

Strategic Research Plan,

2010-15,

the Institutional Accountability Plan & Report,

2009/10-

2011/12,

the SFU and the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences' Three Year Academic Plan,

2010-

13; 6. Various other documents, including data on graduate student funding, faculty funding,

course outlines, documents on Community-Based Learning, and drafts outlines

of new

programs and projects such

as Public Anthropology.

In addition, the External Review Committee visited the School site from March

24-26,

2010.

During these three days, the Committee met with the SFU senior administrators, the

Chair of the Department, the Graduate and Undergraduate Studies Committees, all but 4

faculty members, undergraduate and graduate students, the Department Manager and General

Office Secretary, Library Representatives and

the faculty library liaison.

During those meetings, we were assisted and enlightened by Dr. Stephen McBride of the

Department

of Political Studies, SFU. Everybody spoke openly and answered our questions in a

cooperative,

collegial and straightforward manner.

Overall the Committee was impressed with the high levels of collegiality and democratic

governance in the Department, and

with the overwhelming interdisciplinarity that marks their

teaching programmes and research agendas. This level of collegiality is a notable achievement

in a stressed and stretched

unit such as this, where 2 disciplines and 4 different programs are

competing

for scarce resources that now threaten to become even more scarce. It requires

good

will, constant compromise, frequent meetings, and a willingness to see the other's point

of view. This investment by the SA department chair and faculty cannot be easily quantified,

but it translates into huge benefits for undergraduate and graduate students, and cost savings

for senior administrators!

We were concerned, however,

that the University, by creating two new faculties and

hiring sociologists and anthropologists there,

is not taking advantage of the strengths of the

excellent SA unit it already has. Rather than building on the interdisciplinary opportunities,

research programs and contacts

already established in SA, the new Faculties threaten to

weaken it, creating rivalries and enmity at worst, unrealized synergies at best. This is

particularly worrying in light of the fact that the Department has 8 actual or potential

retirements coming up over

the next 5 years, and may be losing additional faculty through

---

resignations. Anthropologists in the Department are seriously overloaded now, the only

quantitative methodologist resigned recently

(as discussed in section II), and key areas such as

feminist socio-Iegal and family studies are threatened. If these positions are lost, the viability of

the Department will be in serious jeopardy.

Organization

of this Report:

To answer the questions put to us by the Self-Study and those set

out in the SFU Terms of Reference for External Review Committees

2009/10,

this report will

cover the following issues: Undergraduate Studies; Graduate Studies; Research; Faculty

Renewal, Retention and Succession; Governance;

Staff; and finally Summary and

Recommendations.

II: Undergraduate Studies

1. Structure and Enrolment

The Department offers a wide variety

of undergraduate courses in five key areas within

the disciplines of Sociology and Anthropology including: globalization and development; health,

science, and environment; knowledge, culture, and power; social justice, policy, and

law; and

women, gender, and sexuality. These are well-chosen themes

that cohere with the concerns of

Canadian sociology and anthropology more generally. Each theme is well-covered by courses

each year and

the faculty complement is well-distributed among these five themes, although

concern was expressed by one faculty member

that imminent and recent retirements were

jeopardizing the feminist/family field.

The courses are divided into three types: core courses

that are discipline specific (either

Sociology or Anthropology); a large number of interdisciplinary courses that can be designated

either Sociology or Anthropology depending on the student's program of study; and a smaller

group of courses deSignated either Sociology or Anthropology depending on the content of the

course and the discipline

of the instructor. On average, 49% of enrolments in the department

are in

interdisciplinary courses designated

'SA'

and taught by Sociology or Anthropology faculty,

34% are in courses designated '5', and

18%

are in courses designated

'A'.

The program is quite

streamlined

with clear choices for degree completion but with a fair degree of flexibility in

cou

rse options.

Over the past five years the Department has averaged

287

undergraduate majors

(182

in Sociology and

78

in Anthropology) and 146 minors (134 Sociology and 12 Anthropology). The

average undergraduate

enrolment in SA courses is

3800

students, indicating that the

Department plays a crucial role

as a service department for other programs. Teaching quality

appears to be good: teaching evaluations for the average instructor in lower division courses is

3.38 and at the upper division level it is

3.48.

---

2. Strengths

These facts tell only part of the tale. The Sociology and Anthropology undergraduate

programs

at SFU are very strong and very attractive for a number of reasons:

1. The Sociology and Anthropology programs allow for a large degree of interdisciplinary

cross-over between

two disciplines which are quite different in their methods and

objects

of research (though they share some areas of concern). The SA programs allow

students to gain considerable exposure to each discipline.

2. SA has jOint majors established with other departments including Archaeology, Art and

Culture Studies, Communication, Contemporary Arts, Criminology, Latin American

Studies, Linguistics, and Women's Studies.

Some of the undergraduate students we

talked

to cited these joint majors as part of the reason they chose SFU.

3. Class sizes have been kept small and intense with upper division courses capped at 30

students and 4 credit hours. This provides an intimate connection with instructors that

was lauded by the undergraduate students we met, as was their openness and

accessibility. Full-time

tenure and tenure-track instructors teach at all levels, further

exposing students to faculty involved in research.

4. The Department is strongly committed to SFU's goal of developing writing skills. Many

of their courses are designated as (W' courses and all of their courses, including larger

lower division courses, have sizeable writing components.

3. Community Based Learning and Co-op Education

One of the greatest strengths of the SA program is its emphasis on community based

learning. There are

two showcase courses dedicated to this form of education. One is a third

year survey design course (SA357) in which students work with community organizations that

need help designing and analyzing small-scale surveys. The second is SA 498 - Field Study in

Sociology

and/or Anthropology in which students are placed in NGOs and other community

organizations. Both of these courses are writing-intensive, teach transferrable professional skills

in report writing and presentation, survey skills, and networking skills. The fourth year course

has led to permanent and part-time employment for some students as well as attracting

superior undergraduates

to the SFU graduate program.

