report of the academic program transformation task force

Report of the Academic Program Transformation Task Force

Presented to President Ilene Busch-Vishniac November 30, 2013

Academic Program Transformation Task Force Report

2

The Academic Program Transformation Task Force was established in March 2013 with a mandate to review all academic programs at the University of Saskatchewan and assign them to categories reflecting their priority to the institution. The task force comprised 20 members, including two students and 18 faculty members, drawn from a diverse range of academic units and disciplines. Over the period from March to November 2013, the task force adopted review criteria, designed templates as the basis for gathering information, and reviewed a total of 485 programs. This report reflects the deliberations of the task force. The task force assigned each program to a quintile category. This allocation is set out in Appendices Four and Five, which show these assignments by quintile and by unit. The table in Appendix Four includes brief notes about each program that highlight some of the task force discussion. Though the deliberations about programs were confidential, the task force attempted to be as open as possible about other aspects of its work. This report contains a description of the policies adopted and the process followed by the task force, and we comment on the modifications that were made to the “Dickeson model” of program prioritization. The prioritization process offered the task force a unique perspective on the academic programs of the university, and we have taken advantage of this to include in our report some observations on broad themes emerging from our review. We have commented, for example, on interdisciplinary programs, on the possibility that overspecialization has weakened some programs, and on Aboriginal programming. We are grateful to the members of the data support team, whose assistance with data and logistical issues was vital to the work of the task force. We also acknowledge the work of the many, many people across the university who worked diligently to complete the templates that were the basis of our review.

The members of the task force unanimously approved the report contained herein.

Preface


3

Academic Program Transformation Task Force Members 4 Context for Program Prioritization 5 The Work of the Task Force 6 Quintile Scores for Each Program 11

Summary of the quintile scores 11 The scores 12 Application of the Dickeson model to the University of Saskatchewan 12 What does “prioritization” mean? 14 Unique circumstances of the College of Medicine 14

General Observations about Academic Programs at the University of Saskatchewan 15

Interdisciplinary programming 15 Toxicology programs 17 Interdisciplinary programs in the College of Graduate Studies and Research 17 Stronger links between related programs 18 Aboriginal programming 18 Graduation rates and completion times 19 Big programs and small programs 20 Number of programs within units 20 Three-year bachelor’s programs 21 Service teaching 22 Research, scholarly and artistic work 22 The value of strong programs 23

Program Prioritization in the Future 23

Regular prioritization 23 More up-front work 23 Audit of data 24 Diversity is important 24 Snapshot or trends 24 Standardized central data 25

Conclusion 25 Appendix One: Academic Program Transformation Task Force Criteria and Weightings 26 Appendix Two: The Program Template Used by the Task Force 29 Appendix Three: The Scoring Rubric Used by the Task Force 35 Appendix Four: Detailed Program Listing by Quintile 42 Appendix Five: Quintile Scores by Academic Unit 108

Table of Contents


4

Beth Bilson (co-chair), Professor, College of Law Lisa Kalynchuk (co-chair), Professor, Department of Medicine Scott Adams, Undergraduate student, College of Medicine Sina Adl, Professor, Department of Soil Science Paul Babyn, Professor, Department of Medical Imaging Ralph Deters, Professor, Department of Computer Science Pamela Downe, Associate Professor, Department of Archaeology and Anthropology Markus Hecker, Associate Professor, School of Environment and Sustainability John Kleefeld, Assistant Professor, College of Law Dean Kolbinson, Professor, College of Dentistry Ed Krol, Associate Professor, College of Pharmacy and Nutrition Karen Lawson, Professor, Department of Psychology Charles Maule, Professor, Department of Civil and Geological Engineering Venkatesh Meda, Associate Professor, Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering Pat Renihan, Professor, Department of Educational Administration John Rigby, Associate Professor, Department of Management and Marketing Jaswant Singh, Professor, Department of Veterinary Biomedical Sciences Tom Steele, Professor, Department of Physics and Engineering Physics Josie Steeves, Graduate student, Department of Educational Administration Doug Thorpe, Associate Professor, Department of English

Academic Program Transformation Task Force Members


5

In January 2013, President Ilene Busch-Vishniac announced that the University of Saskatchewan would be undertaking a program prioritization process entitled TransformUS as one of the strategies for making operating budget adjustments to confront a projected $44.5 million deficit by the year 2016. In the press release accompanying the announcement, the objective of the process was described in the following terms:

By reviewing all academic and administrative programs supported by the operating budget simultaneously and equally against stated criteria, informed decisions can be made to invest resources, make changes, or eliminate or reduce programs or activities which rank as having lower priority according to these criteria.

This was not the first time that the university had stated an intention to reappraise the investment of resources in academic programs. In 1999, the university embarked on a 6-year process of Systematic Program Review; teams composed of external and internal reviewers assessed 152 academic programs. The rationale for Systematic Program Review as stated by then-Provost Michael Atkinson was in part to identify programs where disinvestment or elimination should be considered. In the first of three university integrated plans, A Framework for Action: University of Saskatchewan Integrated Plan 2003-07, a new focus on aligning resources with academic priorities was suggested:

But Integrated Planning and [Systematic Program Review] have both shown that the University continues to do more in the academic and administrative areas than it can properly sustain. We will, and must, make decisive judgments about our institutional priorities and follow up on these decisions by shifting resources from areas of lowest priority (even though these may still represent valuable intellectual and instructional activities) to fields of greatest need and opportunity.

Though this statement was formulated in 2002, it states in succinct form the basis for the program prioritization process in which the task force has recently engaged. The focus of the work of the task force has not been on evaluation of the academic quality of programs, but rather on how the resources invested in them reflect the priorities of the university as a result of more than a decade of integrated planning. In her announcement launching the TransformUS project, President Busch-Vishniac indicated that the model adopted for the prioritization process would be that formulated by Robert C. Dickeson and followed in a number of North American universities. In the introduction to Dickeson’s book Prioritizing Academic Programs and Services: Reallocating Resources to Achieve Strategic Balance, Stanley O. Ikenberry, President of the American Council on Education, commented in terms that echo the language of A Framework for Action:

The relationship between academic quality and financial resources has always been apparent; an institution’s financial health is crucial to its academic quality. The paradigm has shifted, however, or at least it has expanded, to recognize that academic quality also is linked to purposeful and efficient utilization of resources. Monies wasted or underutilized mean fewer dollars for the academic priorities of

Context for Program Prioritization


6

greatest urgency. Using financial resources in purposeful efficient ways is precisely what one seeks to do in the prioritization of academic programs.

At the heart of the Dickeson model lie two important assumptions: that the process should be one focused on the relationship between resources and priorities, not on academic ranking of programs; and that the process should be conducted by faculty members. University Council approved program prioritization in principle on January 25, 2013, and a process was put in place for the selection of members for two task forces, one for academic programs and one for support services. The selection committee comprised the Provost and Vice-President Academic Brett Fairbairn, the Vice-President Finance and Resources Greg Fowler, and representatives of Council standing committees. Nominations were solicited from the campus community, and 227 names were considered for membership on the two task forces. In early March 2013, 22 appointments were made to the Academic Program Transformation Task Force (20 faculty members and two students) and 25 to the support services task force.1 As the membership of the task forces was being established, a data support team was also being formed under the leadership of Assistant Provost Institutional Planning and Assessment Pauline Melis. Members of the data support team were drawn from the Institutional Planning and Assessment Office, Information and Communication Technology, the Financial Services Division, the Human Resources Division, and the Office of the Vice-President Research. Their mandate was to provide the centrally available data the task forces would require in the course of the review process.

March and April. The academic program task force met in March for two days of workshops facilitated by Larry Goldstein, a consultant familiar with the implementation of the Dickeson prioritization process at a number of North American universities. During these two days, the task force settled on the criteria and criteria weightings that would guide the review. The criteria and weightings were circulated to the campus community, through a TransformUS blog, through meetings with deans and department heads, and through town hall meetings with faculty, staff and students. The criteria and weightings generated considerable comment, and on the basis of this feedback, the criteria were revised and finalized. The final version of the criteria and weightings is provided in Appendix One. May and June. Over the months of May and June, the task force pursued a number of important issues. One of these involved the formulation of a list of programs to be reviewed. Though the term “program” had generally been used at the University of Saskatchewan to refer to a grouping of courses leading to the award of a degree or other credential, the task force adopted a broader definition based on the Dickeson model, which suggested that “any institutional activity that consumes resources” should be treated as a program. This definition would include the research activities of academic units and centres. The formulation and refinement of a programs list was a critical part of the work of the task force at this stage.

1 Two members subsequently withdrew from the academic task force.

The Work of the Task Force


7

Successive versions of the list were published, and amendments were solicited to make the list as comprehensive as possible, with the proviso that programs which had come into existence later than July 2009 should not be included in the review.2 There were also discussions between the co-chairs of the academic programs task force and the support services task force to determine the assignment of some activities with both academic and administrative dimensions. Over this period as well, the task force drafted a template for use in collecting information about programs, a guide to assist in the completion of the template, and a scoring rubric to inform the university community about the approach to be used in assessing the completed templates. Drafts of the template and guide were posted on the TransformUS website, and comments were solicited from the campus community. Extensive discussion took place with the data support team about the kinds of centrally available data that could be provided to units as they completed the templates, and which would be useful to the task force in its deliberations. The task force and members of the data support team also worked to create an online version of the template that would include links to relevant statements of university strategic directions, and a workflow system that would allow the process of template completion and approval to be tracked. Worksheets were also developed containing customized data for each of the academic units responsible for completing program templates. An important component of this phase of the process was the selection of five programs to test the utility of the template and guide. The programs chosen included a fine arts undergraduate program, a social science undergraduate program, a professional program, a master’s level program in an interdisciplinary school, and a doctoral program in a science discipline (though unexpected circumstances meant that the last of these could not be used in this pilot project). The sample programs were invaluable to the task force in evaluating the draft template, and important revisions were made to the template as a result of this experience. The task force is extremely grateful to the units who participated in this pilot. Earlier in the process, e-mail addresses had been created for the task force co-chairs and for the data support team, and both of these were the destination for many questions, both prior to the distribution of finalized templates and worksheets, and over the summer as hundreds of people across campus made their contribution to the completion of the templates for review. The questions asked and the concerns raised throughout these stages of the process revealed a number of common themes. A high proportion of questions and comments centered on the instruction from the task force that closely related programs would have to be differentiated for the purpose of completing the templates. As the university has generally tracked resources according to academic unit – usually departments, colleges or schools – rather than by programs, this required those completing the templates to think in unfamiliar terms and to undertake the challenging process of estimating what proportion of the resources of a unit should be attributed to each program. In the College of Arts and Science, for example, many departments had never devoted attention to the distinction between three-year degrees and four-year degrees; indeed, many students are not actually enrolled in either type of program until they have almost completed it. In some disciplines, there has 2 Some programs given formal approval later than this date were successors to similar programs that had been in

existence for some time; in those cases, the task force did review the templates and categorize the programs.


8

been little distinction between master’s level and doctoral programs in terms of courses taught, faculty time or links to research activity. Another concern was whether the process could accurately capture the amount of “service” teaching carried out by many academic units, where the number of students who take courses from unit faculty may bear little relation to the number who actually obtain a qualification in that discipline. A number of units provide extensive support in this way to programs in other departments or colleges. Yet another set of concerns was expressed about whether the process could appropriately take into account interdisciplinary instructional programs and research. In developing the final template and scoring system, the task force considered all of these concerns carefully. Though task force members recognized that it would be a challenge for units to provide information in separate templates about closely related programs, we concluded that examining each program separately would give us the best basis for deciding on the relative priority of programs. With respect to service teaching, the task force considered the possibility of asking units to complete a separate template for a service teaching program. We concluded, however, that the questions in the template connected with internal demand would permit units to provide adequate information about their contribution to other programs, and that this interdependence would be obscured if separate templates were completed. The task force also decided that the invitation for discursive comments at a number of points in the template would allow units to comment on the interdisciplinary aspects of their programs. The task force considered whether to ask units to complete additional templates for the administrative work and public service carried out by faculty members. Given the absence of helpful definitions of what public service contributions might legitimately be seen as integral to the academic mission of the university, and given the variation in the way these activities are reported and tracked, we decided that separate templates for public service would not provide sufficiently useful information to justify the effort that would be required to complete them. Furthermore, it was our view that where community engagement is an important component of a particular program, the unit responsible for the program would be able to provide comments on this in the template for that program. In the case of administrative work, we decided not to require a separate template, but to ask units to record the investment of faculty resources in administration as part of the calculation of costs of programs. The task force considered whether distinctive templates should be created for instructional programs, research programs, and the activities of centres. We ultimately made the choice to create a common template as a vehicle for gathering information about these different types of program. This made it possible during the review for the task force to get a sense of the research environment in which instructional programs are offered, and of the teaching obligations of the unit in which research activity is carried out. July. In early July, the final template, guide and scoring rubric were posted, and the templates and worksheets distributed to those who would have a role in completing the templates. Appendices Two and Three provide copies of the finalized version of the template


9

and scoring rubric used by the taskforce. Four information sessions were held in July and the first week of August to answer questions about specific aspects of the templates or about the university data that had been provided. The task force co-chairs and the data support team also answered many e-mail inquiries from those designated to complete the templates. The co-chairs of the task force had access to the templates as they were being completed, and were in a position to offer advice in response to queries about various aspects of the templates. August. In August, the task force used a number of the completed templates as the basis for discussion of broad assessment and rating issues, and engaged in a calibration exercise so we could be confident that members of the task force were approaching the assessment of the templates according to a common understanding of the criteria. During this time, the task force also adopted a policy on conflicts of interest. According to this policy, members would be regarded as having a conflict of interest in relation to rating programs associated with their home academic unit or units, and programs associated with academic units in which their spouses or partners have academic appointments. Under this policy, task force members could also declare a genuine conflict of interest in relation to other programs. Members absented themselves during discussion and categorization of programs for which they had a conflict of interest. The task force established ground rules for its deliberations, which emphasized the responsibility of each member to prepare for and attend meetings, to contribute to the discussion, and to make a conscientious effort to prioritize each program. Though the task force acknowledged the value of openness and transparency concerning the process and the criteria for the review, the ground rules included a commitment to strict confidentiality concerning the deliberations about the programs themselves. This commitment to confidentiality permitted the task force to have candid discussions and to make difficult decisions. September to November. Beginning in early September, the task force scheduled two regular weekly meetings to begin assessing programs in earnest. The task force also adopted stringent quorum and rating requirements. Each task force member was required to provide a rating for every program, unless a conflict of interest had been identified. Meetings of the task force could not be held unless 75% or more of the members were present, and in order to place a program in a particular quintile, it was necessary to have the support of 75% or more of members. At each of the first two meetings in September, the task force considered a relatively small number of templates to allow time for members to become comfortable with the procedures and the application of the scoring rubric. At an early meeting the task force decided, in order to remain on track to complete the work in the time allowed and in the interest of fairness, that the review would be conducted on the basis of the templates as submitted; no further information, clarifications or corrections would be sought or accepted from academic units. There was extensive discussion by the task force of the implications for our rankings of assessing templates containing confusing, incomplete or apparently incorrect information, and we decided that the task force would have to make the best possible assessment on the basis of the evidence proffered in the template. This decision was reached on the basis that the task force had made considerable efforts to provide guidance and advice prior to the circulation of the templates for completion, and had given units opportunities to raise any questions they might have. The task force was also reassured in making this decision by the


10

fact that many units had evidently found it possible to provide clear and helpful information in their templates. Though the task force did not ask or permit units to revise their templates once the review process was underway, we did have access to the centrally provided data, which allowed us in some instances to confirm or understand the information provided in the templates. The task force concluded early in its discussions that it was important that each member review all of the programs, in order to ensure that the broadest range of perspectives possible be brought to bear on the allocation of each program to a quintile. This meant that in preparation for the weekly meetings, members of the task force would review approximately 50 templates and provide provisional scores. This extensive preparation by individual members for each meeting created a climate for vigorous discussion. At the meetings, each template was considered separately and an effort was made to reach consensus on the assignment of the program to a quintile. The final determination as to quintile was noted, and brief notes recorded to reflect the rationale for the placement. Members of the task force could also ask that a template be flagged for further discussion at a later time. After several weeks of reviews, a slightly fuller description of the characteristics of the quintile categories was drafted and posted to give the campus community a better sense of how the task force viewed the implications of placement in each of these categories. The task force continued to discuss general issues emerging from the templates, both at its regular meetings and at an additional Saturday meeting in early October. For each agenda of the initial review, templates were selected by the co-chairs to reflect as wide a range of programs as possible, and efforts were made not to include related programs or programs from the same unit on any agenda. This helped to avoid bias in favour of or against particular units. It also permitted the task force to consider each program in isolation, and to examine the information provided about its quality, rationale and prospects. A series of subsequent meetings, including a day-long Saturday meeting, was devoted to revisiting the placement of the programs. In the second pass, the programs were considered in relation to other programs within the unit. This enabled task force members to consider the programs more holistically against the background of the unit, to identify any discrepancies between related templates, and to assure ourselves that a consistent approach to evaluation had been used. This second review also gave the task force a chance to consider whether there were additional general themes that should be identified in the report. Over the course of its mandate, members of the task force demonstrated an extremely strong commitment to the prioritization project. During the preparatory phase from March to August 2013, the task force met for approximately 50 hours in developing the template, scoring rubric and other materials. During the review period from September 4, 2013 to November 30, 2013, the task force met for an additional 90 hours, and individual members spent many more hours reviewing the templates.


11

Summary of the quintile scores. Table 1 shows the distribution of quintile scores by number of programs and by program operating allocation as provided in the templates. At the outset, the task force was asked to assign 20% of all programs to each quintile based on an estimate of the costs associated with running each program. The task force made considerable efforts to distribute the programs as evenly as possible among the quintiles but it became clear to us as we progressed through the templates that it would not be possible to arrive at an exactly equal distribution. There were several reasons for this. Programs vary considerably in size. They also vary in the degree to which investment or disinvestment has occurred or is occurring, and in the extent to which the resources they consume are institutional resources. After wrestling with these considerations, we are confident that the distribution of programs across quintiles is as even as it can be, but that does not mean that the programs fell neatly into five equal slices either by number or by dollar value.

Table 1: Quintile Breakdown by Number of Programs and Operating Allocation

Quintile Number of Programs

Percentage Breakdown

Total Program Operating Allocation as Provided in

Templates Percentage Breakdown

1 16 3% $39,851,843 21% 2 143 30% $64,226,272 34% 3 115 24% $61,884,213 33% 4 107 22% $18,301,329 10% 5 98 20% $5,146,951 3%

479 100% $189,410,607 100% The difficulties associated with assigning programs to quintiles were compounded by the variation in the way financial information was reported in the templates, and by the evident unreliability of some of the numbers provided to us. The university has made significant efforts to create a data warehouse comprised of institutional data collected systematically and according to uniform criteria, and they have made strides in this regard. We understood from the beginning, however, that there are limitations to the information accessible at the institutional level, and we were prepared to take these into account in assessing the templates. The task force encountered further challenges in interpreting the information provided by units that resulted from using institutional data in connection with individual programs. These variations may have resulted from misunderstandings about what the task force was asking for, from a desire to focus positive attention on some programs rather than others, or from other sources. In a number of cases, units indicated that there was no investment at all in a particular program, and in some of these instances this assertion was at odds with the discursive descriptions in the templates. In other cases, it was not clear where figures had been drawn from or how they had been used, as they did not seem to be consistent with the central data provided. The task force decided early in its deliberations that we would have to rely on the information provided to us in the templates once they had been submitted. We decided that it was unrealistic to think we could undertake to clarify or correct the information in all of the templates. We also thought that to inquire about particular templates where the issues were

Quintile Scores for Each Program


12

more evident would be unfair to other units from whom additional information was not sought. We did make our best efforts to understand and to interpret fairly the information in each template. The task force dealt with these challenges as thoroughly as possible, and took the variations in information into account as much as we could. The scores. The quintile scores assigned to individual programs are provided in Appendix Four. The programs are listed in alphabetical order by college and quintile score, so that all programs assigned to quintile one appear first, followed by quintile two, and so on. We have also included a brief set of notes with each listed program to provide the context under which the quintile assignment was made. These notes are not meant to be comprehensive but rather to highlight the salient features of the program that emerged during task force deliberations and that influenced the ranking. It is also important to understand that these notes could be either relative or absolute in nature. For example, a comment related to “small number of students” could indicate a relative determination that the number of students in the program is small relative to similar programs at the institution. Or, it could indicate an absolute determination that the number of students in the program is too small to be sustainable, such as the case for some elite programs or programs with one or two students over the three-year period that was the subject of our review. For those readers interested in viewing the quintile scores by unit, this information is provided in Appendix Five. Application of the Dickeson model to the University of Saskatchewan. The Dickeson model provided the framework for the deliberations of the task force, and we followed the basic principles outlined in Dickeson’s book and in the description conveyed to us by the consultant at the outset of the process. The task force concluded that the framework provides enough flexibility to apply the model in a fashion that is suitable to the characteristics of a particular institution. To members of the university community who have read about the Dickeson model or followed its application in other places, it will be evident from our report that our process deviated slightly from a literal interpretation of the one outlined by Dickeson. One way in which our process may appear to have deviated from the Dickeson model has to do with the characterization of the quintiles. In much discussion within the university, the quintiles have been referred to as a hierarchy from “best” to “worst.” Indeed, the process as presented to us by the consultant suggested that if the task force could not reach consensus on placement in a “higher” quintile, consensus should be tried at successively “lower” quintiles until an assignment could be made. After reviewing a number of templates, however, we concluded that each of the quintiles represents a distinctive set of characteristics, and that it would be preferable not to treat them as though they are a descending scale. The fourth quintile is perhaps the best example of what we mean. In some cases, the assignment of a program to the fourth quintile may have been “negative” in the sense that the program seemed to be struggling or dysfunctional in the context of our criteria, and needs to be fundamentally rethought if it is to survive; or it may have been “positive” in the sense that, while it may not be a high priority for the university to continue to maintain this program in its current form, it may benefit from synergies with other programs or the addition of necessary structural support. It is clear from some templates that units have already begun a process of refocusing or restructuring certain programs, and placement in the fourth quintile was in these cases a sign of deference for a decision already taken by a unit.


