S.12-142

SFU

OFFICE OF Till- VICE-PRESIDENT, ACADEMIC AND PROVOST

University Drive, Burnaby, BC

Canada \'5A 1S6

TH1.: 778.782.3925

FAX: 778.782.5876

vpacatl@sfu.ca

www.sfu.ca/vpacademic

MEMORANDUM

attention

Senate

DATE

September 12,2012

FROM

Jon Driver, Vice-President, Academic and

PAGES

1/1

Provost, and Chair, SCUP

RE:

Faculty of Communication, Art and Technology: External Review of the

Communication (SCUP 12-31)

At its September 5, 2012 meeting SCUP reviewed and approved the ^ctioq Plan for the School for the

Communication that resulted from its External Review.

Motion:

That Senate approve the Action Plan for the School for the Communication that resulted from its External

Review.

end.

A. Beale

C. Geisler

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

ENGAGING THE WORLD

SFU

SCUP 12-31

OI-TICl- OPTTIE VICE-PRESIDENT, ACADEMIC AND PROVOST

8888 University Drive, Bumaby, BC

TEL 778.782.6702

gokho11@sfu.ai

Canada VSA 1S6

I:AX: 778.782.5876

www.sfb.ca/vpftcademic

MEMORANDUM

attention

Jon Driver, Chair, SCUP

date

August 23, 2012

FROM

Bill Kranc, Associate Vice-President,

pages

1/1

Academic and Associate Provost

RE:

External Review of the School ofCommunication

I /Js

Attached are the External Review Report on the School of Communication and the Action Plan endorsed

by the School and the Dean.

Motion:

That SCUP approve and recommend to Senate the Action Plan for the School of

Communication that resulted from its External Review.

Following the site visit, the Report of the External Review Team* for the School of Communication was

submitted in April 2012.

After the Report was received, a meeting was held with the Dean, Faculty of Communication, Art and

Technology, the Director of the School of Communication, and the Director of Academic Planning and

Budgeting (VPA) to consider the recommendations. The School then preparedan Action Plan based on the

Report and these discussions. The Action plan was then submitted to the Dean who endorsed it.

The Reviewers commented that "The School of Communication at Simon Fraser University is a well-

established, intellectually innovative center for communication research and teaching. The School boasts

internationally renowned scholars in the areas

of political economy/policy and in technology and society".

The Reviewers made a number

of recommendations covering the agreed Terms of Reference.

SCUP recommends to Senate that

the School of Communication be advised to pursue the Action Plan.

Attachments:

1. External Rev iewReport-Apri12012

2. School of Communication - Action Plan

* External Review Team:

Dr. Vincent Mosco (Chair), Queen's University

Dr. Lisa Henderson, University of Massachusetts, Amherst

Dr. Leah Lievrouw, University of California, Los Angeles

Dr. Marjorie Cohen (Internal), Simon Fraser University

Cheryl Geisler, Dean, Faculty

of Communication, Art and Technology

Alison Beale, Director, School of Communication

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

ENGAGING THE WORLD

Report of the External Review Committee for the School of Communication at

Simon Fraser University

Submitted to:

Dr. Glynn Nicholls, Director, Academic Planning & Budgeting, Simon Fraser University

Submitted by:

Dr. Vincent Mosco (Chair), Emeritus Professor of Sociology, Queen's University

Dr. Lisa Henderson, Professor of Communication, University of Massachusetts, Amherst

Dr. Leah Lievrouw, Professor of Information Studies, UCLA

April 12,2012

Executive Summary

The School of Communication at Simon Fraser University is a well-established,

intellectually innovative center for communication research and teaching. The School has

internationally recognized strengths in the areas ofpolitical economy/policy and in

technology and society, as well as burgeoningrecognition in cultural studies and

particularly in feminist scholarship. In additionto a number of renowned scholars, the

School has a committed group ofjunior faculty, including new hires, and an equally

dedicated staff ofadministrators, advisers, and technicians for its academic and co-op

programs. The appointment ofa new Director, alongwith the organizational move into a

new Facultyof Communication, Art and Technology and the physicalrelocation into

much-improved facilities havebrought a renewed sense of optimism. In addition, the

School can be proud of its community engagement in Vancouver and across the province,

as well as a strong commitmentto international researchand teaching, most recently in

Asia. Alongside its large undergraduate and co-op program,the School includes a

substantial graduate program with a strongcohort

ofdoctoral students.

These strengths provide the School witha good foundation to takeup a number of

difficultchallenges. Foremostamongthese is the need to address unsustainable

enrolment growth and, relatedly, to make a number of curriculum reforms. Enrolment

expansion at all levels,but especially at the undergraduate level,threatensto undermine

the quality of all of the School'sprograms. We recommend an immediate commitment to

add two full-time positions to the facultycomplement. Even with this, much more needs

to be done to address enrolment and curriculum issues. We recommend curriculum

revisions that would better balance the academic and the professional dimensions of

communication. In addition, the School needs to create measures that track qualitative as

well as quantitative performance and better measure long-term program performance.

Moreover, the School needs to strengthen the undergraduate Honours program, establish

a higher GPA "gate" for admission to the major, and implement enrolment targets at both

the undergraduate and graduate levels commensurate with the School's commitment to

educational excellence. The School also requires a better balance between research and

teaching. Like research, teaching needs to be recognized as the responsibility of all

faculty at all levels

ofthe program. Furthermore, the Schoolneeds to improve its use of

technology throughout the program, including how it manages the program and presents

itselfto students and to its wider community. The School would also benefit by

addressing problems in its climate or culture. These includemalaiseamong senior

faculty, the perception of gender exclusion, and fears about the abilityto sustain the

School'srecent

progress. Finally, the School needs to do a betterjob of planning for the

future.

These are substantialchallengesbut we are confident that the School has the ability to

address them with intelligence and creativity.

Introduction

This is the report of the External Review Committee for the School of Communication at

Simon FraserUniversity. The Committee was comprised of Dr. Vincent Mosco, Chair,

Emeritus Professor of Sociology, Queen's University; Dr. Lisa Henderson, Professor of

Communication, University of Massachusetts, Amherst; and Dr. Leah Lievrouw,

Professor of Information Studies, UCLA. Dr. Marjorie Cohen, Professor of Political

Science at SFU served as an internal member of the Committee for the duration of its site

visit and the Committee is very grateful for her generous assistance throughout the

process.

The Committee was constituted in the fall 2011 and was provided with documents to

review about the School

of Communication, the Faculty of Communication, Art and

Technology, and Simon Fraser University about one month before members visited the

University. The site visit took place from February 21-25, 2012. The Committee met for

the first time on the evening of February 21 to get acquainted and discuss its itinerary and

terms of reference. From February 22-24 it met with faculty, undergraduate and graduate

students, and administrators in the School and in various administrative units at SFU. The

Committee provided preliminary impressions from the site visit to the Director of the

School and then to a group

of senior administrators on February 24. On February 25 the

Committee met to discuss it findings and plan this written report.

Strengths

The School of Communication at Simon Fraser University is a well-established,

intellectually innovative center for communication research and teaching. The School

boasts internationally renowned scholars in the areas of political economy/policy and in

technology and society. The former include particular expertise in the study of media

corporations, government policy-making (including cultural policy formation), media and

social movements, media democracy, and international communication. Moreover, the

School has considerable strength in both the conceptual understanding of the relationship

between technology and society and in the empirical study

of technology, especially in

the areas

of health and science. The School has burgeoning strengths in cultural studies

and particularly in feminist scholarship. The combination

of seasoned scholars and new

hires has the potential to turn this area into a field of international recognition.