The Department also manages a co-op placement program

that has doubled in size over

the last decade

to 19 placements, which is a healthy number. There is some concern that the

current economic climate will impact on

the ability of the Department to find placements in the

future.

The Department's

commitment to experiential learning is strong and well established. It

would be the envy of other Canadian Sociology and Anthropology programs who are just trying

now

to develop this model of education. SA at SFU is clearly ahead of the curve, with a well-

---

developed set of contacts and procedures firmly in place. Undergraduate students love this

option, identifying

it as another factor that attracted them to SFU.

4. Concerns

This excellent undergraduate program is facing a number of challenges over the next 7

years.

1.

Enrolments have begun to decline for majors and minors in Sociology and

Anthropology. This decline

is in keeping with a drop in enrolment within FASS more

generally and indicates larger processes at work, including increasing competition

from university colleges and

other programs at SFU offering similar courses such as

Health Sciences. For Sociology and Anthropology, this problem is compounded by

the fact that the Be high school curriculum does not include sociology or

anthropology; high school graduates therefore enter university unfamiliar

with the

disciplines. The Department and the university would benefit from a more

aggressive and proactive high school and college recruitment strategy

that involves,

at the very least, sending faculty members into high schools

to talk to students

about sociology and anthropology, and providing a dedicated page on

the

departmental website for high school students - with attention-grabbing statements

about the disciplines and information on

how to enter the programs.

2. Because of the relatively small number of Anthropology faculty, students expressed

some concern about a lack

of undergraduate course options in Anthropology. They

wanted both more courses, especially at the

200 level, and more courses deSignated

'A' rather than '5' or 'SA'. Students commented that this absence keeps some

students from doing a

joint major in SA. In other words, there is a sense among the

students

that the Anthropology program needs more instructors and more courses.

3. Cross-listing should not be used as a substitute for disciplinary teaching: research

methods and

other components of a disciplinary core cannot be met through cross-

disciplinary courses.

The faculty member who

is responsible for teaching many of the quantitative methods courses

is leaving SFU. This will leave a significant gap in the faculty complement and it is urgent that he

be replaced. This Department focuses on qualitative methods, but familiarity with quantitative

methods

is a skill many future employers and graduate programs require, particularly in

sociology.

An absence of quantitative methods will also weaken the third and fourth year

community-based learning courses and several others. Sociology has developed its own unique

methods and

applications of statistics that are aimed at addressing the specific requirements of

social analYSis. To train students in how to apply statistical research to organizational and

community issues,

it is important that a sociologically trained instructor teach these courses.

5. Recommendations

7

---

1. The Department, with university support, should engage in more aggressive

recruiting strategies

to inform students about the disciplines of sociology and

anthropology

and about the strengths of the programs

at

SFU. These strategies

should include high school visits

and web site design.

2. The Department requires

a

replacement for its outgoing quantitative sociologist to

ensure

that its community based learning courses and quantitative methods courses

are adequately staffed.

The department also needs

to

hire

at

least one more

Anthropologist

to

enlarge the number and variety of courses and to compensate for

impending retirements in that discipline.

III: Graduate Studies

1. PhD:MA ratio

The Department maintains masters and doctoral programs in 2 disciplines. In the 2009-

2010

academic year there were 53 students in total: 17 MA and 16 PhD students in Sociology;

9

MA and 11 PhD students in Anthropology

The ratio

of PhD:MA students is 1:1 (16:17). Half of the graduate students, then, are

Ph.D. students. This is out of line with other Canadian universities where the ratio is typically

closer

to 1:3. Moreover, the rapid expansion has created a situation in which the doctoral

programs have

not been sufficiently disentangled from the masters programs (see next

section). The high proportion

of doctoral students is a severe challenge for the Department.

Doctoral students bring a set

of specific resource needs for: long-term funding; professional

development training; socialization in grant writing, conference participation, networking and

publishing; and intensive faculty supervision.

Unfortunately, this expansion

of the doctoral programs took place prior to the provinCial

government's decision to fund graduate students and prior to the university's strategic plan and

declared goal to increase graduate enrolment by

25%. The SA Department should not be

encouraged to further this disproportionate intake of PhD students simply to capture

government funding. Given the stresses the Department already faces in supervising and

funding its current graduate students

(see below), attrition and lengthy times-to-completion of

inadequately funded and supervised graduate students would be the result of any further

expansion.

2. Program Structure and Design

Following the last external review, in response to concerns expressed about retention

and times-to-completions rates,

the Department undertook a major restructuring of its

---

graduate programs implemented in 2007-08. The restructuring also aimed to facilitate growth

in student numbers

with no complementary increase in faculty.

The 2010 review team appreciates the goals animating the restructuring and lauds the

congenial and

collegial relations between faculty and students in the two disciplines - indeed,

we deeply admire the emotional labour and professionalism exhibited by

virtually all members

of the department who work daily to build and keep morale in the Department, something that

is sadly lacking in many other North American universities in the present climate. Overall, we

believe the structure of the programs works well for MA students, who were contented with

their experience and need the core theory courses and training in research design. The goal of

masters education is to introduce students to research. MA students typically do require more

structure and higher supervision.

However, the restructuring may be problematic for

PhD students. The goal of doctoral

studies

is to train researchers; PhD students are expected and required to undertake original

research and

to make an original contribution to scholarship. They need flexibility and

opportunities for autonomy alongside faculty mentoring. We found the experience

of the PhD

students we met to be much more varied than that of the MA students. Those PhD students

with adequate funding, supervision and research opportunities were satisfied with the

program. Other PhD students, however, described problems of unresponsive supervisors,

inadequate funding and rigidity in the program structure and offerings

that made it difficult to

combine jobs and families with grad studies.

Doctoral students are typically at the

age when many do have family responsibilities and these -

-

combined with the need of many to work because they are unfunded -- require greater

flexibility in the program

for PhD students. For example, PhD students asked why the doctoral

proposal must be

written within the

"shell"

of the Research Design course which is offered only

1

term/year (the summer term). Could it be possible for a high-achieving student with a

committed faculty supervisor

to develop their doctoral proposal with their supervisor (and

committee) during another term?