13

In some instances, the task force assigned programs to quintile four because the information we had received in the templates was incomplete or unclear. In these cases, the placement in quintile four indicates that the task force thought it would be necessary to investigate the program more closely before deciding to take any action. In some cases, placement in quintile five was also indicative of decisions taken by units to suspend or eliminate a program, possibly in favour of other programs in the unit, or possibly because it was no longer seen as meeting a need. There are, for example, a number of Post Graduate Diploma programs still on the books in a number of areas; these may have been seen at one point as providing transitional opportunities to graduate programs for underqualified students, or as a reentry point for professional graduates wishing to upgrade their credentials, but there has been virtually no enrolment in these programs for a number of years, and it is our view that no useful purpose is served by retaining them. In other cases where programs were assigned to quintile five, the commitment of resources to a program was so low that we concluded it could not be a high priority for the unit, and that a placement in quintile five would reflect this. We also assigned programs to quintile five in a handful of cases where we received virtually no information about the program, and could not therefore assign it to any other category. Because this was a prioritization exercise, and our assessment was not exclusively focused on the quality of programs or on the soundness of the objectives underlying the creation of the programs, there are programs assigned to quintiles four and five that are closely aligned with important university or community interests. Our assessment of these programs was that, whatever their merits, they are not working in their current form, and that some other means may have to be found to serve their stated objectives. One of the assumptions underlying our assignment of programs to quintiles was that, even after the current round of budget adjustment through TransformUS and other projects has come to an end, the university will continue to face financial uncertainty going forward. In that context, the prospect would be that all programs across the institution would face periodic cuts in resources. Thus, though the short descriptor of quintile three is “maintain with decreased resources,” this designation seemed to us to capture what the destiny would be for all programs without a prioritization process. In other words, assignment to quintile three does not represent a “negative” assessment of the program, but a recommendation that it should continue to be exposed to whatever vagaries the financial future of the university might hold. It represents what we expect to be the norm in an environment of budget reduction. An assignment to quintile two, on the other hand, indicates that the task force concluded that the program is of higher priority to the university, and it should therefore have at least its current level of resources protected. Some have described quintile two as representing the “status quo,” but we think this understates the positive quality of the assessment that has led to an assignment to this quintile. The programs placed in quintile two are, in our view, programs with manifest strengths, and of high priority to the institution, and programs that should therefore be excused from the budget adjustments that might be undertaken in a climate of financial exigency. An assignment to quintile one indicates that the task force identified the program as one that warrants additional investment by the university. Our assessment of these programs was that they are strongly aligned with the priorities of the institution – in the broadest sense – and that the units responsible for them had demonstrated that these programs could achieve


14

even more on the basis of additional investment. These programs were characterized by excellent inputs and outcomes, vigorous research activity in the unit, and often a strong national or international reputation. In addition to two of the university’s flagship research centres, the programs in quintile one include undergraduate, graduate and research programs in a variety of disciplines. What does “prioritization” mean? Assessing programs according to a number of weighted criteria is a complex endeavour, and the placement of any particular program in a quintile would have to be explained by a combination of factors. Our assignment of programs to quintiles represented, not an application of a precise mathematical formula, but an exercise of judgment taking the range of criteria into account. In this context, it must be remembered that our assignment was to create a priority ranking of programs, not to assess them in terms exclusively of either their efficiency or their quality. The use of the word “priority” has, we think, created some confusion when we have tried to explain the nature and objectives of our process to members of the campus community. The term “priority” does, of course, have resonance in relation to the university’s integrated planning process and the formulation of strategic directions for the institution. One of the criteria (Criterion 9) was focused specifically on university priorities in this sense. Units were asked explicitly in the template to describe how the program is aligned with the strategic directions of the university, and links were provided to the strategic directions and the three integrated plans to assist with answering these questions. This criterion was only one of ten, however, and the prioritization process in which we were engaged was not disproportionately based on this factor. When the task force considered what would give a program a higher priority for the university, it looked to the full range of factors set out in the criteria – including demand, cost, revenues, size, quality of inputs and outputs, and potential opportunities – in an effort to help the university answer the questions “If we have to stop doing something we are doing or disinvest in something we are doing, what might that be?” and “If we have limited resources to reinvest in academic programs, where are the most strategic places to make that investment?” Many, many programs in the university have become well-aligned with the strategic directions stated through the integrated planning process, and the inclusion of the questions associated with Criterion 9 in the template reflected the view of the task force that such alignment should be a factor in considering every program. Given the budgetary impetus behind the TransformUS project, however, even if 100% of the programs were found to be strongly aligned with the strategic directions, the university would still need to make decisions about where it should be disinvesting and reinvesting, and it is “priority” in this sense that has been the focus of the deliberations of the task force. Unique circumstances of the College of Medicine. It is important to make a specific comment concerning the way the task force approached the assessment of templates from the College of Medicine. During the life of the task force, various working groups in the College of Medicine circulated several plans for significant restructuring and refocusing of all units and programs within the College, including the biomedical sciences departments. The impetus for these initiatives was the ongoing challenge faced by the College in meeting the standards for accreditation and enhancing research activity and outcomes. Some of these plans were put forward to University Council and approved in principle as a basis for reform.


15

One option for the task force, given the definition we had given to the quintiles, would have been simply to place all programs in the College of Medicine in quintile four to signify that they should be reformulated or restructured. After extensive discussion of the issue, the task force decided that our mandate was distinct from the objectives of those overseeing the structural changes in the College of Medicine. Our mandate is focused on the priority to be attached to individual programs, not on the more general questions of the efficacy of administrative structures or of specific college goals. In light of this conclusion, we decided that we should assess the programs in the College of Medicine in the same way we assessed all other programs. In addition to the initial discussion of how our mandate related to the College of Medicine programs, we faced some challenges with respect to the information we received concerning those programs. In the case of a number of clinical departments, there seemed to be some misunderstanding of the relevance of the TransformUS project to their programs, and a review of their templates will show that the information we received concerning these programs, with a few exceptions, was incomplete and provided limited guidance. A number of these programs were assigned to quintile four because we did not have any basis on which to allocate them to quintiles one, two or three. This was less true of the biomedical science departments, whose templates generally contained more information. In some cases, programs from these units were also allocated to quintile four because the template led us to the conclusion that a reappraisal of these programs has the potential to strengthen them.

After conducting a review of all academic programs at the University of Saskatchewan, the task force identified a number of broad themes emerging from the templates. Though making observations on these cross-cutting issues was not strictly required for the purpose of assessing individual programs and placing them in categories, we have concluded that it would be useful to include our comments in this report for two reasons. The first reason is to provide some context for the assessments we made of individual programs. Our sense of the common issues facing academic units helped to inform our assessment of the specific programs for which those units are responsible. The second reason is that the task force was in a unique position to observe academic activities in the university. To have each of 20 colleagues from all corners of the institution read and assess information on close to 500 programs, and then to have them engage in discussion of each of the programs and on the programs as a body of activity, created a unique opportunity for this group to see program characteristics that have implications cutting across disciplines and academic units. We wish to emphasize that we understood our primary task to be the examination and assessment of individual programs, and that is where our energies were largely directed. We decided nevertheless to include in our report observations based on the broader themes suggested by this review. Interdisciplinary programming. For two decades or more, units within the university and the institution as a whole have been exploring ways of bringing about greater exchange and

General Observations about Academic Programs at the University of Saskatchewan


16

collaboration across disciplinary boundaries. In the case of research, scholarly and artistic work, efforts have been made to develop practices that will draw on the expertise and insights of different disciplines to provide more sophisticated answers to inquiry. New approaches to instructional programming are aimed at enriching the experience of students by helping them to see fruitful interconnections between different areas of study. This interest in interdisciplinary programming is not, of course, unique to this university. Granting councils, for example, have manifested a desire to see a reduction in the rigidity of disciplinary boundaries in academic institutions, and this, along with other forces, has induced universities across the country to develop strategies for encouraging interdisciplinary activity. At this university, there are now many examples of interdisciplinary instructional programs and research initiatives, and of centres that are intended to foster interdisciplinary collaboration. Some prominent examples, such as the Global Institute for Food Security and the Global Institute for Water Security were established too recently to fall within our review parameters, but the task force considered a number of other interdisciplinary programs. Though it is impossible to make universally applicable generalizations about these programs, as they vary considerably in size, objectives and resources, certain common features can be identified. In nearly all cases, programs had their origins in the enthusiasm of small groups of faculty who wished to explore ways of working with scholars in other disciplines. What might be called “first generation” interdisciplinary programs were generally established by working within an existing allocation of resources. Faculty members might participate in a coordinating governance body of some kind, teach or co-teach courses with interdisciplinary components, or collaborate on interdisciplinary research projects in addition to the scholarly work they carried out in their home unit. Academic units might agree to co-list courses, or to provide limited administrative support for the interdisciplinary activity. In later versions of interdisciplinary activity, such as the Priority Determination process of the late 1990s, the university committed a number of new faculty appointments to interdisciplinary initiatives, though these were still mainly housed in departments representing a “core” discipline. With the advent of the interdisciplinary school model in the mid 2000s, a different paradigm was followed; in this model, a number of faculty appointments were made directly to the schools, and these schools – the School of Environment and Sustainability, the Johnson-Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy, and the School of Public Health – also operate in dedicated facilities. The task force categorized the interdisciplinary programs offered at the University of Saskatchewan across the full range of quintiles. In some cases – a number of the undergraduate biotechnology programs, for example – the academic units themselves identified programs as failed interdisciplinary experiments, which had never created sufficient student demand to remain sustainable, and which should be considered for elimination. In the templates for these programs, the units typically commented that the students would apparently prefer to receive a degree with a more traditional disciplinary label, although they were prepared to enroll in selected courses with an interdisciplinary dimension. Leaving aside these cases where the original predictions of student interest turned out to be inaccurate, our general observation was that the interdisciplinary programs that did less well in our assessment were those that were most heavily reliant on volunteer efforts of faculty to


17

sustain them. Many interdisciplinary programs could demonstrate that they had a strong alignment with the strategic directions of the institution, but this was only one component of our assessment. Some programs received lower scores because no significant investment of dedicated resources had been made in them, and this was often linked to poor or uncertain outcomes, low levels of demand from students or other constituencies, and an inability to realize fully the collaborative potential of the program. Though participants in these programs are bringing their good will to the enterprise, it is difficult for them to mount effective programs without an adequate resource framework. To choose one example, the programs in biomedical engineering are strongly linked to societal needs and draw on a range of expertise across the university, but have struggled because there has been little direct investment of faculty or administrative resources to support the programs. In contrast, interdisciplinary programs based on dedicated resources tended to demonstrate more vitality and stronger outcomes. Some of the interdisciplinary graduate schools, for example, seem to have set a promising course, as evidenced by indicators such as the growing numbers of students enrolled in their programs, their ability to explore and exploit community partnerships, and the levels of research funding they are able to attract. Toxicology programs. One area of interdisciplinary strength for the university is in the field of toxicology, where there are a number of well-established programs. The task force noted that the Toxicology Centre, currently a Type B centre, indicated its aspiration to be restructured as an academic unit. The centre argued that this would make the links between toxicology research and the undergraduate and graduate programs more direct and less complicated. In light of the comments we have made about interdisciplinary programming in general, the option of conversion to an academic unit in order to ensure more effective coordination of interdisciplinary activity is an example of the kinds of reconfiguration that the university might explore. Interdisciplinary programs in the College of Graduate Studies and Research. The College of Graduate Studies and Research has been responsible for overseeing a number of interdisciplinary programs, including the generic interdisciplinary M.A., M.Sc. and Ph.D. programs and several programs in toxicology. It will be seen from the table in Appendix Four that, with the exception of the M.Sc. and Ph.D. programs in toxicology, we have suggested that these programs should be considered for elimination. The enrolments in the two master’s level programs have decreased in recent years, and this suggested to us that students at that level are able to meet their objectives by other means. During this period, for example, the enrolments in master’s level programs in the three interdisciplinary schools have grown steadily, and it may be that the diverse programs in the schools are providing adequate interdisciplinary options. There has continued to be a cohort of students in the Ph.D. program, and we accept that it is necessary to have some vehicle for students at the doctoral level whose interests do not coincide with existing disciplinary – or even interdisciplinary – structures. We are not convinced, however, that the current program structure is the most effective way to meet this need. Though it was difficult to assess the templates for these programs, because faculty time and most other resources associated with the instruction, mentoring and supervision of students in the programs are drawn from other units, we did conclude that the diffusion of responsibility for students enrolled in these programs weakens their focus and disguises the commitment of resources dedicated to them.


18

The interdisciplinary climate has changed since these programs were first established. Virtually all academic units are engaged in interdisciplinary and cross-disciplinary activity with other parts of the university. In this context, it seems that it would be possible to accommodate the interdisciplinary interests of graduate students within other graduate programs or under the auspices of academic units. The M.Sc. and Ph.D. programs in toxicology are examples of programs that have benefited from well-defined links with the Toxicology Centre, and from well-defined oversight roles for faculty associated with that centre. Stronger links between related programs. In recent years, the University of Saskatchewan has taken steps to encourage greater collaboration and closer links across academic units and disciplines. As we noted above, this has led to the establishment of some strong interdisciplinary programs. Our review across the spectrum of academic programs suggests that more steps could be taken to foster links between academic units offering programs in related areas. We noted, for example, that there are a number of programs in areas such as statistics, environment, microbiology, immunology and public health. There may be a sound academic or practical rationale for the retention of distinct academic units or programs in these areas, and we acknowledge that the information we worked with may not have been extensive enough to disclose these explanations. Our assessment of the programs did raise the question, however, of whether university resources could be more effectively deployed if there were greater collaboration between the units responsible for these programs and more consolidation of the programs themselves. There are strong programs in all of the areas mentioned above. In the case of teaching and research connected to environmental issues, for example, there is an array of programs in the College of Agriculture and Bioresources, the Department of Geography and Planning, the Department of Biology, the School of Environment and Sustainability, the College of Engineering, and the Toxicology Centre, that seem to have some common ground. Some of these programs, particularly at the undergraduate level, seem to be in competition for a similar constituency of students and we wonder whether they would not be made more effective by being linked or combined in a more direct way. Aboriginal programming. From the time of the first integrated planning exercises, the university has acknowledged the importance of offering a positive learning environment to the increasing number of Aboriginal students seeking post-secondary qualifications; creating programs that will equip Aboriginal graduates to participate fully as provincial, national and international citizens; providing all students, faculty and staff with skills necessary for living in a diverse society; and fostering research on questions significant to Aboriginal Peoples. In response to these imperatives, many units have established instructional and research programs with an Aboriginal focus. The task force had an opportunity to examine these programs and to consider whether they are assisting the university in meeting its goals. In some respects, the proliferation of these programs in itself has led to an evolution in thinking about what is required to make programs with an Aboriginal focus effective. The Department of Native Studies, for example, which for some years provided a focus for the study of a wide range of Aboriginal issues and a “home” for Aboriginal students, stated in some of its templates that the unit is beginning to redefine the role it will play going forward, as programs in diverse disciplines respond to demands the department felt it had to meet in the past. This may provide the unit with opportunities to refocus its own vision for research and instruction, and to concentrate on its unique strengths in a new way.


19

Our assessment of programs with an Aboriginal focus placed them in the full range of quintiles. As with other programs, their alignment with the stated strategic aspirations of the university, albeit significant, was only one in the list of criteria on which our evaluation was based. As with interdisciplinary programs, some of the programs with an Aboriginal focus have languished because the unit or the university has not devoted sufficient resources or attention to them, and some have apparently failed to tap into sufficient student demand to make them sustainable. We recognize that there are particular challenges in recruiting faculty with relevant expertise, and we are confident that decision-making bodies of the university would take this into account in appraising whether a particular program should continue or how it can be strengthened. As our assignments of programs indicate, some programs focused on Aboriginal issues are flourishing and merit continued institutional support. A number of units have taken innovative steps, and have established instructional and research programs, as well as centres, that confirm that the university is making progress in fulfilling the ambitions it has articulated in relation to Aboriginal Peoples. We should also note that some programs that do not claim to have a specifically Aboriginal focus have succeeded in attracting increasing numbers of Aboriginal students. The template asked for headcounts of Aboriginal students, as well as graduation numbers, and the templates disclosed significant and growing numbers in disciplines from human resources to computer science, and from education to engineering. The growing presence of Aboriginal students in programs other than those with a specific Aboriginal focus suggests to us that the university may be starting to develop a comprehensive response in meeting the aspirations and interests of Aboriginal students. Graduation rates and completion times. For a number of programs included in the review, the task force noted a concern with graduation rates in comparison to the headcounts recorded. In some instances, an explanation was provided; this might be, in the case of undergraduate programs, that students had not completed an undergraduate program in order to enter a professional college, or, in the case of graduate programs, that students had transferred to a doctoral program rather than complete a master’s program. Even taking these explanations into account, however, the task force concluded that the number of programs with low graduation rates (or in the case of graduate programs, long completion times) was a cause for concern for many obvious reasons, including the additional burden placed on students with extra time in program and the extra resources required to support them. The task force was particularly struck by the low graduation rates for international students and in some instances for Aboriginal students. In recent years, the university has placed a high priority on increasing the diversity of the student body by recruiting higher numbers of international and Aboriginal students. However laudable this may be as an objective, it is our view that the goal is not accomplished solely by admitting students to programs, but will only be achieved when these students are completing programs and obtaining qualifications in proportionate numbers. We did not specifically gather information about the supports provided by units to international or Aboriginal students, and we cannot therefore say whether the supports currently provided are adequate or whether there may be some other explanation for the numbers we have noticed. We did flag this, however, as a somewhat troubling phenomenon, which the institution should be examining in more detail.


20

Big programs and small programs. In the discussion of the prioritization process in the university community, the question has been raised of whether this model of prioritization “discriminates” against small programs. The criteria we have used do invite us to consider the number of students in a program, the number of graduates, and the costs associated with the program, and this does mean that some programs with extremely small headcounts have not been ranked as having a high priority. The question is not whether there is something undesirable about small programs as such, but whether the university can afford to attach a high priority to sustaining programs that attract very small numbers of students. There is also a question, in our view, about the vibrancy of the academic experience that can be offered when only a handful of students are enrolled in the program. In the case of a number of programs – particularly graduate programs – we have raised the question in our comments as to whether, with existing faculty and other resources, it might be possible to accommodate larger numbers of students in the program. Where the faculty complement includes Canada Research Chairs and other faculty with protected research time, or where there are clearly significant numbers of research-active faculty in a unit, we have asked whether a graduate program is operating at optimal capacity. There are also some examples of programs that have been designed to cater to very small numbers of elite students. It is clear that the rigour and specific focus of these programs embody important academic values; they provide rewarding instructional opportunities to faculty and produce accomplished graduates. In an exercise like this one, however, where we are considering priority in relation to financial cost as well as academic excellence, our examination of these programs raises the question of whether elite programs of this kind can be a high priority for an institution facing financial exigencies. This is a broad question that lies beyond our mandate, and the decision-making bodies of the institution will have to consider whether significant resources can be devoted to these boutique programs. Number of programs within units. In addition to looking at individual programs, our review gave us an opportunity to consider the range of academic programs offered by academic units. In some cases – where, for example, the number of programs equals or exceeds the number of faculty members – this led us to wonder whether the number of programs offered by some academic units is beyond their capacity in terms of resources, or has resulted in a dissipation of the focus of the units. At the undergraduate level in the College of Arts and Science, for example, departments typically offer 3-year, 4-year and honours degrees, as well as degrees at the master’s and doctoral level. In some cases, they will offer programs of this type in more than one specialized area, so that a department may be trying to sustain a dozen or more programs. Even for a department with a significant faculty complement, maintaining this number of separate programs is a challenge. The templates indicated, for example, that a unit with a faculty complement of 6 is offering 10 programs; in contrast, another unit with 27 faculty members is sustaining 6 programs. The ratio of faculty connected with individual programs covers a full order of magnitude, from .6 faculty members to 6 faculty members. This kind of information caused the task force to question whether the range of programs offered by some units can be sustained. Our sense is that some academic units have developed programming that is overspecialized. Though in some of the templates we reviewed it was argued that these specialized offerings are necessary to attract new audiences of students, it seemed to us that a number of these programs are struggling because the student demand they were created to meet has not materialized. It was also argued in some of these templates that the addition of these programs entails a negligible additional commitment of unit resources. Our


21

conclusion was, however, that these programs do constitute a drain on unit resources and energy, and that in a number of instances, the return on these investments is questionable. We do not suggest that it is impossible for departments to broaden their array of programs. The Department of Psychology, for example, added a B.Sc. stream to its offerings several years ago, and it has not proved beyond their capacity to sustain these programs in addition to healthy programs on the B.A. side. It is also the case that some units have decided they wish to focus their resources on a more limited number of programs in order to exploit particular strengths and interests among their faculty and are taking steps to do so. This is the declared objective of departments like Geography and Planning, Music and Drama. We would encourage other academic units to look at the range of programs they offer with a view to deciding whether all of them can be sustained as vibrant and distinct programs. It may be, for example, that a unit could strengthen its undergraduate programs by creating more specialized streams, options or clusters within programs rather trying to maintain a host of independent programs. It is not clear why a unit’s academic objectives could not be met by using this kind of strategy. Three-year bachelor’s programs. A related issue has to do with the utility of three-year bachelor’s degree programs. There was prolonged discussion about this in the task force, and concerns were raised about whether a three-year credential provides a useful preparation for students facing the demands of current society. A number of units stated that they were unable to isolate the objectives or the costs of three-year programs from those of other undergraduate programs, and their templates indicate that minimal or no resources are invested in these programs. The task force was skeptical about the claims that these programs are being offered at negligible cost, but we recognize that for these units, the three-year program may not be accorded the priority given to other programs. Other units, however, were able to articulate a persuasive rationale for a three-year program – as preparation for a particular professional program, for example, or as a vehicle for extensive service teaching – as well as to describe outcomes for students and to identify the proportion of unit resources devoted to the program; templates from the Departments of Native Studies and Psychology provide examples of this. Our review of a range of three-year bachelor’s programs suggests that, for some units, the elimination of the three-year degree program would permit them to focus more intensively on four-year and honours programs, to the benefit of students wishing to specialize in the discipline in a meaningful way. For others, however, the three-year program does represent an important building-block in departmental offerings. One possibility alluded to in some of the templates from the College of Arts and Science was that of creating broader-based introductory three-year programs that would draw on the expertise of individual departments without the need to maintain separate programs in each discipline. This “general studies” model has been used at other institutions, and might be considered here. This model might serve the purpose of preparing students for entry into professional programs at least as well as the retention of discrete degrees in every discipline. The task force would recommend consideration – on a case-by-case basis – of the possibility of eliminating three-year programs for which no positive justification can be made