One of the particularly positive signs for the School has been the ability to make a

number of important and successful hires at the junior level. It is clear that it has not had

the resources to hire sufficiently to replenish its complement, particularly in light

of the

significant growth in undergraduate enrolment. However, new

and more seasoned junior

faculty have been a source of considerable strength and continuity in each of the School's

primary areas of specialization. The School also appears to have a strong tutorial system

that brings together teaching assistants and undergraduates.

The School has a tradition of research relationships beyond Canada, particularly with

scholars and policy makers in the United States. It has recently established a strong base

ofinternational commitments, notably in Asia. Foremost among them is the

establishment of a joint graduate program with the Communication University ofChina

(CUC) in Beijing. More than an exchange of graduate students, the programwill enable

participants to pursue a rigorous joint degree mat is sureto enrich SFU's already strong

MA in Communication Studies. The CUC is one ofthe foremost communication studies

programs in China and sufficient preparation is underway to build on the joint teaching

program with research collaborations. Since the programhas only just been approved, it

is important to closely monitor its development. In addition to this program, the School

has taken advantage

ofanother faculty appointment to expand its research profile into

Korea, a major centre for communication research in Asia.

From our observations, the School has a dedicated staff of administrators, advisers, and

technicians for its academic and co-op programs. Consideringthe sheer number of

undergraduate majors (roughly 1300) co-op participants (about 350) and graduate

students (over 80), it is remarkable that the program manageswith its limited number

staff. It is evidence of everyone's hard work and commitment but one wonders for how

long the staff can manage without additional personnel.

Although precise data are not available, interviews and knowledge ofuniversityprograms

in Canada provide evidence thatPhD program graduates find positions in distinguished

academic programs and in academic leadership roles across Canada.

We observed a strong

espritde corps

among junior andrecently-tenured faculty who

have taken on the

challenge of leading key committees, initiating reforms in the School's

decision-making processes, and managing undergraduate courses whose enrolments have

increased substantially in recent years. This is especially the case among core

undergraduate courses, but it canbe observed throughout the curriculum. It is particularly

positive to note the commitmentofjunior and recently tenured faculty to the

responsibilities of collaborative governance. Thisis especially evident in the

undergraduate program committeebut canalso be observed in the graduate program

committee.

The appointment ofa new Director has introduced a climate of possibility in the School.

Specifically, although concerns remain about the process of succession, mere is a general

feeling in the School, especially among newly appointed and recently tenured faculty,

that there is a renewedandmuch-neededcommitment to transparent processes, collegial

governance, and gender equity.

Althoughthe Committee did not have opportunities to talk to many undergraduates,

interviews with undergraduate leaders, faculty, and staff associated with the program

suggest that undergraduates have a solid affinity withone another and withthe program.

While they would like to see amore applied communication focus intheundergraduate

curriculum, there is an appreciation ofthequality of teaching, particularly in the areas of

program concentration: media culture, technology and society, and political

economy/policy.

A key reason cited for general undergraduate satisfaction is a well-managedco-op

program. Withparticipation from aboutthirtypercent of majors, the co-opprogram

placesstudents in paid positions in jobs that are generally relatedto the field of

communication. Although systematic data on career outcomes is not available (see

recommendations), anecdotal evidence leads to the conclusion that the program has

helped graduates find employment after completingthe degree.

Faculty and students in the School are engagedin a wide range of community outreach

activities including, but certainly not limited to, leading the annual Media Democracy

Day event, contributing to community knowledge production, and participating in the

wider community'seffort to expand communication and better manage environmental

risk and disaster. The School'sinvolvement in a variety of British Columbia commumties

is certainly noteworthy for the depth and breadth of its reach. However, information

about community engagement is rarely communicated to the university'svarious

constituencies.

Over the years, the School has built an impressive set ofarchives. These include the

papers of Dallas Smythe, a central figure in the development of communication studies,

particularly the political economy approach to the media. Smythe was a vital force in the

early development ofthe School of Communication. In addition, under the direction of

Professor Barry Truax, the School holds the SoundScape collection, which is a type of

electroacoustic music characterized by the presence of recognizable environmental

sounds and contexts whose purpose it is to invoke the listener's imagination and

recollections associated with the soundscape. There is also a notable archive on

alternative media, particularly on media developed in British Columbia. Much more

could be done to preserve and make readily accessible these rich resources. The library

liaison for the School of Communication, whose interview impressed our committee, is

keen to work on this important task.

Two relatively recent relocations, one physical and one organizational, are also sources of

renewed strength for the School. First, the relocation of the School to the Shrum Science

Centre is a major improvement in the size and quality of the office space and available

facilities. With this location and the Harbour Center campus, where 40%

of courses are

now taught, the School is well situated to carry out its teaching and research.

Nevertheless, given the size of the graduate cohort and anticipated expansion, attention

needs to be paid to office space for doctoral students. Second, organizational

restructuring has placed the School in a new Faculty of Communication, Art and

Technology (FCAT). The reorganization provides a considerably more appropriate

location for the School than its previous position within a Faculty

ofApplied Sciences.

Although it is too soon to determine whether genuine collaborations will emerge between

units in the faculty, there is considerable potential for these to develop.

Challenges and Opportunities

Enrolment and Curriculum

The Committee's view - consistently reinforced by faculty, students, and administrators

as well as by the recommendations from the previous review - is that the single most

serious challenge facing the School ofCommunication is the size ofits academic

programs relative to available resources. Recent enrolment growth, especially at the

undergraduate and Ph.D. levels, has generated a web

of significant, interrelated, and

negative consequences for virtually every aspect ofthe School's operations. The situation

is frankly unsustainable.

Background

and scope.

Exact figures for enrolment trends were a bit difficult to

determine, given data comparability issues in the materials provided

by the University

and the School (e.g., some reports employed annualized student FTE in their analyses,

some used registered students, some total headcounts, etc.). However, a rough estimate

provided by faculty during our visit is that there is currently a total ofabout 1300

registered undergraduate FTEs in Communication, up from 1200 reported

by the

University in Spring 2010 (roughly an 8% increase in less than two years). According to

the School's Self-Study, the number ofundergraduate majors increased by approximately

30% during the period

ofthe present review (AY 2004-05 through 2010-11), including a

particularly steep rise ofmore than 36% in the six years from Spring 2005 to Spring

2011. After the last external review, the minimum GPA for admission to the major was

raised from 2.25 to 2.50,

but this seems to have done little to stem the steadily rising tide

of enrolments.

The proportion ofundergraduate Honours majors is surprisingly low; in 2010, just 9 of

1128 majors (.0079%) were Honours students. Despite the undergraduateprogram's

focus on theory and research, faculty report that only about 2-3%

ofCommunication

B.A.s continue to graduate academic study or professional programs. Some claimed that

this rate reflects the School's vision that students should be prepared to "navigate

citizenship in a media-dense, global, multiculturalworld" (as quoted in the

Undergraduate Curriculum Committee Report from 2010). One interviewee put it more

bluntly: "we teach for citizenship, not

graduate school." There were some anecdotal

reports of problems with academic integrity(plagiarism) arising from degree completion

and employment pressures. According to data included in the Self-Study Report,

persistent demand for courses amongboth majors andnon-majors has led to a shortage of

seats in required courses; as of2010 undergraduate time to degree was nearly five years.