Some PhD students also lamented the attendance

requirement

for the Pro-Seminar saying that they had to leave children or take time off work to

attend and the content often did not warrant these logistics. We agree with the mandatory

attendance requirement,

but think that the PhD students need a Pro-Seminar separated from

MA students. We believe

their resentment of mandatory attendance there would disappear if

it was of clear use to them - perhaps combined with a Departmental Colloquium series (a

feature PhD students noted was lacking in the Dept) where PhD students and faculty members

present

their research at different stages of development. Another idea would be to schedule

the Pro-Seminar fortnightly rather than weekly

and/or turn the second half of it into a

workshop

for development of the doctoral research proposal.

Other issues the Department should discuss and consider include:

9

---

1) The preponderance of methods teaching: in addition to the methods course, SA 856,

methods also appear

to be taught in the Pro-Seminar and the Research Design course

and even in the

small number of elective courses.

2) The graduate theory courses, 849 and 879, are also taught to senior undergraduates and

appear

to duplicate courses that most PhD students should already have taken. They

should

not be required courses for doctoral students except as qualifying courses for

students admitted without sufficient background in theory.

3) There are few electives. PhD students need more opportunities to learn from faculty

members in structured contexts; and faculty members - especially

junior and

intermediate faculty - need opportunities

to teach their areas of expertise and current

research -

for morale, faculty retention and the intellectual vibrancy of Department life.

Currently, these are often taught as independent study courses - not an efficient use of

faculty labour. Furthermore, the Department advertises 5 interdisciplinary areas of

expertise. These attract graduate students who should be able to expect that elective

courses in these areas

will be offered during their tenure in the Department.

4) The methods needs

of anthropology PhD students may not be met by the

interdisciplinary teaching

of "qualitative methods" courses taken with all masters and

doctoral students in both disciplines.

S) The PhD students need to be distinguished from the masters and undergraduate

students and develop

their professional identities as PhD students. Sharing the Pro-

Seminar with masters students, and the theory and

other graduate courses not only

with masters students

but also with senior undergraduates makes it more likely that

they will lose interest or fail to develop the necessary initiative and discipline. These

may

be reflected in low retention and high TIC rates - the very problems the

restructuring set

out to address.

6) Several of the courses were described to us as "shell" courses that bring cohorts

together

for milestones (comprehensive exam preparation in SA 89; prospectus writing

in

SA8S7; grant writing in SA840/841). These restructuring efforts were designed to

guide students but also to "provide structure for faculty members" by requiring

students and

their supervisors to work together on the research prospectus during the

summer months {the annual research design course

is only offered in the summer

term},

IIShell" courses act as surrogates for the mentoring that ideally takes place in the

1:1 faculty supervisor: graduate student relationship. The review team fully

understands that the shell courses represent an attempt to address the problems posed

by the

low faculty: graduate student ratio combined with uneven loads and levels of

graduate supervision, but we are uneasy with so many of the required courses in the

program being directed

to this purpose - perhaps at the expense of courses organized

around intellectual content and goals.

7) The Department is making an admirable attempt to accept international students in

their PhD programs. This brings challenges - faced by all universities that have greater

"internationalization" in their strategic plans -for greater ESL, socialization and other

support services. This cannot be the sale responsibility of Departments - the

University's International

Centre needs a stronger focus on graduate student needs

)0

---

3. Graduate Supervision

As in most universities, supervisory responsibilities are not shared or evenly distributed

in the Department. There are many reasons

for this including the interests of students

themselves. However the

small proportion of anthropology: sociology faculty members (8:14)

means

that the supervisory load is especially heavy for anthropologists.

Research in graduate education in the social sciences indicates that the support of an

intellectually and personally engaged faculty supervisor and mentor is as important as funding

for graduate student success and timely completion. Faculty who do not train students in labs

or co-author publications with them need to make their graduate training activities visible.

Their supervisory labour - facilitating graduate student publication by reading and editing their

papers, organizing workshops and conference sessions for their students, providing hands-on

research training,

placing students in jobs and networks, helping them obtain grants and

awards -

is hard for administrators to see. This is particularly problematiC if, as at SFU, many of

the senior administration were schooled in a different intellectual mentoring tradition. The

University needs to develop ways to recognize the work of graduate supervision in social

science disciplines

specializing in qualitative and ethnographic methodologies. For its part,

faculty might consider a Department newsletter, Colloquium series, annual student conference,

"Research

Days", or other creative forms of visibility. The work involved in this would also need

to be visible, perhaps as a service responsibility of a departmental committee.

4. New Graduate Initiatives

The initiative to launch a new masters program in Public Anthropology is in part an

effort to formalize the Department's strength in qualitative, policy-oriented, community-based

learning - a strength that graduate students are clearly drawn to and that establishes Simon

Fraser as in the forefront in Canada. This is a current trend in anthropology in the U.S. but the

only other public anthropology program we are aware of in Canada is a new UWaterloo-Guelph

joint masters. This proposed program also nicely complements the character of Sociology at

SFU where qualitative/mixed methods prevail and policy research is exceptionally strong.

There are many advantages

to consolidating the Department's resources and strengths

in the new masters initiative. The Department is clear that, at the masters level, students "are

expected to understand both traditions and may be supervised by faculty from either

discipline" (p. 37). But there are risks: the idea has value, but if developed it may well mean

the end

of the traditional MA in Anthroplogy, since it is unlikely that the small number of

Anthropology faculty members will be able to sustain 2 masters programs as well as the very

ambitious

PhD program they already have; hiring and retaining new faculty whose areas of

strength are theory and cultural studies approaches may become more difficult (see section IV).

1 \

---

The Department needs to discuss this and be aware of the dangers as well as the advantages of

gOing in this direction.

5. Summary and Recommendations

1) The number of required courses should be reduced.

2) PhD students need more flexibility in their course options and timetables.