22

in terms of service to an identifiable student constituency or support for the academic objectives of a unit. Service teaching. At the outset of the TransformUS project, some units raised questions about how the templates would reflect the service teaching provided to other programs. We considered this issue, and decided that rather than solicit separate templates for service teaching activities, we would invite units to indicate their service teaching responsibilities in the templates related to other programs. Though some units have continued to express concern that their service teaching activity would be insufficiently visible in the process, we found in our review that the description of service teaching in the templates was enormously helpful in understanding the context in which programs are offered. Service teaching in itself makes an obvious contribution to the mission of the university by exposing students at both the undergraduate and graduate level to perspectives beyond their chosen field of study. The information about service teaching also gave us an insight into the wide range of activities to which some units are committed, and the basis these activities might create for links across disciplines or administrative entities. Some units carry out extensive service teaching obligations while at the same time attracting large numbers of majors in their own programs and maintaining impressive levels of research; the information in the templates about service teaching permitted the task force to fully understand the achievements of such units, and to assign appropriate priority to their programs. Research, scholarly and artistic work. If it was novel for units to differentiate their instructional activities as individual programs, it was perhaps even more unusual for them to be asked to describe their research, scholarly or artistic enterprises in these terms. The templates generally recorded the research metrics for the unit, although some units chose to submit a template for more than one research program. These research metrics were helpful in understanding the nature, scope and productivity of the research, scholarly and artistic activities of the unit as a backdrop and support for instructional programs, particularly honours and graduate programs. The information also permitted the task force to assess the research programs themselves. The integrated planning process from the beginning identified research intensiveness as a planning goal, and emphasized the importance of indicators such as Tri-Agency funding and peer-reviewed publications. It is clear from our review that these indicators have become the currency of research activity in many units, and this made it possible for us to assess a wide range of research programs in a consistent way. Adjustments had to be made to consider research programs in clinical fields, and also for the artistic work done in the fine arts departments. In the case of the fine arts units, many of the templates contained helpful information about reputational criteria and public performance that allowed us to appreciate the artistic work in these fields. With respect to the clinical units, it was far more difficult for us to satisfy ourselves that expectations are being met for research programs. Many of the templates submitted from clinical units acknowledged the importance of clinical research, sometimes as a requirement for accreditation, but in a number of these cases, the templates suggested that the unit had not succeeded in developing respectable levels of research intensiveness. There are clearly challenges in marrying the clinical and research missions, and we do not claim that we were able to gain a complete understanding of these challenges in the course of our review. We


23

did conclude, however, that if the university is to achieve the desired intensity of research in all fields, including clinical fields, new and more effective strategies will have to be formulated for promoting clinical research. The value of strong programs. As a result of our review, we would say that there is much to celebrate in the programs offered at the University of Saskatchewan. We saw evidence in many templates of exceptional student and research outcomes, strong community engagement, national and international reputation, and effective use of resources. In the case of programs that may not have received the hoped for quintile assignment, we suggest that these very strong programs may provide inspiration and guidance for re-imagination or re-conceptualization.

In this report, we have outlined both strengths and limitations in the prioritization process. The members of the task force were aware that we had been given a unique opportunity to scan all of the university’s academic programs, to see them in relation to each other and to consider how they fit with the academic priorities of the institution. The diversity of perspectives on the task force promoted vigorous and stimulating discussion, and the intensity of the schedule produced an immersive effect that permitted us to recognize the wide range of academic activity at the University of Saskatchewan. On the other hand, as we have noted, there were some limitations and some anomalies in the data we were working with. Although the task force worked hard to understand all of the templates and to assess them fairly, we have noted some instances in which we could not interpret the information provided to us. We are confident that the process we followed has resulted in a report that contains information that will support the decision-making actors of the university as they develop options for the strengthening, restructuring, reducing or elimination of programs. Indeed, we would expect that a program prioritization process of some kind would recur in the future. We would like to comment about modifications that might be made to strengthen this kind of initiative, and also to mention some features of the current process that should be retained in future iterations of prioritization. Regular prioritization. The current prioritization process was adopted in a climate of financial exigency, and represented one aspect of a set of budget adjustment initiatives. It is our view that an institution of the size and complexity of this university would do well to consider on a regular basis the relative priority of the programs it offers, quite aside from financial exigencies. As we have noted, since establishing the current sequence of integrated planning, the university has stressed the importance of identifying priorities, and some version of the prioritization process we have just engaged in could be a significant component of the planning process. In addition, though a process focusing on individual programs was unfamiliar to the university community, many who had a role in completing templates commented on the value of this process in deepening their insight into the activities of their units. More up-front work. The time pressures for the review itself – that is, the period from September to November – was, as we have said, a positive aspect of the process. The brevity of this period permitted the task force to concentrate intensively and to develop a

Program Prioritization in the Future


24

sense of the entire range of programs that probably could not have been achieved in any other way. We are less convinced, however, that the earlier part of the process – the work that was done between March and August – needed to be compressed into such a short period. For example, the task force is satisfied that the template we created, though not perfect, provided a basis for presenting the information needed for meaningful review. In retrospect, however, it would have been desirable if it had been possible to brief academic units more fully and provide them with more assistance as they prepared to fill out the templates. In the time available, the task force did provide as much guidance as possible, but a more extended introductory period would have allowed for additional and more targeted interaction with those responsible for completing the templates. Audit of data. One feature that might improve this process would be the introduction of an audit of completed templates before they are reviewed. This would help to ensure that information in the templates is recorded in a way that accurately reflects the data available, that it is recorded in a consistent way, and that any missing data can be obtained. The data support team was helpful to the task force in explaining the basis for the centrally-generated data that had been supplied to the units, but we had no systematic way of ensuring that the templates were as complete and clear as they could be. We understand that there will always be some variations in the way the same indicators are recorded and understood by academic units and at the institutional level, but we think some kind of audit process prior to the review would increase the degree of uniformity of the information examined. Diversity is important. The process used for selecting task force members was, as we have indicated, somewhat complicated. One of the successes of this process, in our view, was to produce a task force representing a broad spectrum of disciplinary backgrounds, experience and institutional roles. It should be emphasized here that members of the task force did not see themselves and did not conduct themselves as advocates or champions for programs in their own unit or discipline. Their knowledge of the culture and conventions of different parts of the institution was invaluable, however, in promoting a healthy appreciation of the diversity of academic activity. In this context, we would like to note the valued contribution made by the two student members of the task force, as the involvement of students was not a feature initially contemplated when the task force was conceived. Student groups on campus were interested in the project from the time it was announced, and they lobbied hard to have students included on the task forces. The inclusion of the undergraduate and graduate student voice was an important asset to the task force. Snapshot or trend. The task force concluded early in its discussions that examining a single moment in the life of an academic program would not provide a full picture of it. The template was thus designed to gather data covering a three-year period – the years 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012. The questions related to some criteria also permitted units to provide additional information about the history, evolution and prospects of the program. The templates in this form provided the task force with much information, and a sense of the dynamic of the programs over time. The choice of the three-year frame for much of the data was partly influenced by our awareness of the burden for units of completing a number of templates in an unfamiliar framework. It would probably be helpful, however, in any future version of program prioritization to take an even longer chronological period into account. This would permit the reviewers to understand more fully the evolutionary trends in the programs, but it would in our view require that additional support be offered to units in completing the templates.


25

Standardized Central Data. Though the task force had the benefit of extensive and illuminating data in the prioritization process, we suggest that future iterations of the process would be enhanced by continuing institutional strategies to develop standardized ways of reporting and tracking data for such things as instructional activities and research metrics. We are convinced of the benefits of a review of institutional activity on the basis of programs, and, as we have said, we think there would be value in carrying out some version of prioritization in the future. If the decision-makers in the institution agree with this conclusion, it would be helpful to have program data recorded and tracked in a consistent way.

With the submission of its final report, the task force has completed its review of academic programs. It is our expectation that the report, along with all of the templates that formed the basis for our assessments, will be released for examination by faculty, staff and students. We have placed a high value on the transparency of this process, and we hope that we have been able to meet that objective. The ratings and recommendations contained in the report will provide a source of information for the senior leadership of the university as they develop an implementation plan for making some of the decisions that will be necessary in order for the institution to meet its financial targets. Within the limits of our mandate, the task force has learned much about the current range of academic programs, and we hope that what we have learned will provide a sound basis for the choices that decision-makers will have to make. We should emphasize, however, that it was not part of our task to make final determinations about where new investments of resources should be made, where disinvestment should occur, where restructuring or reconfiguration should take place, or where consideration should be given to the phasing out of programs. Extensive further assessment and consultation will be necessary before those decisions can be made, and the task force will not have a role, except as interested members of the university community, in those decisions.

Conclusion


26

APPENDIX ONE: ACADEMIC PROGRAM TRANSFORMATION TASK FORCE CRITERIA AND WEIGHTINGS

Academic Program Transformation Task Force Report Appendix One—Criteria and Weightings

27

Criterion Weighting

History, development and expectations of the program: This criterion will focus on both historical factors and expectations regarding future prospects for the program. This criterion will allow the task force to consider information about the origins and evolution of the program, including whether there have been recent reconfiguration or restatement of the objectives of the program.

5%

External demand for the program: This criterion will focus on factors related to the level of external interest and opportunities available to the program. Under this criterion, the task force will focus on such factors as the links between the program and professional and accrediting bodies; the present and future level of interest in the program as indicated by student applications or inquiries or societal demand; or the connections with potential funders or employers of graduates.

11%

Internal demand for the program: This criterion will focus on the interest within the university in the program’s offerings. The task force will consider, for example, the degree to which the program includes service teaching for other programs, or the importance of the program to other units within the university.

10%

Size, scope and productivity of the program: This criterion will address the size of the program in terms of its service to students, production of research, scholarly and artistic work, and breadth of curriculum. In connection with this criterion, the task force will ask for information concerning such indicators as the credit units taught, students served by the program, number of faculty and staff, output of creative scholarship and artistic work, and the scope of the program’s objectives.

12%

Quality of program inputs and processes: This criterion will focus on the various inputs and processes employed by the program in meeting its objectives. The task force will look for evidence concerning the quality of such inputs as students, faculty, equipment and facilities, and indicators of quality of processes such as pedagogy.

6%

Quality of program outcomes: This criterion will focus on the success of the program’s accomplishments. The task force will ask those offering the program to comment on the appropriate measures of success and to demonstrate how the achievements of the program can be assessed according to these measures.

18%

Academic Program Transformation Task Force Report Appendix One—Criteria and Weightings

28

Criterion Weighting

Revenue and other resources generated by the program: This criterion will focus on the revenues that are attributable to the program’s efforts. The revenues considered under this criterion will include tuition and grant revenue tied to student enrolment, Tri-Agency and other research funding, fees and cost recovery charges, sponsorships, endowment income and private donations. Consideration will also be given to the generation of other resources for the program, such as in-kind contributions.

10%

Costs and other expenses associated with the program: This criterion will focus on the expenses incurred by the program in conducting its activities. Units will be asked to give a comprehensive view of the costs of programs, including assigned overhead, travel and administrative costs, and salaries. Consideration will also be given to demonstrable efficiencies in the way programs are delivered.

8%

Impact, justification and overall essentiality of the program: This criterion will allow the program to describe its importance to the institution and the value it creates through its efforts. Under this criterion, the task force will be asking academic units to indicate how their programs are aligned with University of Saskatchewan priorities and to indicate what risks would be created for the institution were the program to be eliminated.

14%

Opportunity analysis of the program: This criterion will allow the program to describe the additional contributions it could make with specified additional resourcing or reconfiguration. Units will be asked to outline significant additional contributions that a program could make with enhanced resourcing of a particular kind, or if it was reconfigured in a particular way.

6%


29

APPENDIX TWO: THE PROGRAM TEMPLATE USED BY THE TASK FORCE

Academic Program Transformation Task Force Report Appendix Five—Quintile Scores by Academic Unit

30

2012-13 Academic Programs Prioritization Template

Program name: Home Department/College: Department Head/Director: Dean: Has this program been formally proposed to the Academic Programs Committee of Council for elimination? If yes, briefly describe the likely impact of the elimination of the program on other University of Saskatchewan programs. [50 words]

[Please note that if the answer to this question is yes, the program will be automatically placed in the fifth quintile, and the rest of the template need not be completed.]

Criterion 1 – History, Development, and Expectations (5%)

1.1 Describe the origins, history, and key accomplishments of the program. [50 word max] 1.2 What key changes have been made to the program over the past five years or are planned for the future? [100 word max] Criterion 2 – External Demand (11%)

2.1 Is there a limit to admissions to this program? Yes □ No □ 2.2 How many applications do you typically have per student admitted? ___ 2.3 Describe the current and anticipated external demand for this program. [100 word max] Criterion 3 – Internal Demand (10%) 3.1 Provide the requested numbers as indicated in the table (data provided centrally) Departmental Service Teaching Activity 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Within Department Within College Inter-College Total 3CUE Teaching 3.2 Describe the demand for this program within the University in terms of courses offered, which include non-majors, research support or other services provided to other units. [50 word max] 3.3 What was the average teaching load in 3 cu equivalents per faculty member in your department in 2011-12? ____ 3.4 How would other programs be affected by elimination of this program? [75 word max] Criterion 4 – Size, Scope, and Productivity (12%) 4.1 Provide the requested numbers as indicated in the tables (data provided centrally). 2011-12 Complement Size Total Department Percent Attributed

to Program Total for Program (Amount x Percent)

Faculty/Librarians Research Senior University Admin. Senior College Admin. Administrative/Professional


31

Support Sessional Lecturers Residents/Interns Students (Non-research) Other 4.2 Provide the requested numbers as indicated in the tables (data provided centrally) Student Metrics 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Degrees /Credentials Granted Aboriginal Out of Province International Student Headcount Aboriginal Out of Province International Average Annual Tuition Rate Per Student Estimated Annual Tuition Revenue (Total Students x Average Annual Rate)

4.3 Provide the requested numbers as indicated in the tables (data provided centrally) Research Metrics (Department Level) 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Total non Tri-Agency research revenue ($) Total Tri-Agency research revenue ($) Total number of grants and contracts Percent of faculty holding external research funding

The metrics below will be provided by the unit Percent of faculty holding Tri-agency funding as a Principal Investigator Average number of published peer-reviewed books per faculty member

Average number of published peer-reviewed journal articles per faculty member

Average number of peer-reviewed scholarly and artistic works per faculty member

Average number of published/completed non peer-reviewed books, journal articles, book chapters, and scholarly/artistic works per faculty member

4.4 Add any comments that would help us understand the significance of these figures. [50 word max]


32

Criterion 5 – Quality of Program Inputs (6%)

5.1 Comment on the formal recognitions and awards for teaching and/or research, scholarly and artistic work achieved by faculty and staff in this program at the local, national, and international levels. [75 word max]

5.2 For programs with limits on admission or specific admission standards, including undergraduate honours programs, what is the usual entering average/GPA for students in the program? ____

5.3 Comment on awards or competitive scholarships won by students in this program or other indicators of student quality. [50 word max] 5.4 Describe any special equipment, facilities, and/or technology associated with this program. [50 words] 5.5 Describe any initiatives undertaken during the past three years to enhance quality, innovation, student engagement, and creativity in this program. [75 word max] 5.6 Describe how the program objectives and curriculum meet the expectations of the discipline in terms of breadth, depth of coverage and interdisciplinary nature. [50 word max] Criterion 6 – Quality of Program Outcomes (18%) 6.1 Is accreditation, certification or registration by a professional body required? Is it available? Has this program been accredited, certified or registered? [50 words] 6.2 Consider the work of the program over the past three years. Describe how success would be measured in your discipline and outline the achievements that have been realized during this time. This could include research, scholarly and artistic work, student graduation rates, students going on to advanced degrees, student engagement, program and accreditation reviews, etc. Focus on external measures of quality where possible. [250 word max] 6.3 Discuss the success of this program relative to similar programs at other universities. [75 word max] Criterion 7 – Revenue and Other Resources Generated by the Program (10%) 7.1 Provide the requested information as indicated in the table (data provided centrally). 2011-12 Revenue Total Department Percent Attributed


Operating Allocation Grants & Contracts Student Fees Donations Other Total 7.2 Describe any additional resources that support this program. [50 word max] 7.3 Are there one-time revenues included in the 2011-12 figures that should be noted? If yes, please explain. [50 word max]


33

Criterion 8 – Costs and other Expenses Associated with the Program (8%) 8.1 Insert the requested information as indicated in the tables (data provided centrally). 2011-12 Salaries & Benefits Total Department Percent Attributed


Faculty/Librarians Research Senior University Admin. Senior College Admin. Administrative/Professional Support Sessional Lecturers Residents/Interns Students (Non-research) Other Benefits Total Salaries and Benefits 8.2 Insert the requested information as indicated in the tables (data provided centrally) 2011-12 Non-salary Direct Costs

Total Department Percent Attributed to Program

Total Amount x Percent

Operational Supplies and Expenses

Travel Scholarships, Bursaries and Prizes

Other Total Non-Salary Expenses

8.3 Are there any other costs associated with this program? [50 word max] 8.4 Are there one-time costs included in the 2011-12 figures that should be noted? If yes, please explain. [50 word max] 8.5 Please describe the administrative work, including work within the unit, within the University and outside the University, performed by faculty members in your unit. [75 word max] 8.6 Please indicate what proportion of the total resources of your unit are devoted to this program. Criterion 9 - Impact, Justification, and Overall Essentiality of the Program (14%) 9.1 How does this program align with the strategic directions of the University? (link to website that provides IP1, IP2, IP3 and strategic directions documents). [150 word max] 9.2 What makes this program valuable? [100 word max]


34

Criterion 10 – Opportunity Analysis of the Program (6%) 10.1 What opportunities exist to strengthen or reconfigure this program in the context of its contributions to the University’s strategic directions and integrated plans (link to website as described in question 23)? [100 word max] 10.2 What opportunities exist for greater collaboration or efficiencies in the delivery of this program? Is there overlap with other programs at the University? [100 word max]

Approvals

Dept Heads/Deans (Non-Departmentalized College)/Program Heads/Directors only. I agree with the information provided in this template. _____

Please add any additional information about this program that you would like us to know. [100 word max]

Deans/Vice-Deans (Arts and Science) only. I agree with the information provided in this template. _____

Please add any additional information about this program that you would like us to know. [100 word max]


35

APPENDIX THREE: THE SCORING RUBRIC USED BY THE TASK FORCE

Academic Program Transformation Task Force Report Appendix Three—Scoring Rubric

36

1 The evidence

provided suggests a significant weak-

ness within this category.

2 The evidence

provided suggests a cause for concern

within this category.

3 The evidence

provided suggests an average level

within this category.

4 The evidence

provided suggests strong performance within this category.

5 The evidence provided

suggests exemplary performance within this

category.

Criterion 1 (5%): History, Development and Expectations

Little to no key accomplishments, declining program, no prospects for future growth.

Program profile entirely in the past, present program seems stagnant.

Modest accomplish-ments, uncertain present direction, program has tended to unfold with little planning.

Some notable past accomplishments, viable current pro-gram, some prospects for future growth.

Distinguished history, dynamic ongoing initiatives, solid prospects for future growth.

Criterion 2 (11%): External Demand

Academic Programs

Research Programs and Centres

Little or no evidence of demand for entrance to the program or demand for its graduates.

Low demand for entrance to the program and/or low demand for its graduates. These low rates are likely to remain stable or decrease.

Moderate demand for entrance to the program and/or moderate demand for its graduates. These moderate rates are likely to remain stable.

High demand for entrance to the program and/or high demand for its graduates. These high rates are likely to remain stable or increase.

Very high demand for entrance to the program and very high demand for its graduates. These very high rates are likely to remain stable or increase.

Little or no evidence of current or anticipated external demand for this research program or centre.

Low evidence of current or anticipated external demand for this research program or centre.

Moderate evidence of current or anticipated external demand for this research program or centre.

Strong evidence of current or anticipated external demand for this research program or centre.

Very strong evidence of current or anticipated external demand for this research program or centre.


37

Criterion 3 (10%): Internal Demand

Academic Programs

Research Programs and Centres

The program offerings are not needed to support other academic program requirements or options.

The program provides little service teaching and includes few offerings that are required or optional for other programs.

The program provides a moderate amount of service teaching and includes some offerings that are required or optional for other programs.

The program provides a high amount of service teaching and includes some offerings that are required or optional for other programs.

The program provides a very high amount of service teaching and/or includes offerings that are required or optional for a variety of other programs.

Little or no evidence of demand for this research program or centre within the University.

Low evidence of demand for this research program or centre within the University.

Moderate evidence of demand for this research program or centre within the University.

Strong evidence of demand for this research program or centre within the University.

Very strong evidence of demand for this research program or centre within the University.

Criterion 4 (12%): Size, Scope and Productivity

Very low enrol-ments, few majors produced, very low teaching activity, very low research, scholarly, and/or artistic productivity.

Low enrolments, low teaching activity, low research, scholarly, and/or artistic pro-ductivity, given the size of the faculty.

Moderate enrol-ments; moderate teaching activity, moderate research, scholarly, and/or artistic productivity.

High enrolments; high teaching activity, high research, scholarly, and/or artistic productivity.

Critical mass of highly productive faculty, very high enrolments in both majors and non-majors. Very high research, scholarly, and/or artistic productivity.