An increase in the number ofregistered undergraduates with international visas appears

to be animportant factor contributing to enrolment growth. According to University

figures, international students accounted for about 10%ofcommunication

undergraduates between2004and 2009, but thenrose sharply to 13% in Spring 2010 and

nearly 17%in Spring 2011. Accordingto the Self-Report, that figure is now about22%,

andhas

already raised significant issues for instruction and advising, includinglanguage,

culture, and student life issues.

In addition to the undergraduate population, the School enrolls over 80 graduate students

atallstages of progress, with a fairly high ratio of Ph.D. students to M.A. students (54 of

83.5, or over two-thirds, in University figures from 2010). To some extent the large

population of doctoral students may be the product of increasing time to degree rates,

which, according to the Self-Study Report, averaged nearly 18"active" (registered)

semesters, or six years, during the present review period, a figure which does not include

terms when students are on leave or working independently. In interviews, doctoral

students attributed time to degree problemsto their large teaching loads; most financial

support for doctoral students takes the form oftemporary employment asteaching

assistants, sessional or limited-term instructors, who staffthe School's own

undergraduate courses.

Currently the School has a faculty complement of24.5 FTE, up from 21.5 in 2010. In

2009-10,the faculty-student ratio in the School was 1:48.2, among the highest in the

University, comparedto an average of 1:29.8 for SFU as a whole and 1:36.1 for FCAT.

Figures from the School's Self-Study indicate that the ratio improved modestly, to 1:43.8

in 2010-11 (about a 10% decrease), which may be attributable in partto two new tenure-

track faculty hires. It remains the highest in FCAT. Moreover, the decline was still less

than a University-wide drop

ofnearly 15%, to 1:26, during the same period.

In an attempt to address the growing enrolment problems, the School establisheda new

Undergraduate Curriculum Committee (UCC) during the currentreview period. It was

charged with finding ways to rethink and restructure the curriculum to bring it into line

with the School's resources. In June 2010 the UCC conducted a faculty curriculum retreat

and issued a report with preliminary recommendations for taking constructive steps

toward goals identified in the retreat. These included the streamlining and re-focusing of

the number and content of courses; reducing enrolments by raising standards for

admission to the major; and updating course information online to make it conform to

actual syllabi and course content.

During our visit, this report was consistently hailed as a turning point by faculty, staff and

graduate students. Unfortunately, however, more recent progress reports from the UCC

and our conversations during the visit indicate that action on the 2010 recommendations

has been slow in coming.

As of January 2012, titles and/or descriptions of 13 courses (out

of a total catalog ofroughly 75 undergraduate-numbered courses, not including special

topics courses) have been revised and posted on the university Calendar. Proposed

changes to 14 other courses have either been rejected outright or returned to faculty

subcommittees for further discussion. Meanwhile, as noted in Appendix B ofthe UCC

report, the School offers more courses than any ofits comparison programs in North

America, and maintains a larger catalog ofcourses than its rivals. (Even the School's

Self-Study Report describes the undergraduate curriculum as "expansive.")

One existing course (CMNS 200) - which, perhaps ironically, was among the most

popular with students because of its focus on effective communication skills —has been

eliminated on the grounds that faculty are unavailable to teach it. A proposal for an

FCAT-wide introductory course on new media, informally dubbed "Tech One," which

would have integrated theory, design, and digital media competencies, was rejected

Communication faculty because ofits focus on technology rather than on social science

research. In December 2011 faculty participating in the three major areas

ofthe

undergraduate curriculum (political economy and policy, media and culture, and

technology and society) met to discuss curriculum content and structure for each area;

one group (technology and society) drafted a new areadescription. As noted above,

undergraduate enrolment has continued to increasesince the report was issued.

In sum, despite the sense

of urgency about ballooning undergraduate enrolment expressed

by virtually everyone during our visit, there seems to have been little substantial progress

since the last review to put measures in place that might begin to remedy the situation.

Instead, faculty and staff seem to be nearly overwhelmed just dealing with the demands

of the existing program. The complexities of setting the course schedule and faculty

teaching assignments have been largely delegated to administrative staff, who

understandably tend to replicate the established schedule year after year, or as one

member put it, "pretty much hit the repeat button." A relatively large proportion of all

CMNS courses (one interviewee estimated 25%) are cross-listed between the

undergraduate and graduate programs, so that they do "double duty" with scarce

resources.

But cross-listing has also led to a lack of a dedicated core curriculum for the

Ph.D. and an unfortunate situation for graduate students who sit in the same classrooms

with undergraduates

who are their pupils in other courses.

Faculty, staff and students offered various anecdotal explanations for this seemingly

intractable situation. Some cited large and unreasonable enrolment expectations from

university administrators,

who are thought to see the undergraduate Communication

program as a source of revenue generation. (In fact, administrators confirmed that the

School's budget is "revenue-driven," with student fees a key component.) As one faculty

member put it, "The University thinks of us as a 'bums-in-seats' program." Another said

that the administration would often "open the floodgates," creatinglast-minute sections

for popular courses and unanticipated staffing shortages, while prohibiting the School

from setting its own enrolment levels. A few cited increasing pressures from the

University to enrol a greaterproportion of international students, who are more likely

than domestic students to meet the School's admission requirements, pay considerably

more than the rate of domestic undergraduate tuition, but also require more remedial

instruction and advising support. Some graduate students attributed the slow pace of

change to resistant faculty, saying that there was "little traction" among faculty on the

undergraduate proposals after the 2010 retreat.

In our own exploration of the issue,we found what appear to be common attitudes within

the School toward different modes of knowledge creation and learning which may also

act as barriers to change. Although "hands-on" courses and production are described on

the School's website as majorfeatures of study at SFU, a number of faculty tended to

cast research/scholarship and creative work/practice (e.g., media production, digital

technology design and use, community engagement and activism) as opposing or even

antithetical pursuits. The first was intellectually valorized and privileged, while the

second was often dismissed as secondaryor even anti-intellectual. Several faculty

specifically excluded any suggestion that the program should increase its focus on "media

practice" in the core curriculum, contending that such courses dilute the School's primary

focus on theory and research, and that skills courses are better handled by local colleges

or postgraduate certificate programs.

A second, and related, attitude among many of those we spoke with is that research and

teaching are competing activities in a zero-sum relationship: effort directed toward

teaching is seen as taking time and effort away from more prestigious and rewarding

research activities, and vice-versa. This view has had a clear influence on the curriculum.

Many senior faculty with active research projects or administrative responsibilities

receive substantial, and perennial, teaching releases. Some are either unwilling or

unprepared to teach introductory undergraduate classes and instead concentrate their

teaching efforts on small, specialized upper-division courses and graduate seminars.

Although the UCC Report notes that the School "can offer students exposure to the work

of advanced researchers and leading experts in many areas of Communication Studies," it

also concedes that with full time (tenure-stream) faculty teaching just 16% ofthe

School'scourses in 2009, "Students have limited contact with full time faculty, especially

at the lower levels."

Responsibility for the largest introductory and required courses has largely been shifted

to junior and recently tenured faculty, especially to sessional and limited-term instructors

drawn from the ranks of the School'sown doctoral graduates and graduate students.