3) The Department might wish

to

examine whether

a

part-time graduate program would

be useful.

4) PhD courses should be separated from those for MA and senior undergraduates

5) More electives should be added. This would reduce the teaching of independent studies,

and offer more faculty the opportunity

to

teach in their fields of research.

6) The Pro-seminar should be redesigned

to

provide

a

context for more informal yet

structured engagement between faculty, doctoral and masters students. One possibility

would be

to

turn it into a Colloquium/Pro-Seminar, where students would be required

to

attend and write response papers

to

presentations by PhD students, who would present

their work at various stages of development, and faculty. Another is

to

make the Pro-

Seminar half professional development and half Departmental colloquium

-

this would

eliminate the need

to

establish

a

new colloquium which overworked faculty have no time

to

do.

7) Ensure that the current PhD students are looked after before adding new numbers

IV: Research

1. Quality and Quantity of Research

The Department's research foci fall in the same five interlinked, interdisciplinary areas

as its teaching - namely Globalization and Development; Health; Environment and Science;

Knowledge, Culture and Power; Social Justice, Policy, Law and Society; and Women, Gender and

Sexuality. The Department's strong interdisciplinarity is showcased by the fact that sociologists

and anthropologists are represented in each of these fields.

The quality and quantity of research programs undertaken by faculty in both Sociology

and Anthropology are excellent. Fifteen of a total of 25 faculty, plus 2 retired faculty (Adam and

McLaren) have ongoing

SSHRC, CURA or CIHR funding. This is an amazing record given the very

high rejection rates of these particular granting councils, and the fact that much of their

research is qualitative, which does not attract - or in some cases need -large research grants.

Moreover, since proposals to these agencies are vetted by peers, faculty research in SA is

obviously highly ranked by experts in their own fields, the most exacting critics of all. From

what we could tell from the documents we had access to, virtually all of the remaining 10

members of the Department have Workshop or conference grants, internal grants, or money

(Z

---

from other external sources. Most are also heavily involved in unfunded research projects,

outreach work

and/or other activist work in marginalized communities.

Overall research productivity is high. Faculty in SA are continually publishing a very

respectable number

of books (with solid academic publishers), book chapters, refereed articles

(in prestigious high-profile journals) and reports. Many

of the established faculty have national

and in some

cases international profiles; those who do not are generally new hires, at the start

of what look like very promising careers. While the cv's varied widely in transparency, breadth

and depth - the University might wish

to consider making it mandatory for faculty to submit

cv's in a universal

but user-friendly protocol analogous to the system used by the Ontario

Council

on Graduate Studies - there did not appear to be any "dead wood" (faculty members

doing no significant research

or contributing in an equivalent way to pedagogy and/or

administration). Even those who are not officially expected to do research, such as senior

lecturers, are writing, actively and constructively contributing

to public issues and scholarly

debates.

What this kind

of qualitative and ethnographic research does need, however, is time.

Many in

the Department commented on the potentially disastrous effects for their research of

SSHRC's abolition of the Research Time Stipend. Many sOciologists and most of the

anthropologists in this Department are doing research

that does not need huge grants,

expensive equipment

or a stable of research assistants. They need relatively small amounts of

money, but more than that they need teaching releases or their equivalent. We recommend

that the University consider the possibility of establishing annual or biennial internal

competitions

to provide release time to qualified applicants in the Social Science and

Humanities.

If the University wishes to retain its excellent national reputation in these fields,

such

an initiative may be critical. The University might also consider rewarding extraordinary

contributions

to pedagogy and/or to graduate student supervision with a separate or corollary

fund. This competition could

be open to all Faculties.

2. New and Emerging Areas

We were asked to comment on the possibility of new and emerging research areas in

the Department. While we would be cautious about new initiatives at a

time when existing

resources are both insufficient and under threat, department members are brimming

with

enthusiasm, initiative and ideas. As noted in section III, several anthropologists have proposed

to build on existing areas of strength - in fieldwork, community-based partiCipatory and action

research, in already

established collaborations with international NGOs, in domestic community

organizations and service agencies -

to establish a program in Experimental Ethnography and

ultimately

an Institute and graduate programs in Public Anthropology. Its initial goals are to

teach public and private sector groups (such as NGOs) the technological, creative and critical

13

---

intellectual skills they will need to communicate effectively with diverse audiences through

text, digital media, and creative forms. While such a proposal clearly has merit, its effects and

implications for new faculty, on workloads and on existing graduate and undergraduate

programs will need to be carefully assessed and broadly debated before further action is taken.

3. Recommendations

1. We recommend that the University consider the possibility of establishing annual or biennial

internal competitions

to

provide release time

to

qualified applicants in the Social Science and

Humanities.

If the University wishes

to

retain its excellent national reputation in these fields,

such an initiative

may be critical. The University might also consider rewarding extraordinary

contributions to pedagogy

and/or

to

graduate student supervision with

a

separate

or

corollary

fund.

This competition could be open

to

all Faculties.

2. If any new programs are initiated, their effects and implications for new faculty, on workloads

and on existing graduate

and undergraduate programs should be carefully assessed and broadly

debated.

V: Faculty Renewal, Retention and Succession

The Sociology and Anthropology Department faces strong challenges in the near future

in terms of renewal and retention of faculty. Since its last external review in 2003, the

department has lost 9.0 CFL FTE's and added 9.S CFL FTE's. Although these numbers look

balanced, many faculty are cross-appointed or half time: four are jointly appointed with other

academic units (Gerontology, first Nations, Political Science and Women's Studies); many are

also Associate members of other programs and centres in the University, particularly Latin

American Studies which is administered by SA staff. Therefore, while student numbers have

grown, actual FTE's have not increased. At present the Department, while hard-pressed, seems

to be handling the increased workload quite well. Its ability to do so in the future, however,

may be compromised due to its demographic profile. Over the next three years, seven faculty

members, a full one-third of the faculty complement, will reach or exceed normal retirement

age. If these people retire - and statistically most faculty stay on only two or three years after

the age of 65 - they do so in an environment where replacements may not be forthcoming. It is

essential that the university develop a plan to keep this Department at or near its present

faculty complement.