38

Criterion 5 (6%): Quality of Inputs

Little or no evidence of faculty awards/ recognition; very low entering student averages and little or no evidence of student awards/ scholarships; program quality is severely limited due to inadequate facilities; no or few initiatives to improve quality have been undertaken in the last three years.

Low evidence of faculty awards/ recognition; low entering student averages and low evidence of student awards/ scholarships; program quality is limited due to inadequate facilities; few initiatives to improve quality have been undertaken in the last three years.

Moderate evidence of faculty awards/ recognition; moderate entering student averages and moderate evidence of student awards/ scholarships; the program has access to adequate facilities; some initiatives to improve quality have been undertaken in the last three years.

Strong evidence of faculty awards/ recognition; high entering student averages and strong evidence of student awards/ scholarships; the program has access to good facilities; evidence of enhanced program quality in the last three years.

Very strong evidence of faculty awards/ recognition; very high entering student averages and very strong evidence of student awards/ scholarships; the program has access to superior facilities; evidence of enhanced program quality in the last three years.


39

Criterion 6 (18%): Quality of Outcomes

Notable deficiencies in accreditation, other program reviews, or comparisons with similar programs.

The program shows little or no faculty success in research, scholarly or artistic output and little or no student success, as measured by such things as engagement surveys, graduation rates, hire rates, or tendency to pursue further studies in the program discipline, over the three year time period.

Weaknesses noted in accreditation, other program reviews, or comparisons with similar programs.

The program shows either some faculty success in research, scholarly or artistic output or some student success, as measured by such things as engage-ment surveys, graduation rates, hire rates, or tendency to pursue further studies in the program discipline, over the three year time period.

No weaknesses noted in accreditation, other program reviews, or comparisons with similar programs.

The program shows faculty success in research, scholarly or artistic output, with output steady or increasing over the three year time period. The program also shows student success on at least some relevant measures over the three-year time period, or an improving trend in that time.

Some strengths noted in accreditation, other program reviews, or comparisons with similar programs.

The program shows marked faculty success in research, scholarly or artistic output. Output has been steady or increasing over the three year time period, and is of consistently high quality. The program also shows student success on most relevant measures over the three-year time period, or an improving trend in that time.

Extensive strengths noted in accreditation, other program reviews, or comparisons with similar programs.

The program shows exemplary faculty success in research, scholarly or artistic output. Output has been increasing and is consistently of very high quality. The program also shows exemplary student success on all or most relevant measures over the three-year time period, or a marked improvement in that time.


40

Criterion 7 (10%): Revenue and Resources

The total revenue generated is far below the prorated median revenue generation.1

The total revenue generated is below the prorated median revenue generation.

The total revenue generated approxi-mately equals the prorated median revenue generation.

The total revenue generated is above the prorated median revenue generation.

The total revenue generated is well above the prorated median revenue generation.

Criterion 8 (8%): Costs and Expenses

Both cost cate-gories (i.e., Salary total, Direct Costs total) substantially exceed the prorated median level of these costs.2

One of the cost categories substantially exceeds the prorated median level of these costs.

The costs are approximately equal to the prorated median level of costs within each category.

One of the cost categories is sub-stantially lower than the prorated median level of these costs.

Both cost categories are substantially lower than the prorated median level of these costs.

Criterion 9 (14%): Impact, Justification, and Overall Essentiality

Program is strate-gically marginal, has low visibility, and makes little attempt to connect with the rest of the University or stake-holders external to the university.

Program is uneven, with only some points of contact with stakeholders external to the university and /or alignment with only one key strategic initiative.

Program is active and vibrant, though not visibly aligned with strategic directions and with modest connections to stakeholders external to the university.

Program is either very well aligned strategically, or very well connected with stakeholders external to the university.

Program is well aligned with University’s strategic directions, has strong connections to stakeholders external to the university, and performs a critical role in delivering the university’s mandate.

1 Prorated median level of revenue generation = median of Total Department Revenue (all departments across university) x % of resources attributed to program

under review. The median of Total Department Revenue would be provided centrally, and this calculation could be included on the template. This calculation would put revenue generation into a university-wide comparative context and would provide a common standard for scoring.

2 Cost Categories: Salary & Benefits; Non-Salary Direct Costs. Prorated median level of salary costs = median level of Total Salaries & Benefits (provided centrally) x % salary attributed to program under review. Prorated median level of non-salary direct costs = median level of Total Non-Salary Direct Costs (provided centrally) x % salary attributed to program under review.


41

Criterion 10 (6%): Opportunity Analysis

Little or no potential for reconfiguration and alignment with strategic directions.

Little or no potential for finding opportunities for greater efficiency or collaboration.

Some potential for reconfiguration and alignment with strategic directions.

Some potential for finding opportunities for greater efficiency or collaboration.

Moderate potential for reconfiguration and alignment with strategic directions.

Moderate potential for finding opportunities for greater efficiency or collaboration.

Strong potential for reconfiguration and alignment with strategic directions.

Strong potential for finding opportunities for greater efficiency or collaboration.

Very strong potential for reconfiguration and alignment with strategic directions.

Very strong potential for finding opportunities for greater efficiency or collaboration.


42

APPENDIX FOUR: DETAILED PROGRAM LISTING BY QUINTILE

Academic Program Transformation Task Force Report Appendix Four—Detailed Program Listing (Quintile 1)

43

QUINTILE 1: CANDIDATES FOR ENHANCED RESOURCING

Academic Unit Fields of Study Program Type Notes

Animal and Poultry Science


Research Excellent research funding, high productivity. Room for future growth. Could be a leading program on campus.

College of Agriculture & Bioresources

Crop Development Centre (CDC) - Type A Centre

All activities High calibre of research, high demand. Positive stakeholder feedback. National reputation for innovation.

Soil Science Soil science Research High proportion of faculty with Tri-Agency funding; exemplary funding overall. Strong publication rate. Highly collaborative. Involvement of undergraduates in research. International reputation. Strong connections with industry.

Chemistry Chemistry PhD Student head count high but lower graduation numbers. Strong research in department. Involvement of students in teaching. Excellent student outcomes.

Chemistry Chemistry Research A fine example of a strong research program. Faculty engaged in important issues. Strong research metrics, including Tri-Agency funding. Research linked to key university facilities.

College of Arts & Science

Institute of Space and Atmospheric Studies – Type A Centre

All activities A long-established centre with an international reputation. Much of the current focus is on study of climate; makes important links. Offers unique research opportunities to students.

College of Arts & Science (Dean's office)

Toxicology BSc (4 year major)

Plans for incorporation of Aboriginal students. High student headcounts. Decline in Tri-Agency funding, but large amount of alternative funding. Faculty conduct research in other units. Well aligned with priorities. Unique in Canada.


Toxicology BSc (honours) Quality of inputs strong. Strong alignment with university priorities. Good student outcomes. Strong impact. Good research funding and output. Good collaborations with other units.


44


English English BA (honours) Good enrolment. Faculty inputs strong. Prestigious teaching awards for faculty. Good initiatives, involvement of students in research. Aligned with university priorities. High amount of service teaching. Strong research activity. Engagement in Aboriginal initiatives. Impressive strategic planning.

Physics & Engineering Physics

Physics Research Increasing research funding, good scholarly output. Strong infrastructure. High quality faculty. Resource investment in research. Links with other units. Aboriginal links.

Psychology Psychology BA (4 year major)

Commitment to student engagement in research, including non-honours students. Good graduation numbers. Good description of program as a distinct from other unit programs. High service teaching combined with high number of majors. Has survived well with addition of BSc program. Employable students. Highly efficient program.

Civil and Geological Engineering

Civil engineering BEng Students in high demand from employers. Alignment with university priorities. Links with industry. Potential for growth. Appropriate investment of faculty resources. Generates revenue. Good tracking of student accomplishments.

Mechanical Engineering

Mechanical engineering BEng High grant success, although some dip in past year. Good enrolments. Good external demand. Capstone course making interdisciplinary use of expertise. Clear tracking of student success. Awareness of extracurricular projects of students.

College of Pharmacy and Nutrition

Pharmacy BSc (Pharm) Signature area, showcase program. High student numbers. Student engagement. Strong outcomes. Cost effective, high student ratio. Strong experiential component.

University-Wide Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization - International Vaccine Centre (VIDO-InterVac) - Type B Centre

All activities Flagship, world-class facility. Outward-looking, strong partnerships with rest of institution. Excellent research productivity. Essential national facility.


45


Western College of Veterinary Medicine

Veterinary medicine DVM Good student numbers. Program strong in all dimensions. High demand. Flagship in western Canada. Expensive program but effective use of funds. Importance of clinical services.


46

QUINTILE 2: CANDIDATES FOR MAINTAINING WITH CURRENT RESOURCING



Animal science BSA (major) Good internal demand. Excellent scholarship awards. Good faculty inputs. Attracts good number of out of province students.


Animal science MSc Productive faculty. Graduates highly employable. New infrastructure. One of the strongest MSc programs. High cost for program, but good outcomes. Top up of tuition an innovative idea.


Animal science PhD Concern about slow graduation rates. Strong research culture, infrastructure in farms. Good research funding but some drop in Tri-Agency. Addressing completion time would alleviate capacity problem.

Bioresource Policy, Business and Economics

Agribusiness BSc (major) Good student demand, good Aboriginal numbers. Employability of graduates. Solid research in unit, though some recent decline in Tri-Agency funding. Engagement of students. Strong statement of opportunities. Investment of faculty resources suggests commitment to program.


Agribusiness Diploma Very good demand. Solid scholarly output. High quality faculty. Good employment prospects for graduates. Potential for increasing Aboriginal enrolment.


Agricultural economics MSc Highly rated in program reviews. Good outcomes for students. Strong external demand. Evidence of national and international reputation.


Feeds Innovation Institute - Type A Centre

All activities Independent funding for centre. Engaged with industry, strong community engagement. Strong external demand for their work. Interdisciplinary dimension.


Indigenous people's resource management

Certificate of Proficiency

External funding initially. Strong demand from Aboriginal community, success in transitioning to jobs. Future funding status in question.


47



Prairie horticulture Certificate of Successful Completion

Seem to use resources efficiently, generating revenue. Links with industry. No allocation from university; uses external resources. Strong ties to community, raises profile of university. Innovative collaboration model.

Food and Bioproduct Sciences


BSA (major) Alignment with university priorities and Agbio signature areas. Dip in research funding. Relevance to external constituencies. Experiential and team-based learning. Large number of international students is a positive sign.



MSc Good student demand, strong external demand. Significant international student population. Addressing decline in revenues. Aligned with university focus on food security. Graduation rate low. Some potential to combine with MSc in applied microbiology.



Research Some decrease in Tri-Agency funding. Unique in Canada, well maintained infrastructure. Good links with industry. Large though fluctuating grants from industry.

Plant Sciences Agronomy BSA (major) Good student numbers, research strength in department. Solid program. Realignment in program offers potential. Demand going up. Alignment with university programs. High tuition revenue. International relevance.

Plant Sciences Agronomy Diploma Laddering into BSA valuable. Tri-Agency funding fairly low, but good level of other grants. Good alignment with signature areas in Agbio. Upward trend in student numbers. Recent restructure having positive impact on enrolment. Non-traditional students.

Plant Sciences Horticultural science BSA (major) Strong research. Focus on undergraduate experience, good trajectory for enrolment. Well aligned with university priorities. International component.

Plant Sciences Plant sciences MSc Long history of agricultural success stories. Strong relationship with CDC. Employability of graduates. Good external demand. Strong research.


48


Plant Sciences Plant sciences PhD Renewal of program. Good enrolment in program, though could be larger with this size faculty and given links with CDC. Strong research profile in unit to support program. Good record of scholarships for students. Strong alignment. Potential for growth.

Plant Sciences Plant sciences Research Highly relevant research, strong funding, high productivity. Significant faculty engagement. Link with CDC. Tri-Agency could be higher, good non-Tri-Agency funding.

Soil Science Environmental science BSA (major) Research metrics strong. Strong student numbers, solid graduation rates. Good Aboriginal engagement. Question whether there would be value in greater consolidation of environment programs across campus. Strong demand evident. Modest investment of faculty resources.

Soil Science Resource science BSc RRM (major)

Experiential learning a prominent feature, increasing student numbers. Good internal demand. Excellent research metrics.

Soil Science Soil science MSc Good research support. Graduation rates in relation to headcount a concern, hard to reconcile with information in template. Good external demand. Strong inputs.

Soil Science Soil science PhD Low completion rate. Strong program, strong research metrics. Number of students growing. Good employability and student outcomes.

Archaeology & Anthropology

Anthropology MA Approved by Council in 2009. Moving in positive direction. Recruiting going well, evidence of demand. Improving Tri-Agency record. Community engagement.


Anthropology Research Good collaborative projects. Good trend in research funding and output. Importance to external community.


49



Archaeology MA Considerable student interest, but some concern about completion rates. Tri-Agency funding showing very positive trend. Alignment with priorities. Good investment in scholarships.

Art & Art History Studio art BFA (honours) Good student engagement in research, strong community connections. High demand. Good graduation rates. Effort to make Aboriginal focus more prominent. Experiential component significant.

Art & Art History Studio art MFA Low capped enrolment, good demand, limited by space. Cross-disciplinary connections, known nationally and internationally. Weakness in faculty output.

Arts & Art history Art & Art History Research Contribution to cultural life of community. Fairly good output. New Aboriginal art historian, potential for Aboriginal engagement. Fair level of funding. Need to make research vision more coherent. Solid base to build on.

Biology Biology BSc (4 year major)

Strong student numbers. Department carries service teaching load, has good research profile. Stepping stone to other programs, more interdisciplinary links could be made.

Chemistry Chemistry BSc (4 year major)

Some clear strengths are evident. However, some information in the template is not specific to the program but reported at the unit level.

Chemistry Chemistry BSc (honours) Research metrics strong. Good comparators provided with other universities. Low number of Aboriginal students, despite focus on Aboriginal engagement in department. Strong attention to student experience in program. Evidence of strong teaching. Links with industry. Potential for more students.

Chemistry Chemistry MSc Research strong, excellent faculty inputs. Good student awards. Graduation rates fluctuating, but good student headcount.


50



Humanities Research Unit - Type A Centre

All activities Small unit. Innovative events. Serves important purpose. Makes good connections at low cost. Helping to galvanize research. Uses funding strategically.


Subatomic Physics Institute (SPIN) - Type A Centre

All activities Largely sustained by grants, very productive on that basis. Strong activity, vigorous group of researchers. Attracts good funding.

Computer Science Computer science BSc (4 year major)

First Nations summer camp. Good demand, high quality teaching. Strong research. Good student numbers.

Computer Science Computer science BSc (honours) Good demand. Strong research profile. Good graduation rates. Good rationale for this program. Good progress to graduate school. Strong faculty inputs, awards for students. Not clear how much research students are doing.

Computer Science Computer science MSc Good student demand. Sound support from faculty resources. Some links with rest of university. Good research output.

Computer Science Computer science PhD High demand from industry. Good student numbers. Strong research funding. Prestigious student awards. Concern about graduation rate.

Computer science Computer science Research Strong research funding and outputs. High external demand for research outputs. High cost of program balanced by expenditures. Innovative research subject matter. Involvement of graduate students in faculty research. Weak case for opportunity.

Drama Drama BFA With modest faculty complement, strong graduation rate and good student numbers. Good employment prospects. Strong community engagement during course of degree. Potential for working through proposed Centre for Prairie Theatre Studies. Fairly high costs.


51


Drama Drama Research High output in production area. Artistic work outcomes not clear. Community impact evident. Persuasive links to strategic directions. Valuable Aboriginal playwright in residence program.

Economics Business economics BA (honours) Good indicators, solid program. Modest research metrics. Positive revenue. Service teaching. Strong community engagement. Internship available. International partnership.

Economics Economics MA Good number of students. Strong program with internship feature, employability for graduates.

English English BA (4 year major)

Well-rounded demand, good student headcount. High service teaching. Steady graduation rate. Little evidence concerning students in this specific program. Internship program component. Good faculty inputs.

English English MA Student headcount decreasing, but have increased completion rates. Good recognitions and awards for faculty and students. Good outcomes for graduates. Good alignment with university directions. Community engagement. Research on upward trend, reasonable Tri-Agency funding. Project option gives flexibility to students.

English English Research Good Tri-Agency funding and identification of research priorities. Some areas of template focused on unit rather than research program. Good research output. Strong record of faculty accomplishments. Sense of vibrancy, research culture moving in right direction. Research in unit with extensive teaching commitment.

Geography & Planning Geography MSc Growing, potential for further growth. Allocated grant revenue to research program. Indication of small faculty commitment. Strong research profile. Involvement of students in publications.


52


Geography & Planning Geography PhD Good demand. Strong inputs. Well-defined outcomes, with evidence of success. Some concern about slow graduation rates, efforts being made to reduce completion times.

Geography & Planning Regional and urban planning BA (4 year major)

Good student engagement, active student body. Unit refocusing on this program, program growing. Well-aligned with priorities. Strong external demand. Generates good tuition revenue. Concern about completion rates.

Geography & Planning Regional and urban planning BA (honours) Program seems to be functioning well. Represents the direction that the department is moving in. Good demand and outcomes.

Geography & Planning Geography Research Strong investment of faculty resources. Strong research funding, good publication rates. No indication of internal demand, may be missed opportunity. Well-aligned with university signature areas.

Geological Sciences Geology BSc (4 year major)

Solid research metrics. Good scholarship support. Good number of Aboriginal students. Little evidence of investment of faculty resources, not clear what resources devoted to program. Good number of out of province students, suggests good reputation for program. Well-aligned with strategic areas.

Geological Sciences Geology BSc (honours) Strong inputs in unit. Good student demand, increasing. Good alignment with university priorities. Strong research profile. Good outcomes.

Geological Sciences Geology Research Strong identification of opportunities. Research metrics very strong. Good faculty inputs with number of CRCs. Good investment of faculty time in research. Good infrastructure, template may have undersold internal demand.

History History BA (honours) Strong internal demand. Good student numbers, good completion rate. Good investment of faculty resources. Somewhat general description of outputs. Strong research metrics. New hires in strategic areas.


53


History History MA Refocus of courses to emphasize research skills. Some weakening of MA program due to emphasis on PhD. Lack of Aboriginal students a concern, as is long time in program. Somewhat costly program. Strong research profile. Alignment with university priorities. Good links with other units.

History History PhD Redesigned program to align with university priorities. Engagement with rest of university. Slow completion rates. Strong student numbers. Excellent faculty inputs, research record. Reputation in Aboriginal history, have attracted good number of Aboriginal students.

History History Research Presence of CRCs dynamic addition. High indicators of success for humanities research, journal editing. Limited collaboration with other units. Aligned with university priorities.

Music Music BMus (4 year major)

Well-established program. Low student numbers. Outcomes for students not entirely clear. Strong performance emphasis supports program. Possibility of regaining students with strengthening of this stream. Unit indicates refocus on this stream.

Music Music Research Considerable potential, good basis for increasing strength. Quality of inputs high. National and international reputation. Performance emphasis.

Music Music education BMus High quality students. Program outcomes excellent. Emphasis on experiential learning. Significant portion of resources devoted to program. Employment for graduates.

Native studies Native studies BA (3 year major)

Good explanation of service teaching, showing essentiality of introductory courses. Need to explore links with other units, avoid overlap. Potential for collaboration. Good Aboriginal student numbers.


54


Native studies Native studies BA (4 year major)

Enrolment decreasing, unit attributes this to specialized Aboriginal programming in other units. Taking steps to address this with new courses. Good community engagement. High service teaching. Clearly aligned with Aboriginal objectives of university. Well connected with other units.

Native studies Native studies PhD (special case PhD)

High market demand. Headcount rising. Prospect of developing Aboriginal scholars. Aligned with university priorities. Hard to predict what graduate levels will be, as program reestablished in 2008. Some research funding, publication record somewhat low, but commitment to community engagement may influence this. Unit should consider whether to regularize.

Native Studies Native studies Research Overall output quite low, though acceptable. Potential for greater opportunities. Direction positive, new hires starting to make contribution. Attracted major national conference, vote of confidence. Strong community engagement.


Engineering physics BEng (major) Recent refocusing of program to link with resources in other parts of university. Good student numbers. Students benefit from up-to-date facilities.


Physics BSc (honours) Excellent research climate, good experiential learning component. Low student numbers may reflect challenging program. Good investment. Objective of recruiting more students. Idea of combined BA/MA program worth pursuing.


Physics and engineering physics

MSc Strong faculty awards, research profile. Good graduation rates, though no explanation for drop-off in student headcount. Good faculty investment in program. Local to international demand.


Physics and engineering physics

PhD Somewhat low graduation rates. Concern about overall number of doctoral students given faculty complement and strong inputs. Strong support for students, strong research in unit. Good infrastructure for student research. Good external demand. Fairly costly program, though good tuition revenue.


55


Psychology Psychology BA (3 year major)

Strong research profile. Popular program, high number of students. Generates revenue. Teaching awards for faculty. Engagement of students in research, suggests strong commitment. Strong external demand.

Psychology Psychology BA (honours) Strong program, attracts good student numbers for honours program. Engagement of students in research distinctive feature. Department carries considerable service teaching.

Psychology Psychology BSc (4 year major)

Strong student demand, increasing numbers. Good Aboriginal component. Fits in strategic areas well. Experiential opportunities for students. Moving in very positive direction.

Psychology Psychology BSc (honours) Focus on undergraduate research. Faculty allotment to program is low, though will perhaps increase as enrolment increases. Still hard to predict student demand. Possibility of online courses freeing resources for honours supervision. Still developing.

Psychology Psychology MA Good graduation rates for MA level program. Good allocation of resources showing strong commitment. High external demand. Some decline in research revenues, still strengths in research program. Distinctiveness of this program not clearly described.

Psychology Psychology PhD Graduation rates increasing. Healthy amount of faculty resources devoted to program. Some drop in research funding, but steady in terms of publications. Strong outcomes for students in terms of awards, scholarships. Large student numbers, clearly strong demand.

Psychology Psychology Research Good external review of program. Wide range of research topics. Some decline in research funding but evidence of solid outcomes. Solid diverse program.


56


Religion & Culture Linguistics BA (4 year major)

Department making efforts at positive change in this program. Some evidence of demand for graduates. Appears to be strength of unit.