Statistics compiled for the 2010 UCC report1 bear this out. They suggest that between

2004-05 and 2009-10 the number of lower-level undergraduate courses taught by

sessionals roughly doubled, while the number taught by full-time faculty fell, with the

steepest change occurring after 2007. Although the differences were not as pronounced

for upper-division courses, the trend was broadly similar; by 2009-10 (the most recent

data available), sessional instructors were teaching substantially more undergraduate

courses overall than full-time faculty. This redistribution trend seems to be strongly

supported by the tenure-stream faculty: the UCC Report even floated a suggestion that

the School consider creating a new, teaching-only tier of full-time faculty lecturers so that

senior researchers might continue to be sheltered from extensive undergraduate teaching

responsibilities. Indeed, one interviewee thought it unlikely that senior faculty who are

already unwilling to teach lower division courses could be "rehabilitated," i.e., persuaded

to teach such courses in the future.

We offer the following recommendations to address enrolment and curriculum issues.

1) Increase the number of full-time faculty in the School of Communication.

We recognize the attraction and energy of a Communication program and the reputation

that Communication has in sustaining student interest. It is widely understood as a

cutting-edge field, a liberal arts alternative, and a flexible major for students whose

interests are in formation and whose ambitions lead them to currently popular professions

1Three graphs using the same titles and data labels appear inboth Appendices Band D ofthe 2010 UCC

report

(200-leveI Course TeachingDistribution,Lower-level Course TeachingDistribution,

and

Upper-

level Course TeachingDistribution).

Although they show the same basic trends, there is some

inconsistency in the data between the versions presented in each Appendix. Therefore only the trends are

discussed here.

and pursuits. It is one of the few disciplines in the liberal arts and social sciences

experiencing growth in relevant academic and non-academic fields. One can easily

understand the demand for undergraduate and graduate programs in the field. However, if

the administration of the university chooses to continue to permit this growth then it must

increase the faculty complement in the School or suffer the erosion of program quality at

all levels. At the very least, it needs to add two new full-time positions to the School with

this net increase to the faculty complement in place by the start

of the 2015 academic

year. The failure to provide sufficient faculty will continue to exacerbate a series

problems. Undergraduate over-enrolment relative to faculty resources inflates class size;

dramatically reduces faculty/student contact; limits essential, labor-intensive forms of

instruction and evaluation that faculty, students, and University leaders value; and

entrenches a work environment

of overextension and precarity for students, faculty, staff,

and advisors. Recognizing the pressures on the University from reduced provincial and

institutional budgets, we do not make this recommendation lightly. The School faces a

clear threat to its well-earned reputation brought about by enrolments spiraling out

control. We also recognize that several steps in addition to enhanced resources must be

taken to address the curriculum and enrolment challenges it faces.

2) Prepare students for life after SFU, whether professional or academic.

Understandably, anxious students facing an uncertain postgraduate job market tend to

demand instruction that centers on simple skills training rather than critical engagement

with important ideas and debates, the latter

of which has been SFU's traditional_/brte. But

addressing such learning needs need not mean funneling scarce resources into expensive

"hands on" media production courses and tracks. The School's historical commitment to

progressive values - critical thinking, political and economic equity, social justice,

community engagement - provides an ideal scaffolding for the integration of theory,

research, and critical scholarship with pedagogies that require students to take action and

use their knowledge to advance these values in the communities they care about: in short,

teaching for

praxis.

In addition to rigorous critique and written communication skills, a short list of relevant

competencies in a

praxis-centered

curriculum might include media analysis (the mastery

and application of critical literacies, e.g., in effective alternative message design), public

presentation and advocacy across media platforms, negotiation and group communication

skills, risk and conflict intervention, critical technology assessment, advanced search and

information/content evaluation, policy scenario building, critical data visualization, and

so on.2 Few of these would necessarily entail major capital investment, but certainly

community organizations, government agencies, cultural institutions, trade unions, and

private-sector firms who value these competencies in SFU's Communication graduates

could be approached to underwrite scholarships, intensive workshops, specially-equipped

classrooms, and so on to support /?7"am-driven teaching.

2Theexpansion ofcritical media literacies and pedagogies is thefocus of several major communication-

based researchprograms. See, for example, the

Learning Through DigitalMedia

projectat the New School

in New York City, headed by Trebor Scholz (http://www.learninizlhroiighdigitalmedia.net/) and the

New

MediaLiteracies Project

at the University of Southern California, headed by Henry Jenkins

(http://dmlcentral.net/resourccs/3756 ).

It is important to point out that the seedsof this approach alreadyexist withinthe School

and FCAT. The Minor in Dialogue, for example, could be a point of departure for

teaching and learning about negotiation, intervention, and group process. The co-op

program, which by all accounts is extraordinarily effective, has a strong record of

mentorshipand engaging students in the community during their studies and in

subsequentpostgraduateplacements. A closer integration

of co-op into the curriculum,

including more required student involvement and granting course credit for co-op

activities, would go a long way toward cultivatingthe spirit of

praxis

in teaching and

learning in the School. In addition, relevant integrated (theory-action) pedagogies

certainly already exist within FCAT, for example in art and design courses. The School

would benefit from closer collaboration with its sister units to develop innovative, cross-

cutting pedagogies.

The criteria for evaluating program success should shift from an emphasis on

quantity and "throughput" and toward a primary focus on excellence in all aspects

and modes of teaching and learning, to achieve an enrolment level commensurate

with major requirements and available resources.

The popularity of an academic

program is not always a good indicator of its intellectual merit or predictors of student

achievement or success. This is especially true for fields like communication, whose

association with popular media culture may attract generalist students or those seeking

alternatives to more rigid disciplines like business or psychology. A reliance on

capitation as the principal measure ofprogram strength, and the concomitant idea that

any single academic program can offer "something for everyone," only encourages

inflated enrolments, the accretion of outdated courses and content, and a reluctance to

prune courses or concentrations as necessary to keep up with changes in the field and

(more critically) faculty expertise. Any faculty must decide what types

of graduates they

want to produce, in specific terms ofknowledge, values, attitudes and practical skills;

then they must design coherent, uncluttered, non-redundant curricula and pedagogies that

make those types

of learning possible. A shift from quantity to quality will necessarily

entail considerable effort and commitment from every active member of the faculty.

Once established, however, a focus on excellence will transform the academic and

research climate ofthe School and provide ample justification for maintaining enrolments

at a level more in keeping with full-time faculty workload.

4) Clear, consistent, long-term measures of program performance and student

outcomes should be instituted to help manage enrolment over time.

The School (or

university administration, as appropriate) should begin to capture more types of

information that enable them to understand and manage demand for its academic

programs. At a minimum, the School should collect its own data on student placements

(employment or postgraduate academic work), if such data are not provided by the

University. Presently only the co-op program has compiled consistent placement data for

its undergraduate participants. As another example, we received no separate data

documenting the figure of 2-3% ofundergraduates continuing to graduate study that was

cited by several members ofthe faculty.

Other useful measures might include annual exit surveys or focus groups of all graduates

to learn more about their experiences in the School and their expectations for the future;

regular, required reporting of graduate student conference presentations, publications,

special awards, orother achievements;3 and frequent reports from advisors (minimum

once per year, preferably each semester) on their students' degree progress, particularly at

the graduate level, to help maintain a consistent and supportive sense of "press" toward

completion.