The Department may also face difficulties in retaining some of its new hires. While

departmental morale overall is quite high, due to its democratic decision-making processes and

strong leadership, some feel there is there is limited intellectual community. The problem is

two-fold. First, due to the absence of consistent and long-term funding for graduate students,

some newer faculty fear that the very strongest graduate applicants in their areas of research

{'-(

---

will chose universities that offer superior financial packages. Second, there is little of the kind of

intellectual life one typically expects in departments with doctoral programs - few colloquia,

works-in-progress seminars

or guest speakers, few events organized by the graduate students.

This

is exacerbated by geography - the curse of a commuter university with multiple campuses

- and scarce resources: the Department lacks

either the funds or the will to organize a regular

program of workshops, conferences, colloquia, and visiting scholar presentations. Faculty meet

as a group only at departmental meetings, which provide few opportunities for newcomers to

develop either insight into the intellectual and research interests of their colleagues, or a sense

of community and belonging to the Department as a whole. More senior faculty, most of whom

are well integrated into their particular niche, do not seem to realize this is a problem, and/or

they are too heavily loaded to spare the time to organize academic (or social) events. This

difference in perspective suggests a worrying generational gap

that the Department should

examine more closely.

Recommendations

1. It is crucial that the Department be permitted to replace some if not all of those who

retire.

This is especially crucial jor the viability of the Anthrop%gy program.

2. The Department should evaluate the level of intellectual engagement occurring at

the departmental/evel. Presentation oj graduate student and faculty research should

be encouraged along with departmentally sponsored workshops, colloquia, guest

speakers, and conferences.

This is a matter of faculty retention as well as

departmental morale.

VI: Departmental Governance

There are few

if any problems with the governance of the Department of Sociology and

Anthropology.

On the contrary, it is a model of how to maintain coherence and collegiality

within a university unit. Although there is some lack of cohesion, especially among newer

faculty (see section V), the Department has very high morale overall, with no major issues of

contention among its members, both faculty and staff. This is due to the Department's

leadership and its commitment to a democratic, consensus-based form of decision-making. A

number of faculty members spoke to us about the importance of nourishing and retaining this

mode

of governance, showing a strong allegiance to the democratic decision-making

procedures the Department has adopted despite the

time and effort required. This

commitment is reinforced and fostered by the current chair, who is highly regarded by all

members

of the faculty who spoke to us.

Another important aspect of the coherence and consensus of the Department is a

strong sense

of respect between the sociologists and anthropologists. There has apparently

---

been a merging of the two disciplines such that the Department is not divided into competing

factions.

Such an accomplishment has major benefits for departmental administration and for

streamlining course offerings, however too much willingness to compromise can lead to a

certain absence

of disciplinary specificity for students wishing to specialize in one discipline or

the other (see section II).

We were surprised, however, at the relative lack of integration of one of the

Departmenfs potentially best assets, the Canada Research Chair in Community Culture and

Health. Part

of the problem is geographic, since the nature of the Chair's research demands

that she work primarily out of the downtown campus. However, the Department has made less

use of her - on committees, in teaching and governance, than it could and should. A

departmental

Colloquium, previously recommended, would help make her research more

visible

to SA faculty and to those graduate students not studying with her, as would

membership on strategic committees. Another idea would

be to have her teach an elective,

regularly scheduled graduate course in her research area.

VII: Staff

The Department of Sociology and Anthropology has 3.5 FTE staff, a Department

Manager

who also serves as Undergraduate Advisor, a Secretary to the Chair of

Sociology/Anthropology and the Director of Latin American Studies, a Secretary to the

Graduate Program Chair in both SA and LAS, and a General Office Secretary. Members of staff

appear dedicated

to the Department, and human relations are generally good among staff

members themselves, and between staff and faculty.

However, University cutbacks,

offloading of administrative tasks, and increased student

numbers have dramatically increased workloads and staff stress. There have been particular

problems in the Graduate Studies program since the retirement

of the unit's long-time

graduate administrator - threats

that the position would be reduced to half-time and problems

arising

from the loss of large chunks of the unit's institutional memory. A full-time Graduate

Secretary

is essential. Staff in SA are responsible for a number of different programs, each with

distinct individual specificities: undergraduate studies in Sociology and Anthropology, graduate

studies (MA and

PhD) in Sociology and Anthropology, and the Latin American Studies program.

Given

all of this, the University should consider adding a half time undergraduate advisor to

take some of the weight off the Department Manager.

There are also issues

of space. Staff have no dedicated space for lunch or breaks. This is

particularly important for the General Office Secretary who must eat her lunch in her office, a

high

traffic area which houses the Department's photocopying and fax machines. While her

position requires her

to be the "face of the Department", the receptionist who answers general

lie;

---

questions and refers people elsewhere, it does not require her to be on duty during lunch and

breaks. A staff room and rotating lunch hours should be considered.

Summary

1. The University should consider adding

a

halftime undergraduate advisor.

2. The University should consider remodelling

or

renovating existing space

to

establish a

room

for staff The Department should consider the virtues of rotating lunch hours for

staff.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDA TlONS

Undergraduate Studies

1. The Department, with university support, should engage in more aggressive

recruiting strategies

to

inform students about the disciplines of sociology and

anthropology

and about the strengths of the programs at SFU. These strategies

should include high school visits and web site design.

2. The Department requires a replacement for its outgoing quantitative sociologist to

ensure

that its community based learning courses and quantitative methods courses

are adequately staffed.

The Department also needs

to

hire

at

least one more

Anthropologist

to enlarge the number and variety of courses and

to

compensate for

impending retirements in that discipline.

Graduate Studies

3. The number of required courses should be reduced.

4. PhD students need more flexibility in their course options and timetables.

5. The Department might wish

to

examine whether a part-time graduate program

would be useful.