Sociology Sociology BA (3 year major)

Good student headcount and graduation rate. Aboriginal student number strong in both headcount and graduation. Good demand. Unit defined well as distinctive program.

Sociology Sociology BA (4 year major)

Aligns with strategic directions of institution. Good Aboriginal focus. Prudent use of resources. Innovative.

Sociology Sociology BA (honours) Strong research metrics, strong faculty inputs. Success of students. Links with community. Good Aboriginal numbers, attention to Aboriginal themes. Adapting to changing times, pursuing new themes. Good investment of faculty resources. Student engagement in research.

Sociology Sociology MA Strong student numbers. Community and social relevance. Good comparators. Unit seems to plan program ahead, tracking trends.

Sociology Sociology PhD Department has strength in research providing a sound foundation for graduate programs. Strengths in signature areas (health, Aboriginal issues, etc.)

Sociology Sociology Research Strong Tri-Agency funding, increasing faculty involvement. Good infrastructure, engagement with community. Commitment of faculty time. Some concern about low publication rate.

Dentistry Dentistry Post graduate general practice residency

Funding from external source. Provides important community service. High cost to support small number of students. High public service component. Arguably could be larger program. Template does not explain links with mission of university clearly.


57


College of Education Aboriginal Education Research Centre (AERC) - Type A Centre

All activities Strong research funding, efficient use of resources. Creating links and providing focus for expertise. May need to consider successorship issues. Strategic with respect to university priorities.

College of Education Saskatchewan Educational Leadership Unit (SELU) - Type A Centre

All activities Excellent community engagement. International reach. Large amount of funding, non-Tri-Agency funding. Large output of contract work. Clearly has impact.

College of Education Teacher education BEd Some weakness in research. Innovative programs for Aboriginal students, anti-racist education. Limited external demand.

Curriculum Studies Theory and practice in curriculum research, design, implementation, evaluation, and instructional leadership

MEd Strong demand, good graduation rate. Program generating revenue. Recent positive change indicative of dynamic program.

Educational Administration

Educational administration Research Strong Tri-Agency funding. Engagement with community and campus. Good internal and external demand. Good applied component. Fared well in international comparisons.


Educational leadership; school improvement and school effectiveness; organizational analysis; school, family, and community partnership; educational finance and law

MEd (Educational Administration)

Large numbers of students. Serves evident need. High commitment from faculty. Use of technology. Good Aboriginal enrolment. Good publication rate.


58



Educational leadership; school improvement and school effectiveness; organizational analysis; school, family, and community partnership; educational finance and law

PhD Strong investment of faculty. Good enrolment with good graduation rates, though some reservations about graduation rates for international and Aboriginal students. Reasonable Tri-Agency funding. Good alignment with priorities. Strong external demand.

Educational Foundations

Aboriginal Education; Adult and Lifelong Learning; Social & Ecological Justice; Foundations of Education

MEd (Educational Foundations)

Quality of inputs strong. Good statement of opportunities. Good numbers, good graduation rates. Increasing Aboriginal student numbers. Good Tri-Agency funding. Anti-racist education, Aboriginal focus innovative.

Educational Psychology & Special Education

Special education Post-degree Certificate in Education (Special Education)

Strong student numbers. Use of online courses, apparently attractive to students. Good Aboriginal student numbers. Modest faculty inputs. Partnership with CCDE, taught by sessionals with input from faculty. Serves a specific purpose, meets important need in education system.

Chemical and Biological Engineering

Chemical engineering BEng (major) Strong student numbers and graduate rates. Good research funding, above benchmarks. Strong external demand. Emphasis on experiential learning, good facilities for that. Investment of faculty resources identified as a priority. Aboriginal student numbers strong.


Chemical engineering MSc Somewhat hard to tell demand for this program. Modest number of students for good-sized faculty. Solid research support, fairly high productivity. Solid program, links with industry. Employability of graduates. Initiative to attract female students.


59



Chemical engineering PhD Strong funding from industry, economic relevance to province. Modest Tri-Agency funding. Solid publication rates. Weaknesses in description of student outcomes. Good international student numbers. Low attrition, good student numbers.


Civil and geological engineering

Research Strong research program. Important links with industry. Significant research funding confirms this.


Civil engineering MSc Low graduation rate a concern, not fully explained. Evidence of high demand. Good research prospects with industry chairs. Good inputs. Engagement with local economy, good employment for graduates.


Civil engineering PhD High demand, good research opportunities for students. Strong faculty. Publication rate could be improved.


Geological engineering BEng (major) High market demand, links with industry. Good research. Good student numbers, targeted for increased enrolment. Quality of program inputs has some weaknesses.

College of Engineering Ron and Jane Graham Centre for the Study of Communication - Type A Centre

All activities High level of student interest. Dynamic program, adapted to industry needs. Solid funding. Opportunities for students in regular programs to gain minor specialization. Experiential learning component. Little scholarly output.

Electrical and Computer Engineering

Electrical and computer engineering

Research Positive trajectory, evidence of future need, developing well. External demand not distinguished from graduate programs. Strong funding, publication rates. Strong collaboration. Limited internal demand.


Electrical engineering BEng (major) High market demand for graduates. Prospects for growth of program. Backed by good research program, though drop in Tri-Agency. Well aligned with priorities. Engaged with industry.


60



Electrical engineering MSc Good demand and student success on graduation. Good research output. Good ties with industry. Good international demand, good graduation rates for international students. Good integration of science with other aspects.


Electrical engineering PhD Graduation rate of international students a concern. Reasonable time to completion otherwise. Good demand. Good success with Tri-Agency scholarships. Strong faculty inputs, good research metrics. Good connections with industry.

Environmental Engineering

Environmental engineering BEng (major) Quite new program, with good enrolment, suggesting strong demand. Student outcomes good. Students engaged in program.


Mechanical engineering MSc Strong student demand, good outcomes. Excellent research metrics. Good completion rates. Initiative to reduce completion time. Good facilities.


Mechanical engineering Research Interest of industry, attracts grants. Solid inputs. Question about impact of research outside Canada.

College of Graduate Studies and Research

Toxicology MSc Strong research metrics, though some dip in Tri-Agency funding. Well-ranked in Canada. Strong external demand. Alignment with priority areas. Convincing case for opportunities. Good faculty inputs. Good student numbers. Given quality of inputs, should have more students.


Toxicology PhD Strong research support, some softness in Tri-Agency funding. 100% placement rate for graduates. Good Aboriginal student numbers though modest numbers of students overall. Parts of template not separate from MSc program. Allocation of resources not clear. Good alignment with university priorities.

Law Law JD Good external demand, good facilities, self-reliant on tuition fees, good outreach to the broader community. Developing research culture.


61


Anatomy & Cell Biology

Anatomy & Cell biology Research Good research output. Enhancing research with new hires. Focus on student engagement in research positive. CRCs have enhanced potential. Alignment with priorities, signature areas. Solid trajectory.

Community Health & Epidemiology

Community health & epidemiology

Research Some confusion about Tri-Agency figures. Research program needs more focus as distinct from graduate program. Solid research foundation to build on, good momentum. Alignment with Aboriginal research a strength.

Community Health and Epidemiology

Health sciences MSc Good productivity. Good demand for program. Strong community engagement. Solid student outcomes.

Community Health and Epidemiology

Health sciences PhD Strong faculty and student awards. Excellent strategic initiatives. Graduation rates rather weak. Good community engagement. Strong research funding, more than half of faculty holding research grants.


Nutrition and dietetics BSc (Nutr) Sound program that meets important needs in the province. There is a demand for program graduates. Good integration of internship program.


Nutrition and dietetics MSc Increasing trajectory of funding, building momentum. Good outputs for size of faculty. Student advancement and professional placement good. Graduation rates of concern. Limited commitment of faculty time.


Nutrition and dietetics PhD Dynamic program, good assessment of opportunities. Good numbers in program, increasing. Good research metrics as support for program. Limited links with other parts of institution. Template indicates fairly low investment in PhD program.


Nutrition and dietetics Research High level of faculty activity in research. Strong relevance to society needs. Strong research funding and productivity for relatively small number of faculty. Interdisciplinary dimension is a strength.


62



Pharmacy MSc Experience of students positive. Graduation rate relatively low, trying to reduce completion time. Good investment in scholarships.


Pharmacy Research Strong research metrics, good publication rate. Good output with small number of faculty also committed to professional program. Good culture of research mentorship. Some decline in research funding noted.

Accounting Accounting BComm (major) Steady high enrolment, high graduation rates, obviously attractive to students. Good investment of faculty resources. Good Aboriginal student numbers. Research profile weak, a concern in discipline that is changing rapidly. Employability of graduates, aligned with market demand. Weak case for alignment with university directions.

Accounting Accounting MPAcc Unique in western Canada. Links with profession. Draws students to U of S. No indication of links with research. Efficient generation of revenue.

Edwards School of Business

Aboriginal business administration

Certificate of Proficiency

Not clear what resources are devoted to this; administration included in the support services template. Lacks direction. Transition to BComm for Aboriginal students very important. Reaching into high schools. Should be clearer indication of faculty commitment.


Business administration Certificate of Successful Completion

Program provides service to profession, links to business community. Good student numbers. No specific evidence of student outcomes. Low investment of faculty resources for number of students.


Centre for the Advancement of Accounting Education - Type A Centre

All activities Research connection unclear. Draws external donations, involvement of students in experiential learning. Some funding directed to research. Set up in 2009, still developing.


63


Finance & Management Science

Finance BComm (major) Strong student numbers, good graduation rate. Good Aboriginal enrolment. Good faculty inputs. Student-managed portfolio innovative idea, other experiential initiatives. Limited research output. Question about why not attracting non-Tri-Agency funding. ESB flagship program.

Human Resources & Organizational Behaviour

Human resources BComm (major) Research metrics showing life, increasing Tri-Agency success. Good demand, students from outside province. Employment prospects for graduates. High numbers, good graduation rates. Strong Aboriginal student numbers. Experiential components. Potential links with JSGS.

School of Public Policy Public administration Master of Public Administration (MPA)

Very healthy new program, good student numbers. Good faculty inputs. Focus on experiential learning. Very cost effective. Internship a positive feature.

School of Public Policy Public policy Master of Public Policy (MPP)

Innovative interdisciplinary programming. Strong external demand, high calibre of students. Strong faculty inputs, attracting students. Competitive nationally.

School of Public Policy Public policy PhD Strength of faculty. Increased student numbers, though no graduates to date. Strong research funding and output.

School of Public Policy Public policy Research High productivity in research. Could make stronger case for alignment, links with other aspects of university. Several chairs, strong potential.

Environment and sustainability


PhD Program still new, promise of success. Starting to graduate students. New faculty hires, good research trajectory. Considering links with other programs. Inputs strong, might accommodate higher number of students in this program.



Research Increasing Tri-Agency funding. Good publication rate. Good plans for future, beginning to act on them. Alignment with university priorities. Evidence concerning internal demand somewhat disappointing.


64


Environment and Sustainability

Sustainable environmental management

MSEM Program underlines strong potential of SENS. Growth in student numbers. Addition of service learning.

University-Wide Canadian Centre for Health and Safety in Agriculture (CCHSA) - Type B Centre

All activities Strong research metrics, brings in considerable funding. Good research output. Positive external review. Good alignment with community needs. Involvement of students not clear. Weak links with other parts of campus and no case made for alignment with university priorities.

University-Wide Centre for the Study of Co–operatives - Type B Centre

All activities Productive, well focused. National leader that generates strong funding. Community engagement. Consonant with sense of place: Saskatchewan is the center of co-op movement.

University-Wide Community-University Institute for Social Research (CUISR) - Type B Centre

All activities Very active, unique approach. Built on collaboration with community. Engagement of Aboriginal community. Strong research and training focus. Publications strong for a centre. Success at attracting funding. Not entirely successful at describing alignment with priorities, though clear potential.

University-Wide Indigenous Land Management Institute (ILMI) - Type B Centre

All activities Not clear what resources devoted to program, or what links with graduate programs. Good outcomes. Important research issues. Dean very supportive. Central role in facilitating research in this area.

University-Wide Toxicology Centre - Type B Centre

All activities Strong faculty inputs. Drop in Tri-Agency funding in last couple of years. Good levels of research funding otherwise. Indication of desire of unit for academic unit status.

Veterinary Biomedical Sciences

Veterinary biomedical sciences

MSc Solid program. Good student numbers and graduation rates. Good publication rate. Aligns well with university priorities. Good faculty inputs, faculty awards and student awards. Some decline in Tri-Agency funding. Good description of student outcomes. Question whether over-reliant on small number of productive faculty.


65




PhD Good student outcomes. Strong faculty and student awards. Relatively expensive to run. Good completion rates and student demand.

Western College of Veterinary Medicine

Canadian Co-Operative Wildlife Health Centre - Type A Centre

All activities Program highly regarded, generating funds. Plans to improve Aboriginal links. Somewhat unclear where activities focused, though important contributor to monitoring of wildlife diseases. Self-supporting.


66

QUINTILE 3: CANDIDATES FOR RETAINING WITH REDUCED RESOURCING



Agricultural economics PhD Graduation rate low, but good enrolments. Strong external demand. Outcomes indicate positive review, but little specific evidence. Strong research funding, though decline in Tri-Agency. Good alignment with university priorities.


Bioresource policy, business and economics

Research Inputs strong. Reasonable level of funding, particularly non-Tri-Agency, but Tri-Agency funding dropping. Publication rate dipping. High external demand. Quite costly for modest output. Good alignment with university priorities.


Applied microbiology MSc External demand good. Fairly strong inputs. Good research metrics, but concern about trending of research funding. Modest student numbers given size of faculty. Some potential to combine with MSc in food and bioproduct sciences.


Food science BSc (major) Research strengths. International student demand. Question about distinctiveness of program.

Plant Sciences Applied plant ecology BSA (major) High quality, but expensive program for the number of students. Question about efficient use of resources. Research metrics strong. Accreditation an asset.

Plant Sciences Crop science BSA (major) Good growth in student numbers. High external demand, evidenced by employment of graduates. Alignment with priorities but not a strong case for opportunities.


Anthropology BA (4 year major)

Recent reconfiguration makes it somewhat hard to assess current state of program. Promising external partnerships.


Anthropology BA (honours) Research engagement of students. Modest enrolment and does not seem to be growing. Solid program, rebooted in 2009. Concern about whether this represents an efficient use of faculty resources for small number of students.


67



Archaeology BA (4 year major)

Low graduation numbers. Seems to be backstop for honours program. Some interesting courses, drawing in students, not specifically for this program.


Archaeology BA (honours) Completion rate good, numbers steady though fairly low. Undergraduate involvement in research. Upward trend in Tri-Agency funding. Good connection with community. Limited case for outcomes. Strong faculty awards. Little evidence of recent innovation, weak statement of opportunities.


Archaeology BSc (4 year major)

Good opportunities for students (e.g. Wanuskewin), but lack of evidence of student success. Decreasing enrolment and graduation numbers. Significant decrease in tuition revenues. Encouraging trend in research funding.


Archaeology BSc (honours) Weak investment of faculty resources. Fair research profile. Strong students. Focus on plains and boreal forest well aligned with university priorities. Low student numbers.


Archaeology Research Case for external demand weak. High proportion of faculty holding grants. Upward trajectory for research metrics. Importance to cultural preservation in western Canada. No strong description of research output.

Art & Art History Art history BA (4 year major)

Low graduate rates. Low commitment of faculty resources. Program incorporating different perspectives. Encouragement of research culture. Student engagement with community. Efforts to align with university priorities.

Art & Art History Art history BA (honours) Impressive refocusing on university priorities and community needs. Student numbers small, not growing. Modest research metrics. Good commitment of faculty resources. May be costly for small student numbers.

Art & Art History Studio art BA (3 year major)

Strong external demand, connection with high schools. Good internal demand, increase in enrolment. Division with 4-year degree not clear. Good Aboriginal student numbers.


68


Art & Art History Studio art BA (4 year major)

Waitlist for introductory courses, extensive service teaching. Aboriginal faculty member has supported refocus to that area. Community outreach, links to artistic community. Viewed as "holding tank" for BFA, suggests this is a lower priority for unit. Low graduation numbers not explained.

Biology Biology BSc (3 year major)

Low graduation rate not explained. Popular feeder for different options. Aboriginal student numbers strong.

Biology Biology BSc (honours) Revenue and cost allocations seem to be out of balance. Reasonable commitment of faculty resources, but cost seems high. Enrolment dropping.

Biology Biology MSc Template lacks information specific to program. Recent decline in number of graduates and research funding. Strong investment in scholarships.

Biology Biology PhD Good external demand, though few out-of-province students. Research metrics respectable. No indication of internal demand. Low graduation rates. Quality of students not articulated.

Biology Biology Research Template lacks information specific to program. Research output could be better. Somewhat cavalier responses to some template questions.

Chemistry Chemistry BSc (3 year major)

Strong internal demand, good external demand. Good graduation rates and Aboriginal student numbers. Strong research profile. Limited case made for this as a distinct program. Links with SIAST.

Computer Science Computer science BSc (3 year major)

High internal demand. Strong research metrics. Drop in student numbers raises concern about prospects for future. Question of how 3 yr program fits in suite of programs in unit.


69


Economics Business economics BA (4 year major)

Information in template mostly about unit, not program. Research metrics modest. Good Aboriginal involvement. Career internships positive. Hard to identify outputs from this program. Strong internal demand.

Economics Economics BA (3 year major)

High graduation rates, good number of Aboriginal and international students. Enrolment declining, suggests demand decreasing. Good service teaching. Apparent redirection to 4-year program.

Economics Economics BA (4 year major)

Research funding low. Good range of faculty involvement. Student numbers reasonable, student inputs seem strong, good graduation rates. Solid program but costly.

Economics Economics BA (honours) Good number of students. Internship dimension. Template not specific about inputs and outputs of this particular program. Weakly aligned with university priorities. Modest research.

English English BA (3 year major)

High level of service teaching. Outreach initiatives. Students involved in research. Strong inputs. Meets expectations. Student numbers steady. Aboriginal initiatives have not borne fruit to this point.

English English PhD High quality of students. Graduation rate slow. Some lack of focus in template on PhD program as such. Strength in faculty.

Geography & Planning Environment and society BASc (4 year major)

New program, result of refocus of programs. Has potential for success. Research strength in unit. Increase in students promising. Still in development.

Geography & Planning Environmental earth sciences

BSc (4 year major)

Priority area for unit. Degrees increasing, but headcount unclear. Unit needs to focus on recruiting into program. Little evidence of alignment with industry. Number of programs in unit may be inhibiting growth. Aligned with research interests of unit. Good faculty research and teaching.


70


Geography & Planning Geography MA Slow graduation rates. Disinvestment in favour of MSc. Possible future related to planning focus. Good research, positive trajectory. Limited research output from students, despite low course requirements.

Geological Sciences Geological sciences MSc Good student outcomes. Somewhat low graduation rates. Could accommodate more students on strength of this faculty complement. Research metrics in unit strong. Good pathway to PhD program.

Geological Sciences Geological sciences PhD Research strength in department. Graduation rates suggest long completion time in program. Long-established program.

Geological Sciences Geophysics BSc (4 year major)

Program has strong inputs but high attrition rate. Committee recognized that this program aligns well with provincial need and is attractive to employers. No clear indication of potential for growth.

Geological Sciences Geophysics BSc (honours) Strong industry demand. High attrition rate. Small student numbers, limited demand. Students have won prestigious awards. Strong research metrics in department. Limited alignment with priorities, and modest assessment of opportunities.

History History BA (3 year major)

Good internal demand, but no real discussion of external demand. Good research funding. Not credible that no cost associated with program. Unit encouraged by students moving to 4-yr program. Some Aboriginal students.

History History BA (4 year major)

Low completion rates explained by role to prepare students for further programs. Good strategic rethinking, headed in right direction.

Mathematics & Statistics Mathematics BSc (3 year major)

Value-added as component of other programs. Apparently small assignment of faculty resources. Helpful comparison with other universities.


71


Mathematics & Statistics Mathematics BSc (honours) High level of service teaching, clear internal demand from rest of university. Little indication of student involvement in research. Good student outcomes. Low enrolment in this particular program.

Mathematics & Statistics Mathematics and statistics MSc Reasonable research funding, well-established program. Good involvement of faculty. Might explore other sources of funding. Publications not particularly impressive given size of faculty. Weakness in case for alignment.

Mathematics & Statistics Mathematics and statistics Research Solid program, good student enrolment. Good level of Tri-Agency funding, concern about number of publications. Apparently cost-efficient. Good external demand.

Mathematics & Statistics Statistics BSc (4 year major)

Student numbers have dropped. Weak evidence of innovation in program. Strong service teaching in unit. Large number introductory courses in different units - potential synergies from consolidation. Small investment of faculty resources. Employability of graduates positive.

Music Music BMus (honours) Long history of program. Good quality faculty. Very low demand, apparently few students. Plans to develop academic stream (musicology etc.). Significant performance component.

Native studies Native studies MA Seems to be serving students well. National comparison was a nice addition to the template. However, research output does not meet expectations and no established demand.

Philosophy Philosophy BA (honours) Increased outreach to community. Steady graduation rate, fairly small student numbers, but high quality of students. Costly program for small number of students. Modest evidence of quality of teaching inputs.

Philosophy Philosophy MA Student numbers fairly solid, perhaps slightly high investment of faculty resources. Good outreach.


72



Physics BSc (3 year major)

Well prepared template. Very solid unit, good research metrics. Low student numbers, question whether cost for this number of students can be sustained.


Physics BSc (4 year major)

Strong research, strong faculty inputs to support undergraduate programs. Strong demand, gives graduates diverse opportunities. Number of graduates somewhat low and student outcomes not clear.

Political Studies Political studies BA (4 year major)

Good Aboriginal student involvement in program. Very modest research. Good internship program, experiential component. Evidence of strong teaching. Not clear how this is distinct from other programs.

Political Studies Political studies BA (honours) Good student numbers, good graduation numbers. Clearly an attractive program. Good faculty investment in program. Research productivity low. Strong teaching record. Weak case concerning external demand.