Once obtained, it is also crucial that relevant data be used to justify and make appropriate

programmatic decisions. For example, the Self-Study Report says that approximately

50% of the School'sdoctoral graduates since 2004 have obtained positions as tenure-

stream faculty at other institutions, as post-doctoral scholars and researchers, as

temporary instructors (many within the School itself), or in other capacities in non-

academic research organizations. It seems reasonable to ask whether any social science-

based Ph.D. program able to place just half of its graduates in academic or related

positions should consider adjusting enrolment to reflect the real market for its graduates.

The undergraduate Honours program should be renewed and expanded as the

exemplar of undergraduate education and achievement in communication studies at

SFU.

An Honours degree is an important distinction that gives recipients a clear

advantage in their future endeavors. Honours students should be prominently recognized

within the School and promoted as part of the School's public profile (see Outreach and

Visibility, below). For a program as research-centeredas Communication at SFU, there

seem to be relatively few opportunities in the current curriculum for bright, motivated

undergraduates to participate meaningfully in rigorous research projects or in-depth

scholarship under close tenure-track faculty mentorship. The Honours program is the

logical avenue for such mentorship and to involve the most highly qualified

undergraduates in research and scholarship. However, as noted previously less than 1%

of Communication undergraduates are Honoursmajors. Eligible students may be

discouragedby the fact that many

of the School's most distinguished faculty appear to be

reluctant to supervise Honours students,due to the workload involved. As a result, the

Honours program was recently converted from faculty supervision and directed study to a

course-based format supervised mainly by temporary instructors. In our view, these are

steps in the wrong direction. To put the Honours programat the center ofundergraduate

study in the School, it is also crucial that Honours advising and mentorship be recognized

and rewarded as an expected and valued part of faculty effort.

The School should implement a consistently high and competitive GPA

requirement for admission to the major.

As the UCC Report rightly observed,the

establishment

ofhigher entrancestandards is one of the quickestand most effectiveways

to manage enrolmentat the undergraduate level,and is clearly suitedto the School's

expectation that students mastertheory andresearch. A higherGPArequirement and

enrolment capwere major

recommendations in the previous review, but as noted

3The listof student publications and presentations included inthe Self-Study Report was an excellent

example, althoughthe Reportnotedthat it was basedon a one-time surveywith a 25% studentresponse

rate.

previously raising the GPA to 2.5 has not significantly affected the continued rise in

enrolment. Thus a new GPA requirement (set at a high enough level to cap enrolment

effectively at a target number) is still needed.

Ifnecessary, it could be phased in over

several years in order to have time to shift student expectations and give aspiring

applicants time to meet the new requirements. But in our view new, more rigorous

standards are long overdue, and should be featured and promoted in the School'spublic

communications. Not only would such a move help regulate enrolments; it would also

make the major

more

attractive and increase its cachet among the most talented students,

draw them from a wider range of other fields, and create a larger pool of students eligible

for Honours. In short, the program should move toward new standards and expectations

that will pay off in the form of superb students and higher visibility for the School's

programs and graduates within and beyond SFU.

Research and teaching (especially undergraduate teaching, given its sheer

presence in the School) must be resituated together as essential and expected aspects

of workload for all tenure-track faculty, from the most recent hires to the most

senior professors and CRCs.

The dual demands of research and teaching are the

perennial challenge and conundrum

of academic workload. But in a time ofever greater

resource cutbacks, the balance - indeed, the symbiotic relationship - between research

and teaching must be reassessed realistically so that teaching duties are distributed

equitably, without any derogation ofteaching as a secondary or low-reward activity.

Even if it did not contrast with the School'sprogressive, social equity values, and even if

budget were suddenly available to hire a new rank of full-time lecturers, the creation of a

two-class system would not seem to be the best solution to a situation in which students

already have little opportunity for engagement with the most prominent, senior members

of School faculty.

Top communication programs in North Americacommonlyrequire that all faculty

members teach courses at all curricular levels (lower and upper undergraduate, Master's,

Ph.D.) on a regular two- to three-yearcycle, for example, with releases being the case-by-

case exception rather than long-termrule for the most senior faculty. Moves in this

direction would do a great deal to ameliorate the chronic problems of equitable teaching

load, over-reliance on graduate students and recent graduates as sessional and limited-

term instructors, shortage

of seats in undergraduate courses, and undergraduate and

graduate time to degree problems.

Improve the management of graduate enrolments.

The School enrols over 80 graduate students at all stages

ofprogress, with a fairly high

ratio

of PhD students to M.A. students (54 of 83.5, or over two-thirds, in University

figures from 2010). This is partly the product of increasing time to degree rates for PhD

students, which according to the Self-Study Report averaged nearly 18 "active"

(registered) semesters, or six years, during the present review period, not including terms

when students are on leave or working independently. The School currently admits

between 17 and 25 new graduate students each year, averaging about 20 per year. Absent

new resource commitments, the School should consider lowering its intake of graduate

students, particularly at the doctoral level. In addition, the School should also consider

taking more explicit steps to advance a course-only M.A. program.

Technology Infrastructure and Integration

Any leading communication program today must use media and information technologies

effectively across all aspects

of its operations - research, teaching, community outreach,

creative work, administrative duties, student services and recruitment, and so on. The

School is no exception. However, as with many programs dealing with reduced

resources, technology needs may become a low priority when basic teaching, research

and personnel demands seem much more urgent.

But up-to-date infrastructure is not merely a dispensable luxury or a set of "toys" to play

with. Information and communication technology is an inextricable element

ofthe

academic enterprise: it is a basic tool of scholarship and research, a platform for

instruction, a medium for representing the academy's interests and activities to wider

publics, for situating programs, faculty and students relative to their peers, and not least,

an important object of study in itself- especially within the communication discipline.

We found that new media and information technologies are central research and creative

interests for many of the School'sfaculty; some employ digital and web-based resources

in their teaching. Students use computers and myriad other digital devices and services as

a matter of course in their studies and everyday lives. The School'stechnical staff seem

to be doing their best to provide what services and support they can given the basic, and

sometimes dated, systems and software capabilities already in place. Nonetheless, our

sense is that technology is often considered to be a secondary concern or a sideline to the

"real" work of the School ~ a view which deserves a thorough reappraisal. We have a

few main suggestions along these lines.

1) Digital media and internet-based technology should be more thoroughly

integrated into the curriculum, both as an object of study/critical analysis, and as a

mode of instruction and learning.

This may seem particularly pertinent for the graduate

and undergraduate Technology and Society concentrations, but the use and analysis

technology is relevant in other areas as well. We were surprised to find how many

courses at SFU, including many core courses in the School, are still designed around

paper syllabi and photocopied course readers that students are required to purchase. This

familiar form of course delivery may inadvertently, and unnecessarily, be shifting costs to

students for materials that SFU already licenses and thus should be available to them

online at little or no charge. In addition, course management systems such as Moodle

(already available at SFU) or Blackboard can provide instructors with helpful tools for

evaluation and communicating with students mat can simplify course oversight and save

time, especially for very large classes and those that are taught frequently.

Of course, not all course content or instructional goals necessarily call for the same types

of technology (or any technology at all, e.g., a small advanced seminar). Not all

instructors (or students) are likely to be sophisticated users at the outset, and "learning

curves" can be strong disincentives to trying new methods. (Instructors at all levels may

want to take advantage ofthe professional advice and support regarding instructional

technology available from SFU'sTeaching & Learning Centre, which was praised during

our visit). But some

of the difficult teaching workload issues cited by faculty during our

visit might be ameliorated by the thoughtful application oftechnological support that is

already available.