6. PhD courses should be separated from those for MA and senior undergraduates

7. More electives should be added. This would reduce the teaching of independent

studies, and

offer more faculty the opportunity to teach in their fields of research.

8. The Pro-seminar should be redesigned to provide

a

context for more informal yet

structured engagement between faculty, doctoral and masters students. One

possibility would be

to

turn it into a Colloquium/Pro-Seminar, where students would

be required

to

attend and write response papers

to

presentations by PhD students,

who would present their work

at various stages of development, and faculty.

Another

is to make the Pro-Seminar half professional development and half

Departmental colloquium

-

this would eliminate the need to establish

a

new

colloquium which overworked faculty have no time

to

do.

9. Ensure that the current PhD students are looked after before adding new numbers

Research

{?

---

10. We recommend that the University consider the possibility of establishing annual or

biennial internal competitions

to

provide release time

to

qualified applicants in the

Social Science

and Humanities. If the University wishes

to

retain its excellent national

reputation in these fields, such an initiative may be critical.

The University might also

consider rewarding extraordinary contributions

to

pedagogy and/or

to

graduate

student supervision with

a

separate

or

corollary fund. This competition could be open

to

all Faculties.

11.

If any new programs are initiated, their effects and implications for new faculty, on

workloads and on existing graduate and undergraduate programs should be

carefully assessed

and broadly debated.

Faculty Retention and Succession

Staff

12. It is crucial that the Department be permitted

to

replace some if not all of those who

retire.

This is especially crucial for the viability of the Anthropology program.

13.

The Department should evaluate the level of intellectual engagement occurring

at

the departmental level. Presentation of graduate student and faculty research should

be encouraged along

with departmentally sponsored workshops, colloquia, guest

speakers, and conferences.

This is

a

matter of faculty retention as well as

departmental morale.

14.

The University should consider adding

a

half time undergraduate advisor.

15.

The University should consider remodelling

or

renovating existing space to establish

a room

for staff. The Department should consider the virtues of rotating lunch hours

for staff.

Overall the Sociology and Anthropology department at SFU is functioning very well. It

has a superb undergraduate program, much more interdiSciplinary and writing-intensive than

most; a productive faculty, many with national and international reputations; and a level

of

collegiality, cooperativeness and generosity of spirit that would serve as a model for

departments across Canada. Its graduate programs, particularly the PhD, are experiencing

growing pains resulting from a

level of expansion that leapt ahead of funding and faculty

resources, coinciding

as it did with cutbacks and loss of faculty (primarily positions left vacant

by retirements).

It also faces challenges with space and faculty retention. Indeed, it will be

unable to offer an adequate range of courses in the two disciplines if its present faculty

complement

is not at the very least maintained.

fa

---

EXTERNAL REVIEW - ACTION PLAN

Section 1- To be completed by the Responsible Unit Person e.g. Chair or Director

Unit under review

Date

of Review Site visit

Responsible Unit person,

Faculty Dean

Sociology and Anthropology

March

24-262010

Dr. Jane Pulkingham (Chair)

Dr. lesley Cormack

Note: It is not expected that every recommendation made by the Review Team needs

to

be included here. The major thrusts of the Report should be

identified and some consolidation

of the recommendations may be possible while other recommendations of lesser importance may be excluded.

External Review

Recommendation

Undergraduate studies

Recommendation:

#

1

The reviewers assess the

Socio logy / Anth ropo logy

undergraduate program

as

"superb,"

and "much more

interdisciplinary and writing-

intensive than most." The

reviewers also note

that in some

respects,

for example,

experiential/field learning,

the

department is "clearly ahead of the

curve" and

lithe

envy of other

Sociology and Anthropology

programs."

The reviewers recommend that

with university support, the

department should more widely

and actively communicate the

strengths of its programs at the

Unit's response notes/Comments

(if any)

The department is very pleased with

the assessment which confirms our

strength and distinctive contribution in

the area

of undergraduate education

and training, in particular,

in the areas

of interdisciplinary teaching,

writing/critical thinking centred

curriculum, and experiential learning.

We

look forward to developing these

strengths

to meet the needs of the

new generation

of students SFU will

see as a result of the reallocation of

Provincial funds to the former colleges

and the recruitment of international

students. Both

of these areas require

additional resources

as SFU

recalibrates its transfer programs and

adapts

to the language support needs

of ESl students.

Action to be taken

1. In collaboration with University

planning bodies,

the department

will continue

to develop forward-

looking curriculum, in particular,

with attention to the new types of

students entering the university.

2. In consultation with the Assistant

Dean

of FASS, and the Associate

Dean

of FASS responsible for

student recruitment, the

Department UCC will review

options

for department outreach

at high schools and colleges, and

develop

an action plan accordingly,

to complement university and

faculty-level

recruitment

initiatives.

3. The Chair of the Department in

consultation with the GPC, UCC,

Resource

Expected

implications

completi

(if

any)

on date

Potential release

for faculty

working on

relevant

development

committees.

Potential course

Fall

2011

release for

faculty who

engage in

outreach

initiatives.

Potential

0.5

Staff pOSition

Fall 2011

1

---

N

o

undergraduate level through more

aggressive recruiting strategies

directed

to high school students

(visitsL and through the web.

Faculty succession in Sociology

and Anthropology respectively.

Recommendations:

# 2

&

12

The reviewers note the excellence

of our unit on many levels; at the

same time they underscore the

urgency of replacing certain

positions (lost due to

retirements/resignation) in terms

of the ongoing/future viability of

the department.

Specifically, the reviewers identify

(1) the precarious position of the

Anthropology program and the

With the appropriate university

support,

we welcome the opportunity

to be more proactive in

communicating

our strengths to

potential future students through

more aggressive student recruitment

initiatives.