Dentistry Dentistry DMD Research metrics very low, need to develop research program. Could develop more links with campus community. Conditional accreditation. Generates strong tuition revenues. Providing dental care to underserviced populations is a strength of the program.

Curriculum Studies Curriculum Studies Research Some international grants, but fairly low Tri-Agency funding. Good engagement with units across university. High costs associated with program in comparison with outputs. Downward trend in funding is a concern.

Educational Foundations Educational foundations Research Good faculty investment in research. Good quality of inputs, strong outputs. Modest research funding for amount of faculty investment. Very engaged, interdisciplinary. Relatively new faculty. Positive direction.


Educational psychology & special education

MEd (Educational Psychology)

Solid enrolment. Good research profile. Somewhat costly for online-based program. Excellent external demand. Distance learning.


73



Educational psychology & special education

Research Large number of graduate students. Low publication rate for time invested. Small amount of Tri-Agency funding, generated by small number of faculty. Aboriginal focus promising. Lack of cohesion in research approach, not convincing that "diversity is a strength."


School and counselling psychology

MEd (School and Counselling Psychology), Thesis Option only

Good student numbers, though some recent decrease. Good employment opportunities, good service to those in profession. Some weakness in faculty inputs. Generates revenue for unit. Small investment of faculty time for number of students.


Biological engineering MSc External demand persuasively presented. Indications of student employability, industry demand. Modest enrolment. Modest Tri-Agency funding. Solid publication rate, though some decline in peer-reviewed articles.


Biological engineering PhD Research funding quite low for program, but strong links with external constituencies. Good potential for linking with priorities. Quite costly program. Question about completion rate in relation to headcount. Apparent downward trend in publications.

College of Engineering Professional Communication Option (PCO)

Demand from students, popular option. Strong financial support from private donors. Attractive to AgBio. Some weaknesses in faculty inputs in terms of scholarly strength, though plan to strengthen through chairs etc. Links with industry, possible mining focus. Question of whether there might be more efficient ways to achieve goal.


Computer engineering BEng (major) High student financial support. Student numbers of concern, demand not clear. Narrow range of connections within university. Strong links with industry. Student outcomes could be improved.


74


Mechanical Engineering Mechanical engineering MEng Good research metrics. Low graduation rates, enrolment still low. Outcomes vague, though program appears to have momentum. Demand from international students.

Mechanical Engineering Mechanical engineering PhD Low and declining graduation rate, not clear why completion rate low. High external demand, application numbers. Employable graduates. Quite costly program, investment of faculty resources should lead to higher completion rates.

Kinesiology Exercise and sport studies BSc (Kin) Information in template difficult to interpret - student numbers across programs in College not indicated. Some indication of strong demand, good student inputs. Costly.

Kinesiology Exercise and sport studies BSc (Kin) (Honours)

Steady numbers. Internal demand quite high, good connections with other units. Difficult to interpret figures in template with respect to cost allocation, investment of faculty resources.

Kinesiology Kinesiology MSc Good student demand, transition to PhD. Modest research metrics, several faculty excused from research. Decline in Tri-Agency funding of concern. Dropping graduation rates.

Kinesiology Kinesiology PhD Strong faculty inputs. Scholarships effectively used. Good student numbers suggest high demand. Student successes outlined. Allocation of resources not clear. Modest level of Tri-Agency funding, seems to have declined. Weak case for essentiality or innovation.

Kinesiology Kinesiology Research Evidence of efforts to build research. Modest Tri-Agency funding. Outcomes strong in terms of presentations, conferences. Research concentrated within few faculty members. High donations.

Kinesiology Kinesiology/Education BSc (Kin)/BEd High demand, good retention. Employment opportunities. Difficult to interpret data provided in template.


75


Law Law LLM Program has high costs. Graduation rate of concern (time to completion too long). Strong collaborative initiatives in place and good Aboriginal engagement, good demand.

Law Law Research Upward trajectory in research metrics but outcomes still low. New faculty stimulating activity.

Anatomy & Cell Biology Anatomy & cell biology BSc (3 year major)

Question whether demand for program will change when requirements for admission to Medicine changed to 4 yr. Steady enrolment.

Anatomy & Cell Biology Anatomy & cell biology BSc (4 year major)

Graduation rates a little low, but potential for future growth. Solid program with strengths, good entry point into professional programs. Question about outcomes for students who do not pursue professional streams.

Anatomy & Cell Biology Anatomy & cell biology BSc (honours) Good evidence of external demand. Template did not distinguish between honours and 4-yr program. Student numbers decreasing, program quite small to start with. Good experiential learning options.

Anatomy & Cell Biology Anatomy & cell biology MSc Monetary award to students who publish is an innovative idea. Number of students small for number of faculty, especially considering the presence of CRCs. Solid research metrics, but could support more graduate students.

Anatomy & Cell Biology Anatomy & cell biology PhD Solid program. Unit has 3 CRCs, student numbers low in this context. Might use resources to strengthen program, recruit more students.

Biochemistry Biochemistry BSc (honours) Research trajectory good, higher student numbers. Somewhat low graduation rates. Unit suggesting that this might be amalgamated with another program. Evidence concerning internal and external demand not convincing. Little analysis of opportunities.


76


Biochemistry Biochemistry MSc Good graduation rates. Solid program. Weak analysis of opportunities, lack of explanation of external demand. Research output trending in right direction. Clear indication of opportunities for students.

Biochemistry Biochemistry Research Good research funding, increasing research output. No strong case for alignment with university priorities. No evidence of external demand. Good faculty investment in program. Little information about faculty inputs. Question whether could be more cost effective.

Family Medicine Family medicine Residency Apparently costly program. Good distributive learning focus. Initiatives in community engagement. Low research output.

Medical Imaging Medical imaging Residency Good external demand, demonstrated internal demand, some collaboration with other units. Low research metrics, lack of investment in research. Good outcomes for students, meets their objectives. Weak case for alignment with university priorities.

Medicine Internal medicine Research Helpful information in template. External funding from diverse sources but Tri-Agency funding could be improved. Provides some indication of research vision.

Microbiology & Immunology

Microbiology & immunology Research Strong research profile but involves small proportion of faculty. Output not strong given protected time for research. Culture of student involvement in research, fostering research culture in department.


Microbiology & immunology BSc (4 year major)

Seems to have relevance to other university programs, potential for collaboration, but this has not been realized. Low student demand. Perhaps overlap with related programs limits enrolments. No compelling argument made for external demand. Limited assessment of opportunities.


77



Microbiology & immunology BSc (honours) Little evidence given of internal and external demand. Little evidence of engagement of students in research. Quite good enrolment, good graduation rate, though recent dip.


Microbiology & immunology MSc High demand for program is noted, but few students admitted. Concern about whether program operating at optimum capacity. Little evidence concerning student outcomes. Dip in research funding. Alignment with university directions vague.


Microbiology & immunology PhD Research metrics could be better given protected time for research and resources attached to this program. Small program given size of faculty. Question whether basis for more consolidation of microbiology programs across campus. Little interaction with VIDO or other university units. Weak analysis of opportunities.

Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation

Physical medicine & rehabilitation

Residency Good student numbers. Student satisfaction, good environment established. Stable program.

Physiology Physiology & pharmacology BSc (3 year major)

Combined program has some strengths. Good student numbers, increase in Aboriginal students. Good experiential components. Solid inputs. Unit notes that restructuring in Medicine may have impact.

Physiology Physiology & pharmacology BSc (4 year major)

Good student numbers, including Aboriginal students. Good internal demand. Modest research outputs, drop in Tri-Agency funding. Limited case made for future prospects. Signs that combined program having success, seems to be a positive model for other basic science units in college to consider.

Physiology Physiology & pharmacology BSc (honours) Good student numbers. Combination of resources from two units has had positive effect on enrolment. External demand not well described. Investment of faculty resources unclear.


78


Psychiatry Psychiatry Research Positive trajectory of Tri-Agency and non-Tri-Agency funding. On verge of moving forward in significant way. Some weakness in research metrics given proportion of time members of unit have for research. Clear social importance of research, good opportunities to meet community need.

Psychiatry Psychiatry Residency Strong history, high external need. High cost. Need for stronger links with research to galvanize it. Decline in student numbers with no explanation. Question about external reputation.

College of Nursing Nursing BSc (Nursing) Costly program. Some weakness in quality of inputs. Supports for Aboriginal students. Innovative outreach to remote areas.

College of Nursing Nursing Post degree BSN

Well-aligned with university priorities. Potential for increased demand. Good numbers of Aboriginal students but difficult to figure out enrolment from template information. Not described in distinctive terms.


Pharmacy PhD Information on graduate rates not consistent. Research reasonable, strengths in unit. Given faculty numbers, three research chairs, would expect larger number of students completing program. Good information about quality of students, strong outputs.


Business administration MBA Strong program from point of view of students. Link with faculty research output not clear. Clear external demand. Numbers of students increasing. Self-contained program, potential for links with other programs. Student outcomes not defined.


Finance MSc Good student employability. Strong demand for thesis. Good student numbers. Low investment of resources. Good inputs and outcomes for students. Developing research culture.


Operations management BComm (major) Very high demand in business sector. Student numbers small, but growing. Costs somewhat high. Limited research in unit.


79


Management & Marketing Management BComm (major) Stable program, good numbers. Research output low, should be improved to support undergraduate program. Good employment prospects. Opportunity analysis somewhat weak. Good Aboriginal student numbers, with completion. Generates revenue.

Management & Marketing Marketing BComm (major) Impressed by strong external demand, service teaching. Good case for essentiality. Focus on Aboriginal business opportunities. Strong student numbers, though some downturn. Young faculty, promising for research, promising trajectory.



MES Growth in demand from industry. Research metrics good. Good student scholarships. Strong student demand but could accommodate more students given faculty involved. Somewhat low graduation numbers. Somewhat weak internal demand.

School of Physical Therapy

Physical therapy MPT High market demand for graduates. Steady graduation rates and enrolment. Good Aboriginal student numbers. Aligned with health priorities of university. Good publication rates. Experiential learning component significant for professional preparation. Seems to be a somewhat costly program.

School of Physical Therapy

Physical therapy Research Concern that clinical service may interfere with research progress. Research at this moment not convincing but good potential in the future with recent hires. Good focus on collaboration. Well organized template.

School of Public Health Public health Master of public health

Student numbers growing, solid graduation rates, though low rates for international students. Use of distance education a positive. Demand for graduates not clear. Question whether costly for number of students. Accreditation not yet obtained. Fairly new program, difficult to evaluate.


80


Large Animal Clinical Sciences

Large animal clinical sciences

MSc Reasonable demand. Research output quite modest. Relatively low number of graduates from program. Emphasis on clinical load, need balance with academic research.



PhD Low enrolment, low graduation rate. Low investment of faculty resources. Market demand strong. Good faculty inputs, reasonable funding.



Research Good faculty inputs. Modest research output. Good funding, not eligible for a lot of Tri-Agency. High level of clinical obligations. Unclear how faculty are focused on research activity. May need more protected time for research and to focus research vision.

Small Animal Clinical Sciences

Small animal clinical sciences

MVetSc Coupled with residency program, strong external demand. Research in unit weak. Potential offered by new research chairs. Record of students achieving certification. Costly program.



Research Research metrics sound. Credit given to graduate students for involvement. Little information about how research program connects with other units. Some decline in research funding. Reliant on small number of research-active faculty. Alignment with university priorities could have been stronger.

Veterinary Microbiology Veterinary microbiology MSc Good research metrics, good funding. Evidence of funding for students. Low graduation rates, explained by transfers to PhD. Seems to be a somewhat costly program.

Veterinary Microbiology Veterinary microbiology PhD Good internal and external demand. Costly program. Recent attention to graduation rates showing positive effect. Good publication rate by students. Taking steps to re-evaluate program.


81


Veterinary Microbiology Veterinary microbiology Research Quite high productivity, strong relationship with VIDO. Strong research funding. Nothing distinctive about program. No indication of research link with external stakeholders. No strong case for alignment with priorities.

Veterinary Pathology Veterinary pathology MVetSc Costly program for small number of students. Evidence of student advancement and success. Specialized program. Need to develop different model to accommodate external demand.


82

QUINTILE 4: CANDIDATES FOR RECONFIGURING FOR EFFICIENCY/EFFECTIVENESS



Resource economics & policy

BSc RRM (major) Some lack of direction in program. Small student enrolments, no graduates in review period. New program, slow development. Alignment with priorities. Some research strength. Dean suggests it could be combined with soil science version of this program.


Applied microbiology PhD Department has good research. Resources stretched to offer a large number of graduate programs. Graduation rate seems low despite strong demand for program. Potential to combine with PhD in food and bioproduct sciences.


Food and bioproduct sciences

PhD Low enrolment, low investment of faculty resources in this program. Number of students low considering amount of research funding. Unit suggests might be advantageous to merge with other PhD program. Decline in research output.

Soil Science Soil science BSA (major) Small but stable program. Some sign of decline in student headcount, graduation rates, may indicate a decline in demand. Somewhat costly for small student numbers. Unique program nationally but this is not increasing external demand. Dean acknowledges need for recruitment effort.

Art & Art History Art history BA (3 year major) Low student headcounts. Potential for enhancing Aboriginal enrolment, recent hiring of Aboriginal faculty member. Lack of clearly distinct vision for this program. Suggest unit focus on higher level programs. Question of whether demand can be created.

College of Arts & Science Centre for Algebra, Logic, and Computation (CALC) - Type A Centre

All activities Good faculty inputs. National profile through conferences. Link to research productivity not clear. Allocation of faculty resources to graduate students not clear. Value added of centre structure not clear.


83


College of Arts & Science Centre for High-Performance Computing (HPC) - Type A Centre

All activities More a service than an academic activity. Opportunity exists to develop academic mandate. Provides important resources to campus community.

College of Arts & Science Institute for Computer and Information Technology - Type A Centre

All activities Low level of current resources and formal commitment of faculty time. Reasonable level of output. Links to industry offer potential, but centre needs dedicated attention.

College of Arts & Science Social Research Unit - Type A Centre

All activities Role in facilitating research in sociology. Modest costs. Difficult to interpret metrics provided. Lack of clarity about what activities carried out. Serves one department. Alignment with university goals.


Northern studies BA (3 year major) Very important program but not working in its present form. Does not seem to serve northern communities well. Requires fundamental change to reach its potential.


Northern studies BA (4 year major) Program could do better with more focus, resources. Aligns with university priorities. Attracts students from out of province but low student headcount is a concern.

Drama Drama BA (4 year major) Good engagement with community, contribution to cultural scene a strength of the department. Good student numbers, though somewhat low graduation rates. Focus on BFA more than this program suggests there has been some disinvestment here.

Economics Economics Research Tri-Agency funding low and declining. Limited publication rate, perhaps too much focus on commissioned reports. Unit might develop academic research vision.


84


Geography & Planning Environment and society BASc (honours) Unique interdisciplinary program, refocus of department. Links with other environmental programs. Low student demand. Little commitment of resources given claim that this is an important new program. Need to figure out how to attract the students they expected.

Geography & Planning Environmental earth sciences

BSc (honours) Might have more strength combined with other programs. Low student demand. Research numbers declining. Unclear that sufficient resources dedicated to the development of this program.

Geography & Planning Geography Cooperative Education Program

Attracts small number of students, suggests fairly low priority. Experiential learning aligned with university priorities. Strong potential, would benefit from investment, greater attention.

History Classical, medieval and renaissance studies

Research Template did not provide research metrics specific to this program. Difficult to judge. Overlap with history research program, not clear what aspects are independent.

Interdisciplinary Centre for Culture and Creativity (ICCC)

Interdisciplinary Centre for Culture and Creativity (ICCC) - Type A Centre

All activities Relatively new initiative, effort to promote interdisciplinary programming. Template does not make strong case that aspirations behind centre coming to fruition. Does not seem to be attracting significant funding. Might be over-resourced.


Women's and gender studies

BA (4 year major) Significant changes in faculty configuration in this area. Small though steady student numbers. No strong case for internal demand. Some good external links. Suggest unit focus here rather than 3-year or honours.



Research Concern with lack of Tri-Agency activity, though SSHRC eligible. Small faculty complement, short of critical mass. Interdisciplinary links. Focus in template on graduate program being introduced, less on research. Some alignment with priorities.


85


Languages, Literatures, and Cultural Studies

French BA (3 year major) Research metrics low. Enrolment, graduate numbers modest. Vice-Dean raises question of sustainability. Little evidence concerning student outcomes.


French BA (4 year major) Important subject matter, alignment with university priorities. Collaboration with U of R promising. Online courses planned, shows initiative. Low enrolments for program of long standing. Low research metrics, weak faculty inputs. Creation of large technologically assisted classes a promising direction.


Languages Research Department has long history. New faculty working to establish research focus. Limited focus on research in template, no apparent research plan. Limited research funding.


Modern languages BA (4 year major) Increasing student numbers, new configuration has had impact. Positive trend. Research metrics a concern. Weak case for alignment with university priorities. Question of whether adequate investment of resources. Strong service teaching at this level.

Mathematics & Statistics Mathematics BSc (4 year major)

Low graduation rates. Reference to low standards of students in major. Strong service teaching by department. Not strong evidence of alignment with university priorities. Very low allocation of resources.

Mathematics & Statistics Mathematics and statistics PhD Program seems to lack vision. Relatively few degrees conferred and student headcount is low for faculty complement size. No clear plans for the future.

Music Music MMus Enrolment fairly low, some decline. Clearly articulated expectations. Strong program inputs. Strong faculty, increasing RSAW. Strong community engagement. Unit acknowledges need to take steps to regain enrolment in some areas, reconfiguration supported by Vice-Dean.


86


Native Studies Native studies BA (honours) Very low student numbers. Department has been engaged in important revising and planning. High amount of service teaching does not translate into honours students. Program would need to have more distinctive focus.

Philosophy Philosophy BA (3 year major) Very small program. Decreasing headcount, low research metrics. High degree of service teaching. Weak case for societal demand. Might focus on 4-yr, honours programs, or rethink this program.

Philosophy Philosophy BA (4 year major) Low graduation rate, but high amount of service teaching. Focus of unit seems to be on honours program. Foundational discipline in university indicated by demand from other programs. Weak case for alignment. Unclear graduate outcomes. Limited research output, even considering small faculty numbers.

Philosophy Philosophy Research Strength in community outreach. Well prepared template. Low research metrics. Clear plan for future growth a positive step.

Political Studies Political studies BA (3 year major) Little evidence of external demand. Good student numbers. Difficulty of making 3-yr program distinctive. Role as feeder program may have value. Modest research metrics.

Political Studies Political studies MA Concern about graduation rate, suggests retention problem. Funding not a match with time in program. Good student headcount, obviously attracts students. No indication of market demand. Alignment with university priorities vague. Tri-Agency funding low.

Political Studies Political studies Research Low research funding, poor research output. New hires may lead to renewal. In need of developing research vision.

Political Studies (Interdisciplinary)

Aboriginal public administration

BA (4 year major) This is an important program for the province, but few degrees conferred. Retention rate is low. Demand is low. Overly dependent on sessional lecturers.


87


Political Studies (interdisciplinary)

Aboriginal public administration

BA (honours) Poor enrolment. Important to institutional priorities, but need to provide adequate faculty support. Program needs re-conceptualization and a more supportive research environment.


International studies BA (4 year major) Popular program, good Aboriginal enrolment. Graduation rates a concern. Tuition revenue not clear. Little investment of faculty or administrative resources. Strong alignment with university priorities. Modest research profile.


International studies BA (honours) Program attractive to students. Change in focus suggested is desirable. More resources would be necessary to allow program to achieve potential. Suggest that unit re-consider large number of programs being offered.


Public administration BA (4 year major) Good number of Aboriginal students but otherwise modest student numbers. Low graduate rates. Unclear vision. One of few undergraduate programs in this area nation-wide. Potential for collaboration with JSGS. Low research output.

Religion & Culture Linguistics BA (3 year major) Faculty making efforts to reconfigure. Small program, Vice-Dean indicates potential for further reconfiguration. Outcomes for graduates identified.

Religion & Culture Linguistics BA (honours) Newly organized in this form. Small investment of faculty resources, perhaps because of small faculty complement. Student numbers very low. Limited research in unit. Template does not demonstrate coherent alignment with university directions.

Religion & Culture Linguistics MA (special case)

Relatively new program. Struggle to develop. Some good collaborative opportunities, with FNUC etc. Seems to be some student interest. Very modest research. Low investment of faculty resources suggests might be difficult to sustain full MA program.

Religion & Culture Linguistics Research Low level of research funding and publications. No clear vision for future growth. New faculty could spark renewed emphasis.


88


Dentistry Dentistry Research Unit acknowledges weakness of research. Hard to predict whether adding Associate Dean will enhance research. Exceedingly little evidence of research activity. Hiring needs to take research into account.

Biomedical Engineering Biomedical engineering MEng Relevant program, but needs stronger leadership and dedicated resources. Fits with university priorities, but lacks appropriate support.

Biomedical Engineering Biomedical engineering MSc Good level of growth, good prospects. Would benefit from more structure. Perhaps should consider placing this under the auspices of VPR to realize potential. This area is in demand nationally but requires significant resources for the U of S to contribute to this mission.

Biomedical Engineering Biomedical engineering PhD Low graduation rates. Would benefit from more dedicated resources. Question of supervisory role of CGSR. Need for more leadership from medical sciences, more formal structure. See MSc comments.

Biomedical Engineering Biomedical engineering Research Data on research output not provided. Growth in demand, some positive indications of initiatives. Poorly positioned in university, needs resources to make impact.

Biomedical Engineering Biomedical engineering - Type B Centre

All activities Lack of resources to make this a vigorous interdisciplinary entity. Need for champion or additional commitment. Subject matter well aligned with university priorities, would provide considerable opportunities. Not sustainable with current configuration.

Chemical & Biological Engineering

Chemical & biological engineering

Research Limited information in template. Seems to be well-funded program, but information not included. Evidence of considerable research output, but unit indicates that this is allocated to graduate programs.


89



Civil engineering MEng Student numbers low in relation to inquiries about program, evidence of some demand among part-time students. Small investment of faculty/sessional resources or other resources devoted to this program.