We also want to be clear that we are

not

suggesting that the School embark on a major

distance-learning scheme. Properly designed and implemented, distance-learning

programs can produce strong student learning outcomes. But such programs are

extraordinarily capital- and time-intensive to develop, and require extensive, regular

updating on a fairly short cycle to stay current and ensure that learning is at least

comparable to "live" instruction. At present, the School does not have the resources to

devote to such a substantial project, but it might benefit by continuing to provide some

distance education course instruction. Distance education aside, more could be done to

enrich existing instruction with available technology infrastructure and budget.

2) The School's web presence needs an update.

A website is the primary entree for

anyone who wants to know about an academic program and its accomplishments, spirit

and sensibility (see also the section on Visibility, below). While the School'sweb pages

seem to be consistent with the overall look and feel of SFU'sother sites and graphic

standards, and generally are simple and easy to read, the architecture of the site is not

intuitive and can be difficult to navigate without resorting to the browser "back button."

The site also doesn'treveal where the School "resides" within SFU. (Curiously, there is

no link to FCAT on the School'shome page!) Many pages are no more than long text

blocks or bullet lists that must be scrolled or clicked through serially to find relevant

information, and the priority and interrelatedness of topics, or the path of links the visitor

has already followed, is not always indicated. Overall,the site feels somewhat static,

more like a catalog than the essential, first-choice resource for everything and anything to

do with the School, its people, and its activities.

For example,the caption below the headingphoto on the home page includes a two-line

list ofthe School'sspecialization areas, separated from one another by vertical lines (the

"pipe" character, or | ). Ordinarily, pipe separators indicate that the items are live links;

however, none of the specialization labels actually links to anything. Or: visitors to the

home page who click on the featured "Undergraduate" link is directed to a page headed

by a long list ofbullet-point links (and in alphabeticalorder, suggesting that they all have

the same level of importance) for topics that differ widely in scope: Undergraduate

Orientation, Course Outlines, Checklists & Forms, and Sick Notes are all given the same

emphasis. The bullet list on the "Graduate" page is a bit more consistent, but in either

case the visitor who clicks on a bulleted link and arrives at a third-level page must back

up to the prior page (through the browser) to go to any other topic on the original list.

Obviously, these are textbook web design problems. "Dead end" links tend to proliferate

as new information and pages are appended to an existing site. Individual web pages are

often treated as though they are simply print documents on a screen rather than a dynamic

set of interlinking, multimedia resources in themselves that should encourage visitors to

explore and browse. These and other problemscan be addressedby the School's web

master, possibly in consultation with a website designer or information architect from the

artists and designers inside FCAT or from Vancouver's thriving creative community who

can help reconfigure the site'sunderlying architecture and update the look and

navigability

of the site while remaining faithful to SFU'simage standards. It is also

important to remember that the School's usesof technology are key models for the ways

that students learn about and use technology themselves.

Outreach and Visibility

The School deserves much greater visibility in Vancouver and British Columbia, and

across Canada and internationally: perhaps more than any other unit at SFU, it has the

potential to embody the University'smission of"engaging the world." The School has a

remarkable and distinguished history, as well as exciting new directions for the future,

with new programs, new faculty, and a new organizational home within FCAT. All

members of the School of Communication and others who support its continued success

- students, faculty, staff, alumni, community partners, FCAT colleagues - should be

enlisted to identify and tell the story

of the School'saccomplishments and strengths to a

variety of audiences, in a variety of media. Clearly the School has many relevant

activities and efforts already underway, but these should be brought together and built

upon to raise the visibility of the School'smission and purpose. Telling the School's

story is not only essential for its own institutional well-being; the "story" in many ways

helps to define the academic and professional identities of the School'sstudents, alumni,

and faculty (perhaps especially new faculty drawn by its legacy of critical scholarship,

engagement, and activism).

The School must engage more actively with the large and accomplished family of

SFU Communication graduates in Canada and throughout the world.

The School's

alumni are one of its most important, yet largely untapped, resources for student

mentorship, development advice and financial support. Alumni can also be a powerful

voice for the School in its engagement with University administration and external

audiences, and provide important external perspectives on School initiatives. The

Committee was mildly surprised not to have an opportunity to meet with local alumni,

whose views might have enriched our understanding

of the School and its strengths. We

would recommend that, at a minimum, the Director form and regularly meet with an

informal group of local alumni to hear their views, ideally with student representatives

present, to explore ways that active alumni might contribute to a range

of activities within

the School. In addition to such meetings, an even stronger approach would be to hire or

assign a half-time (or more ifpossible) staff member to cultivate alumni relations and

opportunities for alumni involvement in School activities (this individual might also

serve as an overall public communications officer for the School). An investment in

alumni relations could produce a large and important return, particularlyin a time of

increasingly scarce resources.

2) Unite existing outreach efforts and public events into a compelling, ongoing

calendar of activities and opportunities for interaction and engagement

within

FCAT, across SFU, and in the world beyond. During our site visit we were struck by the

range of public activities in which the School'smembers participate, and which couldbe

includedas part of a larger overallprogramof publicengagement. A short list would

include:

Media Democracy Day

FCAT'sannual research forum

Undergraduate research forum

Honours presentations

Lecture series and guest speakers

Community activism/outreach projects

International initiatives/academic programs

Faculty and student publications, presentations, recognitions

Graduate student defenses

Research center projects

3) The School's unique and invaluable collections of scholarly and media materials

should be organized, preserved, and made accessible (digitally where appropriate)

to researchers and the public throughout the world, and not least, prominently

associated with the School.

During our visit, we were introduced to several collections

that would seem particularly appropriate for such efforts; it is likely there are many more:

The Dallas Smythe archive

Barry Truax's collection of soundscape audio recordings

Research collections

of alternative/underground media

Publicity materials for Media Democracy Day events

We were impressed by the proactive, enthusiastic attitude of the SFU library staff

members we met, and their desire to help the School manage its collections. The library

already offers many types ofassistance and services to the School's students, faculty, and

staff. However, we would urge the School to enter into an even more active partnership

with the library to insure that the School'sunique resources and collections are not only

properly managed and preserved, but also represent the School'steaching and research to

global audiences.

School Climate

Some of the threats ofover-enrolment that befall departments and schools of

Communication—such as inattention to curriculum development in the face ofurgent

delivery demands—are beginning to be addressed at SFU. The work ofthe

Undergraduate Curriculum Committee marks an impressive step in the right direction,

particularly in initiating an accountability system evident in the timeline/checklist

document, which tracks initiatives undertaken, completed, and to be addressed. Both the

Undergraduate and Graduate committees, moreover, involve individuals across faculty

generations, and are possessed of an

esprit de corps

that is essential to focus, consensus-

building, and follow-through. Overall, we discovered a sense

of solidarity and ofrenewed

possibility in the school. We also discovered, however, certain collective dispositions that

could threaten future development, and we would like to comment especially on a refrain

ofmalaise, frustration, and complaint, especially from the precincts ofmore senior

faculty, a concern across rank about gender enfranchisement, and the overall sense

delicacy that prevails amid optimism about the future of the School.

Part ofthe optimism comes from general consensus that FCAT is a strong new home,

with better fit, better recognition, and stronger, more creative and suitable leadership than

had existed in Applied Sciences. The move to the new building, moreover, has been a

significant positive development. These are deep resources, but they can be squandered

by inattention to collective mood.

