Introduction
Suggested tactics and actions – aimed at enhancing QES courses and the development of uniquely qualified QES graduates – have been organized based on their scope of implementation. The sections are:
- Enhancing courses: actions that can be applied in a single course or sequence of courses.
- Enhancing existing degrees: actions for adjusting the priorities, delivery, or requirements of existing degree specializations without making major curricular changes.
- Adjusting degree programs: actions that would adjust degree expectations including alternatives to current degrees and degree structures.
- Department level suggestions: mainly about support and development of faculty and teaching assistants.
- Student support: suggested ways of ensuring appropriate expectations, improving the sense of community, supporting appropriate career preparation, etc.
- Career development: actions to help students prepare for post-graduation opportunities.
- Professional registration: specifics related to preparing BSc students for registration as professional geoscientists.
- Marketing recommendations are in the Marketing main menu section.
The 21 recommendation categories are summarized on this table which characterizes them in terms of their type, the implementation context and rough measures of urgency, impact, cost of implementation and cost of sustainment.
All specific suggestions are listed on a separate page.
How did these recommendations emerge? What inspired them?
Many come from faculty discussions, interviews and surveys. Some are specific recommendations articulated by at least a few different faculty members. Some arise in response to perceived opportunities, imperatives or barriers (eg specific questions in interviews). Others have been articulated by combining faculty input with wisdom from the peer reviewed literature or experiences of peers and colleagues. Students have also contributed their expectations, preferences and priorities, based on survey data and conversations with individuals.
How are recommendations expected to be used?
It is certainly true that curriculum belongs to the faculty. Understandably, curricula are often geared towards very specific disciplinary goals, and change is not easy, even when there is some desire to change. Some cynicism is inevitable, since curriculum reform is sometimes based on fads and box-checking rather than genuine engagement (Usher, 2018). Therefore it is anticipated that an important “next step” will be to clarify priorities among stake holders, choose the categories of recommendations that are relevant, then use the detailed suggestions as a starting point for discussions that will first clearly define the goals. Then a “project” can be initiated, practical plans and timelines can be prepared, and support can be sought as needed.
Assumptions underlying recommendations
If we want our programs to help prepare students to solve global challenges that require interdisciplinary work, then it behooves us to facilitate opportunities in which students practice these integrative or synthesis abilities.
Several recommendations on the degree specializations page (capstones, etc.) are driven by the need to implement opportunities for students to practice synthesis, systems & critical thinking, societal relevance, and other “higher level thinking” aspects of learning. One reference with an example of how this is not a new educational perspective is Yasar and Landau, 2003. EOAS faculty certainly recognize the importance of creating opportunities where students practice and re-practice “higher level thinking”. There are many examples in EOAS courses that serve as useful precedent. Recommendations related to equity diversion and inclusion are also addressed under this heading.
There is precedent in EOAS. For example the ENSC program has unique characteristics such a 6-credit capstone project-based course, new “climate action labs” (in which students from all three year-levels develop community-engaged climate action skills), and 2 core courses (ENVR 200 & 300) in which students investigate major global, regional, and local environmental issues, and learn research and reporting methodologies for a range of scientific disciplines and fields.
Engineering students also take a 6-credit 4th year capstone course involving industry sponsors supporting community-based projects.
Courses such as EOSC212 and 453 and others do appear to aim to have students thinking about global research questions. The Department may want to identify further opportunities for students to focus on global challenges, interdisciplinarity, systems thinking and societal relevance. There are likely such opportunities within existing courses across the curriculum, and a departmental commitment to do make such adjustments would be needed.
NOTE: some recommendations include “drop down” sections representing further discussions. Those drop down sections are not recommendations – they are “sidebars” or “boxed” content.