College of Engineering Engineering Entrepreneurship Option (EEO)

New program, difficulties in establishing program with Edwards. Few metrics provided. Serious scheduling and curricular issues, possibly should have worked this out before program launched.

College of Engineering Engineering Professional Internship Program (EPIP)

Little evidence of assessment of student experience or student satisfaction. No compelling description of mission. Efficient use of resources. Industry interest strong. High student demand.

College of Engineering Saskatchewan Centre of Excellence in Transportation and Infrastructure - Type A Centre

All activities Good research profile. Links with students not clear. Doing well at stimulating research. Links with industry, creation of business opportunities. Link with government. Question whether high university priority should be placed on this form of activity.

Native Law Centre of Canada

Type A Centre All activities External demand well stated. Research could be stronger. Unique role in Canada. Important program, needs stronger links with college and a coherent research vision.

Anesthesiology Anesthesiology Research Need increased focus of faculty to make strides in research. Output has been low. Some lack of clarity of information. Some indication of development of research infrastructure.

Anesthesiology Anesthesiology Residency Data confusing, number of residents overstated. Little indication of research support. Weak case for essentiality of program. Need for revised focus on this program.


90


Biochemistry Biochemistry BSc (4 year major)

Clear external demand though student outcomes not clear. Template suggests lack of respect for these students. Pathway to professional programs. Fairly solid student numbers, including Aboriginal students. Weak case for alignment with university priorities.

Biochemistry Biochemistry PhD Graduation rates low, particularly among international students. Costly program for number of students. Recent improvement in research metrics would justify having more students. High quality students, little information about quality of faculty.

College of Medicine Health sciences MSc Recently restructured. Somewhat early to assess, but student numbers not strong. No faculty data in template. Combination of clinical graduate programs a good idea. Challenges caused by apparent lack of anyone to take ownership.

College of Medicine Health sciences PhD Small number of graduates tied to newness of program. Promising consolidation of previous program in clinical areas. Lacks structure, need to create focus.

College of Medicine Medicine MD Accreditation is a serious concern. College re-structuring. Low investment of faculty resources in support of program. Commendable Aboriginal student numbers and graduation rates. Offers clear opportunities with effective re-structuring. Should strive to be a flagship.

Family Medicine Family medicine Research Low research productivity. High external demand. Sense of social obligations of profession, strong case for alignment. Quite good inputs. Absence of Tri-Agency funding or other funding. Low investment of resources in research program.

Medical Imaging Medical imaging Research No strong evidence provided for research intensiveness, but potential is noted. Recognition that progress has been made toward the development of a research culture. No Tri-Agency funding a concern.


91


Medicine Cardiology Fellowship Little information in template. Statement of potential not supported. Little evidence of research.

Medicine Internal medicine Residency Limited information. No evidence provided for assertions of potential. Requires additional focus on research. Not clear how students engaged in research.

Medicine Neurology Residency Limited information. No case made for importance of program. Outcomes not clear.

Medicine Respirology Fellowship Limited information provided. No explanation for how fellowship differs from residency. No information about outcomes.


Microbiology & immunology

BSc (3 year major)

Small program, steady graduation rates. Moderate research metrics. Description of student outcomes does not seem focused on students in this program. Limited investment of faculty resources. Concern about whether change in Medicine admissions standards will have negative impact on enrolment. Weak case for external demand. No strong case for alignment with university priorities.

Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences

Obstetrics, gynecology & reproductive sciences

Residency No research output. Few initiatives or opportunities. Indicate aspiration to increase research culture. Little information about how students are faring, or what size of program is.

Pathology & Lab Medicine Pathology & lab medicine Research Little evidence in template of research activity. Importance of research to community is noted. Some increase in research funding, but low number of faculty getting funding. Need to focus on a research vision. Potential activity from new hires.

Pathology & Lab Medicine Pathology & lab medicine Residency Rationale provided for program not persuasive. Lack of compelling evidence. Important training for future pathologists, tied to clinical service. High demand. Program in need of remediation.


92


Pediatrics Pediatrics Research Low research commitment from faculty, low funding for large number of faculty. Discussion in template of potential, but little current output. Area of high social importance. Faculty need time for research to realize potential.

Pediatrics Pediatrics Residency Very little information about actual program. Low research metrics. No evidence about how many residents.

Pharmacology Pharmacology MSc Declining research metrics, low level of funding. Difficult to identify student numbers in this program as distinct from PhD, though numbers seem low. Low graduation rates for international students. Very low investment of faculty resources in program.

Pharmacology Pharmacology PhD Some issues about level of research funding. Importance of PhD students in unit not clear. Costs high for apparent number of students. Loss of devolved funding a concern.

Pharmacology Pharmacology Research High allocation of resources to research. Somewhat low output given the resources. Modest research funding. Some evidence that new faculty will galvanize research.

Physiology Physiology MSc Limited evidence of demand. Research funding and publications generally low. Unit looks to graduate students to carry weight of research, questionable environment for students. Graduation numbers low, given size of faculty. Would expect more faculty research given low teaching loads.

Physiology Physiology PhD Program very small compared to number of faculty. Faculty have protected time for research, few students in relation to that. Little evidence of demand. Weak case for alignment with university priorities.


93


Physiology Physiology Research References to collaborative research. Strong investment of faculty time. Some CIHR funding. Modest publication rate for amount of time devoted. No strong case for alignment with university priorities. Unit aware of need to promote research culture and increase productivity.

Surgery General surgery Residency Important for accreditation. Little information provided in template, difficult to assess.

Surgery Neurosurgery Residency Important for accreditation. Little information provided in template, demand not clear and outcomes not described.

Surgery Orthopedic surgery Residency Important for accreditation. Little information provided in template, student numbers and outcomes not specified.

Surgery Surgical foundations Residency Important for accreditation. Little information provided in template, not clear how this differs from general surgery residency program.

College of Nursing Nursing MN - Nurse Practitioner Program

Template does not distinguish among students in the three MN programs. Appears to be low demand. Purpose of program not clear.

College of Nursing Nursing MN Course Based

Template does not distinguish among students in the three MN programs. Demand apparently strong for this program. Research funding dropping a bit, publications modest. Recognition of teaching. Online offerings, distributed teaching. Good Aboriginal headcount, low graduation rate. Unit intention to review program.

College of Nursing Nursing MN Thesis Based

Template does not distinguish among students in the three MN programs. Unit considering what to do differently, not sure how directions fit with thesis based program. Purpose of program not clear.


94


College of Nursing Nursing Nurse Practitioner - Post Graduate Degree Specialization Certificate

Administrative artifact, created for students with Master's degree. Small demand, but assists at creation of Master's credential. Almost no students have taken this route, clearly need to change to attract enrolment.

College of Nursing Nursing PhD Argument about growing own faculty through PhD program not persuasive. Increasing number of students. Case for future opportunities weak. New program, level of success unclear.

College of Nursing Nursing Research Unit making efforts to develop research culture, though evidence of actual achievement not strong. Tri-Agency funding low and in decline. Concern about proportion of faculty engaged in research. Output low given allocation of faculty resources to research.

Accounting Accounting Research Modest research output. Faculty effort to upgrade qualifications, potential for future. Need for strategic decisions about improving research. Focus on pedagogical research endorsed by Dean. Would benefit from rethinking, reallocation of resources.


Centre for Strategic Financial Management - Type A Centre

All activities Centre is part of effort to increase research intensiveness of college but it is not clear how well this is working. Research in college quite low in general.


Finance Research Low research funding, somewhat difficult to understand why funding not obtained in this area. Template suggests low investment of faculty time, needs to be given greater priority. New faculty offer potential for improvement. Well-articulated benchmarks, but evidence not entirely convincing.


95


Human Resources and Organizational Behavior

Human resources Research External demand not clear. Weakness in research output, little evidence of research activity. New hires, increase in activity in last year recorded. Good potential.

Management & Marketing Management & marketing Research Low research outputs, low research funding. Weak description of research objectives. Not clear why unit doesn't have access to non-Tri-Agency funding. Need to explore links with industry. Some new hires may bring about change.

School of Public Policy International trade Master of International Trade (MIT)

Relatively new program. Growing student numbers, suggests demand. Lack of connection with other programs. Little information about faculty inputs involved in program and resources invested. Link of research metrics with program not clear. Cost recovery basis, but cost of program not well reflected in template.

School of Public Health Vaccinology & immunotherapeutics

MSc Publication record good but decline in Tri-Agency funding. Numbers of students somewhat small, not clear why graduation rates low. Not clear whether adequate demand for program. No case for internal demand or alignment with other university interests.

School of Public Health Vaccinology & immunotherapeutics

PhD Relatively new program. Weak explanation of internal demand and weak links with other parts of university. Important area from point of view of university priorities. Not clear how costs and revenues align. Question of whether unit should consider consolidated PhD program given small size.

School of Public Health Biostatistics MSc Program fairly new, enrolment increasing. No description of research support for program. Relatively little information in template, difficult to assess. Question about whether there might be value in consolidation of statistics programs.

School of Public Health Biostatistics PhD New program, but small enrolment raises concern about whether this has taken off as expected. Lack of information in template. Program a collaboration between units, but template does not provide strong evidence of collaborative spirit.


96


Library Library Research Unit clearly making an effort to create and maintain a research culture, though research activity remains limited. Unit has allocated research time in assignment of duties but this may not be sufficient.

University-Wide International Centre for Northern Governance and Development - Type B Centre

All activities New centre, template really about master's program, does not reveal much about Type B centre.



MVetSc Unit indicating potential for change to MSc plus residency. Decline in demand in favour of other programs.



Research Very limited research funding, little focus on research. Low research output. Weak statement of alignment with university priorities. Clearly focus on clinical services rather than research. Mentions possibility of dedicated research appointments.

Veterinary Pathology Veterinary pathology MSc Unit considering whether to have MVet/DVM combination. Clearly some uncertainty about future of program.

Veterinary Pathology Veterinary pathology PhD Low external demand. Fairly low student numbers, small number of graduates for well-established program. Question whether program is a priority for unit. Modest research metrics.

Veterinary Pathology Veterinary pathology Research Template focused on students, not research. Weak case for alignment with university priorities. Decline in Tri-Agency, increase in non-Tri-Agency funding.


97

QUINTILE 5: CANDIDATES FOR PHASING OUT, SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW



Animal science MAgr No demand. Unit indicates intention to terminate program.


Agribusiness BSc (honours) Small program, supported by limited resources. Possibility of combining this with other programs to generate critical mass. Decline in research metrics.


Agricultural economics BSA (honours) Elite program. Very low enrolment, question about whether this is sustainable with such a small number of students.


Agricultural economics BSA (major) Weak internal demand, low student numbers. Not clear what inputs go directly to this program. Downward trend in research. Overlaps with agribusiness and could potentially be combined with BSc.


Agricultural economics MAgr Extremely low demand, no investment of resources. Dean indicates program underutilized.


Agricultural economics PGD No demand, no potential demand.


Agricultural biology BSA (honours) Research metrics not included. No resources dedicated. Question whether students could be accommodated in other programs. Lack of dynamism.


Agricultural biology BSA (major) Low enrolments, modest research outputs. No faculty resources dedicated to this program. Incomplete data in template.


Centre for Northern Agroforestry & Afforestation - Type A Centre

All activities Was once productive, has run its course. Funding expired, centre is really no longer in existence.


98



Food and bioproduct sciences

MAgr No demand for program. Weak case for continuation. Unit suspended admission. Doubts about prospects for future.


Food science BSc (honours) Internal demand quite strong. Faculty allocation quite low. Low enrolment raises question about demand and whether this program can provide adequate experience for small number of students.

Soil Science Soil science MAgr Department clearly intending to disinvest, no demand.

Soil Science Soil science PGD No demand, no students entered in program. Unit indicates intention to eliminate.


Anthropology BA (3 year major)

Recent reconfiguration. Small faculty commitment to this program. Template focused on unit and not this program. Low demand, despite reconfiguration.


Archaeology BA (3 year major)

Small student numbers, not clear where program fits in array of unit programs. Unit has indicated desire to eliminate program.

Biology Biology and biotechnology BSc (4 year major)

Template contained little information. Suggests lack of unit commitment to program.

Biology Biology and biotechnology BSc (honours) Unit indicates change of focus, low interest in program, possible elimination.


Northern studies BA (honours) Vice-Dean indicates essentiality to northern outreach. Stronger investment of resources needed to assist program to thrive. Little student demand for program in current form. Might concentrate on getting 4-yr major stable, reintroduce honours program when resources justify it.

Computer Science Computer science PDSC Little evidence of student demand, question whether program in existence. Unit indicates this model has been superseded.

Computer Science Computer science PGD Very low student demand, no potential demand.


99


Computer Science Computing BSc (4 year major)

No demand, unit indicates students prefer accredited programs. No investment from unit.

Computer Science (Interdisciplinary)

Bioinformatics BSc (4 year major)

Limited number of students. Example of interdisciplinary program that should have broad appeal, but perhaps needs to be refreshed to appeal to more students. Few resources allocated to this program by unit.

Computer Science (Interdisciplinary)

Bioinformatics BSc (honours) Good external demand but very low enrolment in program. Only one additional class for honours. Unit allocates few resources.

Drama Drama BA (3 year major)

High profile department, well-connected in profession. Small number of students. Vice-Dean raises question of sustainability of program as currently operating. Not clear what opportunities exist for graduates of this particular program.

Drama Drama BA (honours) Very low enrolment, creates question of whether program sustainable. Despite strengths in unit, hard to justify devoting resources to this program as it stands. Unit should focus on BFA side.

Drama Drama MA (special case)

Interesting ideas for future development, but hypothetical in light of very low demand. No evidence that demand exists. Need to build stronger case for program.

Economics Economics PDSC Very low demand. Little investment. Template focused on department, not on this program. Tri-Agency decline.

Economics Economics PGD No demand for this program, no investment in it. No prospect of future demand.

Geography & Planning Geography BA (3 year major)

Department has been refocusing direction away from this and related programs. Rationale presented for retention of this program - that the College desires it - is not persuasive.


100


Geography & Planning Geography BA (4 year major)

Unit indicates change of focus in department. Have identified this program for disinvestment. Focus on programs in new areas.

Geography & Planning Geography BA (honours) Unit indicates wish to phase out this program. Very low student demand. Unit refocusing on other programs.

Geography & Planning Geography BSc (3 year major)

Low headcount, serving limited purpose. Unit redirecting focus, not clear how this program would connect with newer programs.

Geography & Planning Geography BSc (4 year major)

Unit indicates desire to phase out program. Changes endorsed by Vice-Dean.

Geography & Planning Geography BSc (honours) Department has disinvested in program, refocused to other areas. Persistently low student enrolment.

Geological Sciences Geological Sciences PGD Dean notes low demand, program has no prospects.

Geological Sciences Geology BSc (3 year major)

Low enrolments, unit indicates demand will remain low because it does not lead to accreditation. Suggestion of low level of commitment to this program.

Geological Sciences (Interdisciplinary)

Palaeobiology BSc (4 year major)

Small enrolment, few graduates. Disinvestment by partner departments raises question about sustainability.

Geological Sciences (interdisciplinary)

Palaeobiology BSc (honours) Quality of students high but little demand. Limited course offerings. Disinvestment by partner departments raises question about sustainability.

History (interdisciplinary) Classical, medieval and renaissance studies

BA (4 year major)

Low number of students. Few direct resources allocated to program. Potential to become a stream within history programs.

History (Interdisciplinary) Classical, medieval and renaissance studies

BA (honours) Graduation rate low. Possibly more effective combined with other program, e.g. as specialization in history.


101




BA (3 year major)

Alignment with university priorities, but low student numbers. No evidence that demand increasing. Very low research metrics. Lack of focus. Aboriginal engagement claimed but not supported by student numbers. Not sustainable.



BA (honours) Small faculty complement makes it hard to accomplish goals of program. Possibility of combining this program with others might be considered. Very low research metrics.


French BA (honours) Unsustainably low student numbers in program. Very low research metrics. Strong students.


Modern languages BA (3 year major)

Very low demand, insufficient resources, lack of focus.

Mathematics & Statistics Mathematical physics BSc (honours) Very small number of students, elite program. Question whether investment can be sustained for small number of students. Could perhaps be a stream in regular Math or Physics honours programs.

Mathematics & Statistics Statistics BSc (honours) Low student numbers, question whether separate honours program distinct from major necessary. Program in existence for long time, has not succeeded in attracting numbers.

Music Music BA (3 year major)

Insufficient resources and demand for sustainable separate program. Focus of unit on other stream of programs. Reputational risk of poorly-subscribed program of this kind.

Music Music BA (4 year major)

Adjustments made in program. Consumes few resources. No recent graduates, minimal demand. Transition to BMus could be done without this program.


102


Music Music BA (honours) Good faculty, strong opportunities for collaborations. Student numbers in honours program not clear but demand apparently very low. Not having significant impact. May not align with unit priorities.

Music Music MA Unit has no plans for future of this program, have redirected focus to other programs. Little demand for program. Little external demand.


Public administration BA (honours) Costly for small number of students. Lack of distinctiveness in program. Difficult to ascertain demand for graduates. Some Aboriginal students. Department needs to think about allocation of resources.

Religion & Culture Religion & culture Research Almost no research funding. No coherent research vision. Potential for linking to external demand, but failing to meet those needs at present. Might consider leaving research leadership to affiliated units.

Religion & Culture Religion & culture BA (3 year major)

Low student demand, low research metrics. Vice-Dean supports phasing out.

Religion & Culture Religion & culture BA (4 year major)

Low enrolments. Very low research metrics. Impact on other programs not persuasive. Consuming high level of resources. STM links are sustaining program.

Religion & Culture Religion & culture BA (honours) Claims of demand not supported by evidence, low student numbers. Low research metrics.

Religion & Culture Religion & culture MA Student numbers have grown slightly from negligible base. Focus on Asia unique. Change from special case basis in 2010. Weak research profile raises concerns about sustainability of graduate program.

Biomedical Engineering Biomedical engineering MEng (Clinical) Doubtful that this program has any concrete form.

Biomedical Engineering Biomedical engineering PGD No graduates, no investment in program.


103



Biological engineering BEng (major) Program suspended. Some faculty transferred to other unit.


Biological engineering MEng Not active in 20 years, no demand, no prospects of increasing demand.


Biological engineering PGD No demand for this program, no prospects for future demand.


Chemical engineering MEng Small number of students. Industry demand not at master's level. Unit attaches fairly low priority to this program.


Chemical engineering PGD Absence of demand, no potential demand. Unit not interested in continuation.


Civil engineering PGD Extremely limited enrolment. Little evidence of any systematic efforts to reshape it.


Electrical engineering MEng Low demand. Low investment of faculty resources, redirecting resources to thesis stream. Low graduation rate. Unit intention to replace this program.


Electrical engineering PGD Little student demand, lack of commitment of resources.


Environmental engineering MEng Still students in program but have suspended admissions. Unit not committed to program. No investment. No apparent external demand.


Environmental engineering MSc Suspension of admission to program. No indication of demand, or prospect of demand.


Environmental engineering PGD Program suspended because of low demand. No students currently in program. Likely to be eliminated.


104


Environmental engineering

Environmental engineering PhD Unit has already suspended program. Low student interest, low faculty engagement in current configuration.


Environmental engineering Research Uncertainty about direction. Unit considering whether to reinvest in area. Establishment of SENS raises question of future of program. No indication of research output or focus on research in this area.


Environmental engineering - Type A Centre

All activities Formal steps taken to eliminate program.

Mechanical Engineering Mechanical engineering PGD Low student demand, little indication of any future demand. Unit not committed to program.


Individual interdisciplinary graduate programs

MA Low enrollment. Does not seem to be necessary at MA level given new interdisciplinary programs in schools and other units across campus.



MSc Low enrollment. Does not seem to be necessary at MSc level given new interdisciplinary programs in schools and other units across campus.



PGD No demand.



PhD Some enrollment, but student outcomes not strong. Little Tri-Agency funding among students. Suggest that graduate programs within disciplinary units find ways to accommodate these students.


Toxicology PGD Little demand, no real evidence of potential for this program.

Kinesiology Physical education studies BSc (Kin) Significant decrease in enrollment in favor of flagship exercise and sport studies program and combined BSc Kin/BEd.


105


Kinesiology Physical education studies BSc (Kin) (Honours)

No enrollment. Unit indicates possibility of re-directing resources to exercise studies programs.

Biochemistry Biochemistry BSc (3 year major)

Question whether change in Medicine admissions standards will have negative impact on student numbers in this program. Unit seems to support elimination of program, not focusing on quality of program. Not investing resources.

Biochemistry Biochemistry PGD Little information in template. Clearly no demand, no prospects for improvement.

Biochemistry Biochemistry and biotechnology

BSc (4 year major)

Lack of commitment to program from unit. Unit resources redirected to other programs.

Biochemistry Biochemistry and biotechnology

BSc (honours) Unit suggests no distinctiveness from regular biochemistry degree. Unit has little commitment to program.

Biochemistry Biomolecular structure studies

BSc (4 year major)

No demand, enrolment suspended.

Biochemistry Biomolecular structure studies

BSc (honours) Program has been identified for disinvestment. Low demand, little enrolment.

Medicine Rheumatology Fellowship Unit indicates not enough resources available to continue program.


Biotechnology, microbiology & immunology

BSc (4 year major)

Small number of graduates, small student headcounts and enrolment declining. Possibly other BSc program would accommodate students with this interest. Discussion of outputs generic, suggests not focusing on this as a program.


Biotechnology, microbiology & immunology

BSc (honours) Low faculty commitment, low enrolment, no critical mass for honours program. Template does not provide focus for this program.

Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences

Obstetrics, gynecology & reproductive sciences

Research Low productivity. Weak research record, program is struggling.


106


Surgery Surgery Research No template provided

College of Nursing Centre for the Advance-ment of the Study of Nursing Education and Interprofessional Education - Type A Centre

All activities Objectives of centre not clear as distinct from mandate of college. Little evidence of success at promoting faculty research.

Accounting Accounting MSc No enrolment in last three years. Unit suggests possibility of resurrection, but plans not clear.