Seniorfaculty malaise:

We were surprised and concerned to learn ofa sense of

disconnection from several of the most senior colleagues in CMNS, people who are

working on their own projects in their own spaces with a sense

of disenfranchisement or

detachment from the core work

of the school. While we recognize changeable cycles and

contradictory pressures in the life of any institution, we also believe that it is critical for

senior faculty members to contribute to all areas

of CMNS operation. The successful

operationofthe schoolrequiresthe accountability of all facultymembers—especially the

most senior—to all ofthese activities, even if some take a leadership role and others do

not.

1) All senior faculty, including those with research-intensive appointments, should

be expected to teach at the lower division of the undergraduate curriculum.

Admittedly, generational distance from new technologies makes this difficult, but that

means it is time to re-skill, not withdraw, and it is clear that SFU has support from its

Teaching and Learning Center. Seniorfaculty with grant-seeking responsibilities should

be producing grantproposals. Senior faculty withareaexpertise to offer should be

offering it to undergraduate and graduate students; that expertise shouldnot be

underutilized. If using it requiresmore co-operative forms of facultyparticipationto

build trust, then faculty can be held accountable to that. Institutionallife is no less

complicated, in humanterms, than otherforms, but it is better regulated by basic

expectations of professionalism andaccountability. Weencourage involvement from the

appropriate human resources office to raise these questions andto steerthis discussion

with seniorcolleagues, perhaps in conjunction withthe Director of the School. A laissez-

faire or nothing-can-be-done disposition will meanthat precious (and scarce) resources

are underused and that malaise willreproduce itselfandundermine existing energyfor

change. Senior faculty must offer leadership, andarenotexempt from everyday lifeor

decision-making in School.

Gender enfranchisement:

Several women and some men expressed concerns aboutthe

difficultieswomen face in trying to bring about gender equality in the School.

Specifically, there were concerns that women face greater challenges intaking leadership

roles in the School and are calledon to shoulder a disproportionate share ofthe workload.

Most of these references wereto historical patterns in the School that were in the process

of changing. It was recognized thatwomen are now taking on greater leadership

responsibilities. Nevertheless, feelings ofexclusion persist and need to be addressed.

2) We recommend the intervention of the Dean and the appropriate human

resources office to assist with establishing standards of professional accountability

and respect. Attention to governance agreements in decision-making is also essential

for general enfranchisement and trust.

Thefragility ofprogress:

Several faculty expressed concern about the fragility of the new

positive culture in the School. Again, this is not surprising. Positive change usually seems

fragile, and old antagonisms usually seem entrenched.

In order to preserve the benefits of positive changes in the School, the Committee

recommends the establishment of a clear set of guidelines for leadership review and

succession.

This applies primarily to the position ofDirector ofthe School but should

also be considered for the other key leadership positions in the School.

As communication scholars, we know that culture is real in its effects, and must be

attended to, in order to make the best use ofthe School'screative, scholarly, human,

economic, and reputational resources.

Planning

The Committee was struck by the lack of institutionalizedplanning in the School. The

consequences of no systematicnear- and long-term assessmentare evident throughoutthe

program- in curriculum, enrolment, resource allocation, workload distribution, alumni

engagement, relationship to the other units of FCAT, etc. Along with planningfor

leadership succession, these mattersneed careful consideration. To that end,

recommend a faculty retreat or similar planning exercise to establish a strategic

plan to address the short- and long-term needs of the School. At the very least this

would address leadership succession, curriculum, enrolment, workload distribution,

resource allocation, alumni engagement and relationship to FCAT.

Conclusion

The Committee is confident that the School of Communication can draw on its

considerable strengths to meet the challengesit faces. Along with several internationally

recognized scholars, the School has a creative collection

ofjunior faculty, including

promisingnew hires, and a committedstaff of administrators, advisers, and technicians.

The appointment

of a new Director, the relocation to the Shrum Science Centre, and the

move into a new Faculty of Communication, Art and Technology have given the School

additional grounds for optimism. Moreover, the School has an excellent record of

community engagement in Vancouver and across British Columbia. Building on an

established commitment to international research and teaching, the School has initiated

important new programs, including collaboration with the Communication University of

China in Beijing. Alongside its large undergraduate and co-op program, the School has

built a substantial graduate program with a strong cohort of doctoral students.

The School has a good foundation to take up a numberofdifficult challenges andturn

them into opportunities to improve. The primary challenge is to address excessive and

unsustainable enrolment growth. Expansionat all levels, but especially at the

undergraduate level, threatens to undermine the qualityofall ofits programs. We

recommend an immediate commitment to add two full-time positions to the faculty

complement. Even if it were to receive such a commitment, the School needs to do much

more to addressenrolment and relatedcurriculumissues. Specifically, the School would

benefit from curriculum revisions that would give some emphasis to the professional

dimension of communication. In addition, the School requires measures that track

qualitative aswell asquantitative performance andbetterassess long-term program

performance. Moreover, the School needs to paymoreattention to the undergraduate

Honours program, establish a higher GPA for admission to the major, andimplement

enrolmenttargets commensurate with the School's commitment to excellence in the

undergraduate andgraduate programs. The School also needs a betterbalance between

research andteaching. In particular, teaching, like research, needs to be recognized asthe

responsibility ofall faculty at all levels ofthe program. Furthermore, the School needs to

improve its use oftechnology, including in management ofthe program and in how it

presents the School to students and to its wider community. The School would also

benefit

by addressing the malaise among senior faculty, the perception of gender

exclusion, and

fears about its ability to sustain recent progress. Finally the School needs

to do a better job of planning for the future by institutionalizing a planning process.

Addressing these requirements is admittedly a major task. But it is important for the

School to recognize that no one is expecting it to make changes on its own. The School

has extensive resources to draw on within SFU and the wider Vancouver community. We

strongly urge the School to reach out to FCAT and its sister departments and the Dean, to

the administration, including Human Resources, to its many alumni, to the community

organizations faculty and students work with, to the library, to instructional services, and

soon.

Moreover, no one is expecting the School to bring about these recommended changes all

at once. To begin the process of designing its future, the School should organize a

planning retreatto set priorities and allocate tasks to faculty sub-groups. Recognizing the

need for change is a starting point, but planning for how to bring it about is equally

essential. However this is done, we are confident that the School ofCommunication has

the imagination and creativity to carry it out successfully.

EXTERNAL REVIEW - ACTION PLAN

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

Unit under review

.Communication.

Date of Review Site visit

Feb. 22-24 2012

Responsible Unit person,

Alison Beale

Faculty Dean

Cheryl Geisler

Note: Itis not expected that every recommendation made by the Review Team be covered by thisAction Plan. The

majorthrusts of the Report should be identifiedand some consolidation of the recommendationsmay be possible while

other recommendations of lesser importance may be excluded.

Should an additional responsefrom be warranted it shouldbe attached as a separate document.