The

department is appreciative of the

reviewers' determination that

Sociology/Anthropology is an

II

excellent" unit that functions very

well, emphasizing in particular

the

strengths, attractiveness and

distinctiveness

of our programming at

the undergraduate level, its synergistic

and

efficient interdisciplinary

programming

at the undergraduate

and graduate levels,

the productivity of

our faculty (many with national and

Department Manager, will review

current staffing functions, staffing

functions across units in FASS and

the university, to consider

alternate ways of organizing staff

support for department activities

directed at (undergraduate)

student recruitment and support

(e.g., communications/recruitment

officer; undergraduate advisor).

4.

The UCC, in consultation with the

Consulting/de-

Fall 2011

Chair and Department as a whole,

sign fees

will review options for revamping

associated

with

web content and design directed

website re-

at undergraduate student

design. (Amount

recruitment, and make

to be

recommendations to the

determined)'

department.

1.

The department will make a

1.0 CFL tenure

Fall 2011

request for a 1.0 eFL position in

track position in

Anthropology, to commence in

Anthropology at

Fall 2011. [Anthropologist with

the Assistant

---

interdisciplinary experiential

international reputations), and the

scholarly interests in community-

Professor level

learning dimension of the

collegial, cooperative and generous

based experiential learning, and

curriculum for Sociology and

spirit in which faculty self-govern.

community-based research,

Anthropology, because of the

focusing on issues such as urban

recent retirement of Marilyn Gates

The department concurs with the

social justice, new communication

(urban & environmental

reviewers' assessment of the serious

technologies, and/or environment

anthropology, development and

jeopardy to the unit of recent

and society.]

experiential learning) and

retirements and an impending

(2) the critical loss to the Sociology

resignation. In the past two years, the

2.

The department will make a

1.0 eFl tenure

Spring

program due to the impending

department has lost 3 positions to

request for a 1.0 CFl position in

track position in

2012

resignation of Fernando De Maio

retirement/modified contract, 2 in

Sociology, to commence in

Sociology at the

(inequality and health, medical

Sociology and 1.0 in Anthropology;

January 2012. [Sociologist with a

Assistant

sociology, quantitative sociological

during this time, the department has

primary scholarly interest in social

Professor level

methodology), the only full-time

gained the equivalent of a 1.2 eFL

inequality and health or medical

sociology faculty member qualified

pOSition (including the very recent

sociology in general, with

to teach quantitative sociological

conversion of the eRe from a 0.5 to a

advanced quantitative skills, and

methods at both the

1.0 eFL position).

with a strong secondary interest in

undergraduate and graduate levels.

one or more of the department's

By the fall of 2011, the department will

thematic areas of specialization:

The reviewers also note that as the

lose a further 1.5 eFL positions in

globalization

&

development;

-

department faces a significant

Sociology due to resignation (1.0 eFL

health, science

&

environment;

retirement "bulge" in the next 3- 5

position) and retirement (0.5 eFL

knowledge, culture and power;

years, retirement replacement will

position).

The net loss of

3.3

eFL

social justice, policy, law

&

society;

continue to be

a

critical concern.

positions creates a significant gap in

women, gender & sexuality.}

faculty complement.

The department concurs with the

reviewers that the faculty complement

should remain at its current level, and

at the very least in the immediate

term

l

two losses should be replaced

without which the ability of the

department to maintain the necessary

curriculum will be fundamentally

jeopardized.

---

N

N

Graduate studies.

Recommendations:

# 3 -9

inclusive

&#13

The reviewers note the "growing

pains" the department is

experiencing as a result of the level

of expansion of the PhD program

recently, relative

to the availability

of graduate student funding and

faculty resources.

The reviewers identify a

number of

areas the department should

address

at the graduate level

pertaining

to the number and kind

of course offerings, course

requirements, forum

for

intellectual exchange at the unit

level, and graduate student

support. The reviewers

recommend a slower pace

of

growth, especially at the PhD level,

into the future.

The

department recognizes the

additional strains placed upon the unit

as a result of the overall growth in the

graduate program, and shift toward

PhD admissions.

Having restructured

the program in

response to the 2003 external review,

and in the context

of SFU graduate

education

priority mandates, the

department will soon have completed

the implementation of our new PhD

curriculum structure. We have now

also achieved the goal of increasing the

number of PhD students, and have

already leveled

off 2010 admissions to

this program. We will conduct a

general evaluation

of the recently

implemented curriculum in

2011-2012,

with attention to the areas identified

in

the current external review, and in

particular

with an eye to rebalancing

the ratio of MA/PhD admissions.

As members of a variety of other SFU

programs and centres (e.g., the Centre

for Political Global Economy, the Latin

I American Studies Program, Gender,

Sexuality and Women's Studies,

l. In consultation with faculty, and in Cost to the

Spring

planning and assigning teaching

undergraduate

2011

duties, the Chair of the

program through

Department will redirect faculty

a small reduction

teaching resources to the graduate in the number of

program level in order to ensure

undergraduate

that more regularly scheduled (non

course offerings

Directed Readings) elective courses

are offered on a regular rather

than episodic basis. These will be

organized around

the five key

thematic areas of

research/teaching strength

identified in

the Department's

External Review Self-Report and

current Three Year Plan, as well as

annual graduate admissions.

2.

In addition, the chair of the

No cost: may

Fall

2010

department will actively work with

create savings

other cognate disciplines, and

other units with

sociology/anthropology faculty, to

explore opportunities for

synergetic cross-listing of graduate

courses.

3.

After two PhD cohorts have fully

No cost

Fall 2011-

completed the coursework

Summer

associated

with the first two years

2012

---

Gerontology, Political Science, First

plus one term

of the program, the

Nations},

as well as other research

GPC, in consultation with

networks based at SFU and other

Department constituents, will

universities, individual faculty

undertake a review the current

members are very active in scholarly

graduate program at the

MA and

exchange; in recent years, these

PhD levels, focusing on the latter in

activities have been undertaken in lieu

particular,

to identify ways to

of a formal unit-level forum for

strengthen the program and

intellectual exchange. This form

of

address areas of concern.

intellectual exchange makes

it more

challenging

for graduate students as a

4.