Executive business administration

Certificate of Successful Completion

Little commitment of faculty resources. Unit indicating not much future for this program in its current form.

School of Public Health Public health Research Declining Tri-Agency funding a concern. Respectable publication rate. Virtual absence of information in template, though some indication of activity. Template makes no case for essentiality of program. No indication of investment of faculty time or operating allocation. Little indication of links with Community Health and Epidemiology, although there should be obvious connections.

School of Public Health Epidemiology PhD Student headcount promising, though still low. Decrease in Tri-Agency and non-Tri-Agency funding a concern. Little evidence of investment in this program.



MSc Solid job prospects for graduates, but very low enrolment. Modest research support for master's program. Question whether special case model would be more appropriate.

Veterinary Pathology Veterinary pathology PGD No information in template. Obviously no interest in program.

Academic Programs Transformation Task Force Report Appendix Four— Detailed Program Listing (Not Reviewed)

107

PROGRAMS SUBMITTED BUT NOT REVIEWED



Aboriginal agriculture and land management

PGD Too new to be evaluated by the task force

Biology Environmental biology BSc (4 year major) Too new to be evaluated by the task force

Biology Environmental biology BSc (honours) Too new to be evaluated by the task force

Medicine General internal medicine Fellowship Too new to be evaluated by the task force

School of Public Health Public health Master of Public Health, Distance Program

Too new to be evaluated by the task force


108

APPENDIX FIVE: QUINTILE SCORE BY UNIT


109

APPENDIX FIVE: QUINTILE SCORES BY ACADEMIC UNIT COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE & BIORESOURCES Department Fields of Study Program Type Quintile

College of Agriculture & Bioresources Agricultural biology BSA (honours) 5

Agricultural biology BSA (major) 5

Centre for Northern Agroforestry & Afforestation - Type A Centre All activities 5

Crop Development Centre (CDC) - Type A Centre All activities 1

Feeds Innovation Institute - Type A Centre All activities 2

Indigenous people's resource management Certificate of Proficiency 2

Prairie Horticulture Certificate of Successful Completion 2

Animal & Poultry Science Animal and poultry science Research 1

Animal science BSA (major) 2

Animal science MAgr 5

Animal science MSc 2

Animal science PhD 2

Bioresource Policy, Business & Economics Aboriginal agriculture and land management PGD not reviewed

Agribusiness BSc (honours) 5

Agribusiness BSc (major) 2

Agribusiness Diploma 2

Agricultural Economics BSA (honours) 5

Agricultural Economics BSA (major) 5

Agricultural Economics MAgr 5

Agricultural Economics MSc 2


110

Department Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Agricultural Economics PGD 5

Agricultural Economics PhD 3

Bioresource Policy, Business and Economics Research 3

Resource economics & policy BSc RRM (major) 4

Food & Bioproduct Sciences Applied microbiology MSc 3

Applied microbiology PhD 4

Food and bioproduct sciences BSA (major) 2

Food and bioproduct sciences MAgr 5

Food and bioproduct sciences MSc 2

Food and bioproduct sciences PhD 4

Food and bioproduct Sciences Research 2

Food science BSc (honours) 5

Food science BSc (major) 3

Plant Sciences Agronomy BSA (major) 2

Agronomy Diploma 2

Applied Plant Ecology BSA (major) 3

Crop science BSA (major) 3

Horticultural science BSA (major) 2

Plant Sciences MSc 2

Plant Sciences PhD 2

Plant Sciences Research 2

Soil Science Environmental science BSA (major) 2

Resource Science BSc RRM (major) 2

Soil science BSA (major) 4


111

Department Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Soil science MAgr 5

Soil science MSc 2

Soil science PGD 5

Soil science PhD 2

Soil science Research 1


112

COLLEGE OF ARTS & SCIENCE Department Fields of Study Program Type Quintile

College of Arts & Science Centre for Algebra, Logic, and Computation (CALC) - Type A Centre All activities 4

Centre for High-Performance Computing (HPC) - Type A Centre All activities 4

Humanities Research Unit - Type A Centre All activities 2

Institute for Computer and Information Technology - Type A Centre All activities 4

Institute of Space and Atmospheric Studies - Type A Centre All activities 1

Social Research Unit - Type A Centre All activities 4

Subatomic Physics Institute (SPIN) - Type A Centre All activities 2

Northern studies BA (3 year major) 4

Northern studies BA (4 year major) 4

Northern studies BA (honours) 5

Toxicology BSc (4 year major) 1

Toxicology BSc (honours) 1

Archaeology & Anthropology Anthropology BA (3 year major) 5

Anthropology BA (4 year major) 3

Anthropology BA (honours) 3

Anthropology MA 2

Anthropology Research 2

Archaeology BA (3 year major) 5

Archaeology BA (4 year major) 3

Archaeology BA (honours) 3

Archaeology BSc (4 year major) 3

Archaeology BSc (honours) 3

Archaeology MA 2

Archaeology Research 3


113

Department Fields of Study Program Type Quintile

Art & Art History Art history BA (3 year major) 4

Art history BA (4 year major) 3

Art history BA (honours) 3

Studio art BA (3 year major) 3

Studio art BA (4 year major) 3

Studio art BFA (honours) 2

Studio art MFA 2

Art & Art History Research 2

Biology Biology BSc (3 year major) 3

Biology BSc (4 year major) 2

Biology BSc (honours) 3

Biology MSc 3

Biology PhD 3

Biology Research 3

Biology and biotechnology BSc (4 year major) 5

Biology and biotechnology BSc (honours) 5

Environmental biology BSc (4 year major) not reviewed

Environmental biology BSc (honours) not reviewed

Chemistry Chemistry BSc (3 year major) 3

Chemistry BSc (4 year major) 2

Chemistry BSc (honours) 2

Chemistry MSc 2

Chemistry PhD 1

Chemistry Research 1


114


Computer Science Computer science BSc (3 year major) 3

Computer science BSc (4 year major) 2

Computer science BSc (honours) 2

Computer science MSc 2

Computer science PDSC 5

Computer science PGD 5

Computer science PhD 2

Computer science Research 2

Computing BSc (4 year major) 5

Bioinformatics BSc (4 year major) 5

Bioinformatics BSc (honours) 5

Drama Drama BA (3 year major) 5

Drama BA (4 year major) 4

Drama BA (honours) 5

Drama BFA 2

Drama MA (special case) 5

Drama Research 2

Economics Business economics BA (4 year major) 3

Business economics BA (honours) 2

Economics BA (3 year major) 3

Economics BA (4 year major) 3

Economics BA (honours) 3

Economics MA 2

Economics PDSC 5


115

Department Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Economics PGD 5

Economics Research 4

English English BA (3 year major) 3

English BA (4 year major) 2

English BA (honours) 1

English MA 2

English PhD 3

English Research 2

Geography & Planning Environment and society BASc (4 year major) 3

Environment and society BASc (honours) 4

Environmental earth sciences BSc (4 year major) 3

Environmental earth sciences BSc (honours) 4

Geography BA (3 year major) 5

Geography BA (4 year major) 5

Geography BA (honours) 5

Geography BSc (3 year major) 5

Geography BSc (4 year major) 5

Geography BSc (honours) 5

Geography Cooperative Education Program 4

Geography MA 3

Geography MSc 2

Geography PhD 2

Regional and urban planning BA (4 year major) 2

Regional and urban planning BA (honours) 2

Geography Research 2


116


Geological Sciences Geological Sciences MSc 3

Geological Sciences PGD 5

Geological Sciences PhD 3

Geology BSc (3 year major) 5

Geology BSc (4 year major) 2

Geology BSc (honours) 2

Geology Research 2

Geophysics BSc (4 year major) 3

Geophysics BSc (honours) 3

Palaeobiology BSc (4 year major) 5

Palaeobiology BSc (honours) 5

History History BA (3 year major) 3

History BA (4 year major) 3

History BA (honours) 2

History MA 2

History PhD 2

History Research 2

Classical, medieval and renaissance studies BA (4 year major) 5

Classical, medieval and renaissance studies BA (honours) 5

Classical, medieval and renaissance studies Research 4

Interdisciplinary Centre for Culture and Creativity (ICCC) ICCC - Type A Centre All activities 4

Women's and gender studies BA (3 year major) 5

Women's and gender studies BA (4 year major) 4


117

Department Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Women's and gender studies BA (honours) 5

Women's and gender studies Research 4

Languages, Literatures, and Cultural Studies French BA (3 year major) 4

French BA (4 year major) 4

French BA (honours) 5

Languages Research 4

Modern languages BA (3 year major) 5

Modern languages BA (4 year major) 4

Mathematics & Statistics Mathematical physics BSc (honours) 5

Mathematics BSc (3 year major) 3

Mathematics BSc (4 year major) 4

Mathematics BSc (honours) 3

Mathematics and statistics MSc 3

Mathematics and statistics PhD 4

Mathematics and statistics Research 3

Statistics BSc (4 year major) 3

Statistics BSc (honours) 5

Music Music BA (3 year major) 5

Music BA (4 year major) 5

Music BA (honours) 5

Music BMus (4 year major) 2

Music BMus (honours) 3

Music MA 5

Music MMus 4


118

Department Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Music Research 2

Music education BMus 2

Native studies Native studies BA (3 year major) 2

Native studies BA (4 year major) 2

Native studies BA (honours) 4

Native studies MA 3

Native studies PhD (special case PhD) 2

Native studies Research 2

Philosophy Philosophy BA (3 year major) 4

Philosophy BA (4 year major) 4

Philosophy BA (honours) 3

Philosophy MA 3

Philosophy Research 4

Physics & Engineering Physics Engineering physics BEng (major) 2

Physics BSc (3 year major) 3

Physics BSc (4 year major) 3

Physics BSc (honours) 2

Physics Research 1

Physics and engineering physics MSc 2

Physics and engineering physics PhD 2

Political Studies Political studies BA (3 year major) 4

Political studies BA (4 year major) 3

Political studies BA (honours) 3


119

Department Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Political studies MA 4

Political Studies Research 4

Aboriginal public administration BA (4 year major) 4

Aboriginal public administration BA (honours) 4

International studies BA (4 year major) 4

International studies BA (honours) 4

Public administration BA (4 year major) 4

Public administration BA (honours) 5

Psychology Psychology BA (3 year major) 2

Psychology BA (4 year major) 1

Psychology BA (honours) 2

Psychology BSc (4 year major) 2

Psychology BSc (honours) 2

Psychology MA 2

Psychology PhD 2

Psychology Research 2

Religion & Culture Linguistics BA (3 year major) 4

Linguistics BA (4 year major) 2

Linguistics BA (honours) 4

Linguistics MA (special case) 4

Linguistics Research 4

Religion and culture BA (3 year major) 5

Religion and culture BA (4 year major) 5

Religion and culture BA (honours) 5

Religion and culture MA 5

Religion & Culture Research 5


120


Sociology Sociology BA (3 year major) 2

Sociology BA (4 year major) 2

Sociology BA (honours) 2

Sociology MA 2

Sociology PhD 2

Sociology Research 2

COLLEGE OF DENTISTRY Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Dentistry DMD 3

Dentistry Post graduate general practice residency 2

Dentistry Research 4


121

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION Department Fields of Study Program Type Quintile

College of Education Aboriginal Education Research Centre (AERC) - Type A Centre All activities 2

Saskatchewan Educational Leadership Unit (SELU) - Type A Centre All activities 2

Teacher Education BEd 2

Curriculum Studies Curriculum Studies Research 3

Theory and practice in curriculum research, design, implementation, evaluation, and instructional leadership

MEd 2

Educational Administration Educational leadership; school improvement and school

effectiveness; organizational analysis; school, family, and community partnership; educational finance and law

MEd (Educational Administration) 2

PhD 2

Educational Administration Research 2

Educational Foundations Aboriginal Education; Adult and Lifelong Learning; Social

& Ecological Justice; Foundations of Education MEd (Educational Foundations) 2

Educational Foundations Research 3

Educational Psychology & Special Education Educational Psychology & Special Education MEd (Educational Psychology) 3

School and Counselling Psychology MEd (School and Counselling Psychology), Thesis Option only

3

Special education Post-degree Certificate in Education (Special Education)

2

Educational Psychology & Special Education Research 3


122

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING Department Fields of Study Program Type Quintile

College of Engineering Engineering Entrepreneurship Option (EEO) 4

Engineering Professional Internship Program (EPIP) 4

Professional Communication Option (PCO) 3

Ron and Jane Graham Centre for the Study of Communication - Type A Centre 2

Saskatchewan Centre of Excellence in Transportation and Infrastructure - Type A Centre 4

Biomedical Engineering Biomedical engineering MEng 4

Biomedical engineering MEng (Clinical) 5

Biomedical engineering MSc 4

Biomedical engineering PGD 5

Biomedical engineering PhD 4

Biomedical Engineering - Type B Centre All activities 4

Biomedical Engineering Research 4

Chemical and Biological Engineering Biological engineering BEng (major) 5

Biological engineering MEng 5

Biological engineering MSc 3

Biological engineering PGD 5

Biological engineering PhD 3

Chemical engineering BEng (major) 2

Chemical engineering MEng 5

Chemical engineering MSc 2

Chemical engineering PGD 5

Chemical engineering PhD 2

Chemical & Biological Engineering Research 4


123


Civil and Geological Engineering Civil engineering BEng (major) 1

Civil engineering MEng 4

Civil engineering MSc 2

Civil engineering PGD 5

Civil engineering PhD 2

Geological engineering BEng (major) 2

Civil and Geological Engineering Research 2

Electrical and Computer Engineering Computer engineering BEng (major) 3

Electrical engineering BEng (major) 2

Electrical engineering MEng 5

Electrical engineering MSc 2

Electrical engineering PGD 5

Electrical engineering PhD 2

Electrical and Computer Engineering Research 2

Environmental Engineering Environmental engineering BEng (major) 2

Environmental engineering MEng 5

Environmental engineering MSc 5

Environmental engineering PGD 5

Environmental engineering PhD 5

Environmental Engineering Research 5

Environmental Engineering - Type A Centre All activities 5

Mechanical Engineering Mechanical engineering BEng 1

Mechanical engineering MEng 3


124

Department Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Mechanical engineering MSc 2

Mechanical engineering PGD 5

Mechanical engineering PhD 3

Mechanical Engineering Research 2

COLLEGE OF GRADUATE STUDIES AND RESEARCH Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Individual interdisciplinary graduate programs MA 5

Individual interdisciplinary graduate programs MSc 5

Individual interdisciplinary graduate programs PGD 5

Individual interdisciplinary graduate programs PhD 5

Toxicology MSc 2

Toxicology PGD 5

Toxicology PhD 2

COLLEGE OF KINESIOLOGY Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Exercise and sport studies BSc (Kin) 3

Exercise and sport studies BSc (Kin) (Honours) 3

Kinesiology MSc 3

Kinesiology PhD 3

Kinesiology Research 3

Kinesiology/Education BSc (Kin)/BEd 3

Physical education studies BSc (Kin) 5

Physical education studies BSc (Kin) (Honours) 5


125

COLLEGE OF LAW Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Law JD 2

Law LLM 3

Law Research 3

Law Native Law Centre of Canada - Type A Centre 4

COLLEGE OF MEDICINE Department Fields of Study Program Type Quintile

College of Medicine Health Sciences MSc 4

Health Sciences PhD 4

Medicine MD 4

Anatomy & Cell Biology Anatomy and cell biology BSc (3 year major) 3

Anatomy and cell biology BSc (4 year major) 3

Anatomy and cell biology BSc (honours) 3

Anatomy and cell biology MSc 3

Anatomy and cell biology PhD 3

Anatomy and cell biology Research 2

Anesthesiology Anesthesiology Residency 4

Anesthesiology Research 4

Biochemistry Biochemistry BSc (3 year major) 5

Biochemistry BSc (4 year major) 4


126

Department Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Biochemistry BSc (honours) 3

Biochemistry MSc 3

Biochemistry PGD 5

Biochemistry PhD 4

Biochemistry and biotechnology BSc (4 year major) 5

Biochemistry and biotechnology BSc (honours) 5

Biomolecular structure studies BSc (4 year major) 5

Biomolecular structure studies BSc (honours) 5

Biochemistry Research 3

Community Health and Epidemiology Health Sciences MSc 2

Health Sciences PhD 2

Community Health & Epidemiology Research 2

Family Medicine Family Medicine Residency 3

Family Medicine Research 4

Medical Imaging Medical Imaging Residency 3

Medical Imaging Research 4

Medicine Cardiology Fellowship 4

General Internal Medicine Fellowship not reviewed

Internal Medicine Residency 4

Internal Medicine Research 3

Neurology Residency 4

Respirology Fellowship 4

Rheumatology Fellowship 5


127


Microbiology & Immunology Biotechnology, microbiology and immunology BSc (4 year major) 5

Biotechnology, microbiology and immunology BSc (honours) 5

Microbiology and immunology BSc (3 year major) 4

Microbiology and immunology BSc (4 year major) 3

Microbiology and immunology BSc (honours) 3

Microbiology and immunology MSc 3

Microbiology and immunology PhD 3

Microbiology & Immunology Research 3

Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences Residency 4

Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences Research 5

Pathology & Lab Medicine Pathology & Lab Medicine Residency 4

Pathology & Lab Medicine Research 4

Pediatrics Pediatrics Residency 4

Pediatrics Research 4

Pharmacology Pharmacology MSc 4

Pharmacology PhD 4

Pharmacology Research 4

Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Residency 3


128

Physiology Physiology MSc 4

Physiology PhD 4

Physiology & Pharmacology BSc (3 year major) 3

Physiology & Pharmacology BSc (4 year major) 3

Physiology & Pharmacology BSc (honours) 3

Physiology Research 4

Psychiatry Psychiatry Residency 3

Psychiatry Research 3

Surgery General Surgery Residency 4

Neurosurgery Residency 4

Orthopedic Surgery Residency 4

Surgical Foundations Residency 4

Surgery Research 5

COLLEGE OF NURSING Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Nursing BSc (Nursing) 3

Nursing MN - Nurse Practitioner Program 4

Nursing MN Course Based 4

Nursing MN Thesis Based 4

Nursing Nurse Practitioner - Post Graduate Degree Specialization Certificate 4

Nursing PhD 4

Nursing Post-Degree BSN 3

Nursing Research 4


129

Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Nursing Centre for the Advancement of the Study of Nursing Education and

Interprofessional Education (CASNIE) - Type A Centre 5

COLLEGE OF PHARMACY AND NUTRITION Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Nutrition and dietetics BSc (Nutr) 2

Nutrition and dietetics MSc 2

Nutrition and dietetics PhD 2

Nutrition and dietetics Research 2

Pharmacy BSc (Pharm) 1

Pharmacy MSc 2

Pharmacy PhD 3

Pharmacy Research 2

EDWARDS SCHOOL OF BUSINESS Department Fields of Study Program Type Quintile

Edwards School of Business Aboriginal business administration Certificate of Proficiency 2

Business administration Certificate of Successful Completion 2

Business administration MBA 3

Centre for Strategic Financial Management - Type A Centre 4

Centre for the Advancement of Accounting Education - Type A Centre 2

Executive business administration Certificate of Successful Completion 5


130


Accounting Accounting BComm (major) 2

Accounting MPAcc 2

Accounting MSc 5

Accounting Research 4

Finance & Management Science Finance BComm (major) 2

Finance MSc 3

Finance Research 4

Operations management BComm (major) 3

Human Resources & Organizational Behaviour Human resources BComm (major) 2

Human Resources Research 4

Management & Marketing Management BComm (major) 3

Management & Marketing Research 4

Marketing BComm (major) 3

JOHNSON-SHOYAMA GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY Fields of Study Program Type Quintile International trade Master of International Trade (MIT) 4

Public administration Master of Public Administration (MPA) 2

Public policy Master of Public Policy (MPP) 2

Public policy PhD 2

Public policy Research 2


131

SCHOOL OF ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Environment and sustainability MES 3

Environment and sustainability PhD 2

Environment and sustainability Research 2

Sustainable environmental management MSEM 2

SCHOOL OF PHYSICAL THERAPY Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Physical therapy MPT 3

Physical therapy Research 3

SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Public health Research 5

Epidemiology PhD 5

Public health Master of Public Health 3

Public health Master of Public Health, Distance Program not reviewed

Vaccinology & Immunotherapeutics MSc 4

Vaccinology & Immunotherapeutics PhD 4

Biostatistics MSc 4

Biostatistics PhD 4


132

WESTERN COLLEGE OF VETERINARY MEDICINE Department Fields of Study Program Type Quintile

Western College of Veterinary Medicine Canadian Co-Operative Wildlife Health Centre - Type A Centre 2 Veterinary medicine DVM 1

Large Animal Clinical Sciences Large animal clinical sciences MSc 3 Large animal clinical sciences MVetSc 4 Large animal clinical sciences PhD 3 Large animal clinical sciences Research 3

Small Animal Clinical Sciences Small animal clinical sciences MSc 5 Small animal clinical sciences MVetSc 3 Small Animal Clinical Sciences Research 4

Vet Biomedical Sciences Vet Biomedical Sciences MSc 2 Vet Biomedical Sciences PhD 2 Vet Biomedical Sciences Research 3

Vet Microbiology Veterinary microbiology MSc 3 Veterinary microbiology PhD 3 Veterinary microbiology Research 3

Vet Pathology Veterinary pathology MSc 4 Veterinary pathology MVetSc 3 Veterinary pathology PGD 5 Veterinary pathology PhD 4 Veterinary pathology Research 4


133

UNIVERSITY LIBRARY Fields of Study Program Type Quintile Library Research 4

UNIVERSITY-WIDE Fields of Study Program Type Quintile

Canadian Centre for Health and Safety in Agriculture (CCHSA) - Type B Centre All activities 2

Centre for the Study of Co–operatives - Type B Centre All activities 2

Community-University Institute for Social Research (CUISR) - Type B Centre All activities 2

Indigenous Land Management Institute (ILMI) - Type B Centre All activities 2

International Centre for Northern Governance and Development - Type B Centre All activities 4

Toxicology Centre - Type B Centre All activities 2

Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization - International Vaccine Centre (VIDO-InterVac) - Type B Centre All activities 1

report of the academic program transformation task force

Documents