1. PROGRAMMING

1.1 Action/s (description what is going to be done):

1.1.1 Undergraduate:

a) Enrollments: Recommendations 3 and 4 (page 11) of the Report concern enrollments in the undergraduate program. The

School agrees

that no further growth in undergraduate enrollment should be planned and is actively pursuing a strategy to

limit enrollments to present levels (semester 1121, Spring 2012), concurrent with efforts to maximize enrollments within

scheduled courses,

attract and retain excellent students, and improve the School'sfaculty/student ratio. Expansion of the

School's offerings in the NOW program to a full Major (as one of four SFU departments participating in this 2012 initiative) and

further course development in the CODE program, also underway, will also enhance course access while maximizing resources

and accessibility.

b) Curriculum review: The School will complete in 2012-13 the curriculum review begun in 2011. The review focuses on

reducing course overlaps, simplifying prerequisite chains, updating course content and adding or deleting courses to reflect

faculty interest and changes in the field. Through working meetings of faculty at all ranks teaching in the three focus areas of

the School progress has been made toward these goals, contributing to the focus and emphasis on "quality over quantity"

recommended by the reviewers' report (item 3, p.ll). Thiscurriculum review is complemented by a project initiated in Spring

2012 with the assistance of IRP to improve course scheduling in Communication to identify and reduce bottlenecks in course

access for majors, and facilitate more effective and predictable course scheduling year over year and semester to semester.

c)Teaching for for

praxis

(Recommendation 2 page 10). TheSchool will improvethe visibility of the many courses we offer

across the curriculum (a majority) in which experiential learning, applied learning, and community-based learning are featured. This

goal will be achieved a) bya review of teaching methods in our courses (per course outlines) followed bya revision of calendar, website

and recruitment literature and b) by participation of individual faculty and faculty teams in pedagogical innovation facilitated by

Teaching and Learning and by FCAT. We will collaborate with the Co-Op program and with other FCAT schoolsto provide a degree of

professional training, work to enhance the accessibility of internet-based technology training (p.14) incourses within the limits of our

lab infrastructure, and consider collaborating with external partners suchas BCIT to provide further options forourstudents, suchas

certificate programs.

1.1.2 Graduate Programs:

Through its admissions process in 2013 the Graduate Program inthe School of Communication will address inthe shortterm the

temporaryimbalance of MAto PhD students (Recommendation 8,p.l3). The program will alsoexpand mentoring and

professional development opportunities fordoctoral candidates. We willcontinue to work with our Director of Advancementto

improve student funding from non-TA sources (one majorscholarship- B.C. Egg Marketing Board hasbeen added since the

External Review report was received.) The double Master's degree inGlobal Communication with the Communication

University of China in developmentsince 2010 was approved by Senateand Board of Governors inJuly 2012 andthe admission

process begins in December 2012 forthe first cohortforSeptember2013. Following the initiation of this degreethe School will

also begin to consider offering a course-based MA degree. TheSchool'srecruitment, fundraising and general information will

feature more details about our successful MAand PhD graduates, and the Schoolwillalso increase efforts to track alumniand

take advantage

of its global community of graduates.Alumni profiles are scheduled to be developed by current students as part

of the preparations for our2013 40th anniversary yearandassociated promotion and events anda database of graduates will be

developed from 2013 building on this initiative.

1.2 Resource implications ((if any):

SFU/CUC double M.A. degree resource commitments are outlined in the degree proposal.

1.3 Expected completion date/s:

Undergrad: Enrollments: fall 2012 and ongoing

Curriculum review: fall/spring 2012-13

Experientialand professional training- initiate assessment of its presence in current curriculum 2012-13

Graduate: MA/PhD proportion through 2013 intake

PhD professional dev't 2012-13 academic year

Funding (scholarships) enhance through advancement and faculty RA positions- continuing

CUC Double Masters first admissions for fall 2013

Course-based MA- to be considered by Graduate Studies committee from 2013

R~SEARCH

2.1 Actlon/s (what

Raing

to be

done):

The Extemal Review report provided a

very

positive assessment of our strengths, reputation and innovation outlined on

page 3

of the Report. Regarding research, the report was chiefly concerned with how faculty can balance the demands of

research, teaching and service. The School agrees with the reviewers that we could provide more opportunities for

undergraduates

participate In faculty-led research, for example by taking advantage of undergraduate RA funding

programs.

In order

manage the resource demands of a research-intensive school we will continue to require faculty at all ranks to

balance research with teaching and service. In addition we will seek an additional

staff

support position for the

management of research budgets and reporting, create an annual review process of the assignment of lab space and other

research Infrastructure, encourage and reward mentorlng of junior by senior faculty, and promote awareness of research

activity through colloquia and School publicity. Permanent records of highlights of research and creation In the School, and

of unique research resources (publications, recorded Interviews, etc.) will be achieved In collaboration with the Library

through

the digitization of archived materials to begin summer 2012. We note that this work has already begun with respect

the World Soundscape Project, an initiative of the School.

2.2

Resource implications ((H any):

Staff support

for research budget management may be shared within FCAT. Funding for digital archiving available through the SFU

library and archives will be sought In collaboration with our Librarian Sylvia Roberts.

2.3 Expected completion date/s:

AD:MlNISTRATION

3.1 Action/sfwhat

going

be done) :

The School

will complete its review of staff job descriptions/needs and workload, with particular attention

technical staff

and their role in enhancing the School website for internal functions as well as external publicity and recruitment.

will complete and implement a 2-year course teaching plan from

Sept.

2012.

will revise advisory committee structure In the School to add permanent and/or ad-hoc committees on such areas as space

planning and

technology review as part of a review of governance and the School governance document to be completed in the

2012-13 academic year.

3.2

Resource implications(if any):

3.3

Expected completion date/s:

above.

e) Working Environment

4.1 Action/sfwhat is going

done) :

In fall 2012 we will:

hold a meeting of continuing Faculty to review the balance of service,teaching and research and other issues of concern to

this group. Follow-up action will

determined at this meeting.

hold a retreat/meeting for Staff regarding professional development, job descriptions, and staff renewal

A special meeting

or meetings of members of the School Meeting will address the directorship and faculty renewal (fall/spring

2012-13).

4.2

Resource impllcations(if any):

4.3

Expected completion date/s:

above

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

Faculty complement.....................................

(OTHER)

5.1

Actlon/s:

•

We will present requests for the two faculty appointments recommended

our reviewers, aligned with the forthcoming

(fall

2012)

strategic plan and university priorities.

5.2

Resource implications(if any):

5.3

Expected completion date/s:

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

Unit Leader (signed)

Name

Alison Beale

ntle......

Director.....................................................

Date

Aug.20,201Z

Section 2-

Dean's

comments and endorsement of

the Action Plan

support the

School's

efforts to revise

its

undergraduate curriculum and

keep

enro

ments flat over the next few years

The

recent course access study

will provide good

input

the

school's efforts to reduce bottleneck

for

majors. To address

students'

interest

in more practical courses

the

school

also exploring curricular

collabo

ratio

across the

faculty,

specifically with

Publishing

and Interactive Arts and Technology.

The school

development

of a joint masters degree with

the

Communication University of China is an

important initiative.

Efforts

mprove

degree completion at the PhD

level

have

already been

underway

and should address the

imbalance

between

the

PhD

and MA.

I will work with the school to better understand its needs

budget management. As

funding

levels

increase,

this

will become

important.

Effort

to revise

the

governance

structure

of the school are starting and

support this effort

review

of the technical

staff

roles

is also a

good idea in light

of the changes

technical support needs

the school.

am sympathetic to the school

s need for an increase in faculty and

will

try to support strategies

for

financing

this in

light

the new budget model, but this may take several years

accomplish.

Faculty Dean

Date

August 20, 2012