The department will reinstitute a

Dedicated

Fall 2010

whole to identify a locus for engaging

unit level seminar for intellectual

portion

of

in disciplinary intellectual exchange

exchange,

to be held once per

department

with

SA faculty, as well as other

month,

as part of the regular

annual operating

students in the program.

graduate pro-dev seminar.

budget (Amount

to be

determined).

Research

Fall 2010

Recommendation:

#

10

&

11

The reviewers underscore the

The department

is very proud of the

excellence of the quality and

reviewers' endorsement

of the high

quantity

of the research programs

quality, volume, and integration

of SA

undertaken by faculty in both

faculty research productivity, work

disciplines in the department, and

accomplished by a fully engaged

the

"amazing" record of peer

complement

of the whole faculty

reviewed research funding.

rather than by a

smaller subset. The

highly competitive funding track

1. The Chair will initiate discussions

Dedicated

Fall 2010

The reviewers are concerned,

record, and quality

of publication

at the level of FASS and the VP

funding: amount

however,

that the university's

venues

has positioned the department

Research regarding institutional

to be

excellent national reputation in the as a national and international leader

mechanisms for supporting

determined

fields

of sociology and

in several areas

of study.

intensive research efforts on the

pending

anthropology (and sub-disciplinary

part

of individual faculty through,

approval and

areas) will

be jeopardized now that

for example, the development of a

im plementation

\

---

SSHRC (the major funder of SA

university level funding

of the proposal.

faculty research), and the

competition

that provides stipends

university

is no longer in the

for teaching release for research

business

of cost-shared funding of

purposes. A portion of CTEF funds

teaching release

(RTS) for most of

might be dedicated to such an

its research awards.

initiative.

The reviewers urge SFU to

continue to direct resources to

support intensive research efforts

on the part of faculty by developing

a university level funding

competition

to support teaching

release for research purposes.

The reviewers' recommend that

There are a number of innovative

any new

initiatives by way of

research/teaching initiatives SA faculty

research

and/or programmatic

members have begun

to explore

innovations that

will require

including targeted international

department and/or university

teaching/research exchanges, a

Centre

resources, be debated broadly and

for Experimental Ethnography, and an

deliberated carefully before action

Institute for Public Anthropology.

is taken, given resource

These initiatives are at the preliminary

constraints.

"ideas"

stage only and will be pursued

with due caution and diligence,

with

careful attention to their faculty and

programmatic resource implications.

Staff

Recommendations:

# 14

&

15

The reviewers note the dramatic

The department

is one of the more

1. As indicated above, the Chair of the

0.5 Staff position

Fall 2011

increase in workload and stress

efficient, and understaffed, units in

Department in consultation

with the

associated with two staffing

FASS, especially when factoring into

GPC,

UCC,

Department Manager, will

functions-

that of the department

the staffing function equation (which

review current staffing functions,

---

manager and the graduate

IRP data does not) administrative

staffing functions across units in FASS

program secretary - because of

responsibility for the latin American

and the university, to consider

staffing cutbacks, administrative

Studies Program that operates both

alternate ways of organizing staff

downloading, and rising student

undergraduate and graduate degree

support for department activities

numbers.

programs.

directed at (undergraduate) student

recruitment and support, paying

The reviewers recommend that

Since the external review site visit, the

particular attention to redistributing

1}

the graduate secretary position

graduate program secretary position

the current support functions

be returned to full-time (having was increased from part-to full-time

performed by the department

been reduced to a half-time

status, and the department has

manager, perhaps by creating a part-

position during the period of

recently appointed a new person to

time 0.5 undergraduate advisor

the hiring freeze), and

this position. The department is

position.

2) the department manager be

relieved to be able to have a full-time

relieved of one area of her

staff person performing this important

duties, that of undergraduate

support function and we are very

adviSing, by creating a separate pleased with the recent hire.

O.S position dedicated to

undergraduate advising.

The manager's role continues to be

over-laden.

The above action plan has been considered by the Unit under review and has been discussed and agreed to by the Dean.

Date

Title.f.Y..cf£.ss9Y::.

....

::±.C

..

~~.z.1.~

~\l'\'M~'

...

=:l.

:z.91.~

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

.

---

Section 2 - Dean's comments and endorsement of the Action Plan:

I am delighted to read such a strong external review of an excellent department. In the areas of collegiality and governance} research productivity, and

innovative teaching, particularly, the external reviewers have drawn

our attention to the major strengths of this department.

With regards

to the recommendations listed above:

1. FASS has already begun to work with recruitment in Student Services to ensure that FASS programs receive appropriate recognition. We would be

pleased

to work with SA to develop options for outreach that they might undertake.

2. Staffing and faculty positions. All departments and schools in FASS have lean staffing levels; SA is no exception. FASS worked with SA this year to

reinstate a lost .5 position in the area of the graduate secretary. It is unlikely that there will be further increases to SA staffing in the immediate future.

In terms of faculty positions, the arguments made by the external reviewers and reiterated by the Department are valid.

+Anthropology, particularly,

has a heavy load as the much smaller portion of the Department and the loss of Dr. De Maio to the Sociology program will

be Significant, since he was responsible for required quantitative sociology courses. We are therefore sympathetic to the request for these two

positions. Unfortunately, for the next three or four years, FASS may have to surrender all or most of the positions vacated through retirement just to

make the anticipated cuts to budget. I would anticipate that Dr. De Maio's position will have a high priority in a faculty renewal plan, but it is not clear

that there will

be any positions funded in that plan.

3. Graduate students. The recommendations of the external review team are thoughtful and I would leave it to the department to work through them,

as they appear to be doing.

4. Research. FASS has just inaugurated the Shadbolt Fe"owship program, which will give up to 3 faculty members teaching release for a year in order

to concentrate on their research. This responds in part to the issue about the end of RTS from SSHRC. As well, FASS would be happy to work with SA

on a proposal for some central funds that might help researchers find the time they need to complete research.

---

.

;~

i

'-..!

~

---.L

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

:

.J E

~VI