EVDSSA REPORT

EVDS & Restructuring

survey results compiled by Sumetra Dutt

In March, the EVDSSA electronically mailed out a questionnaire asking faculty, staff and students their opinions on the restructuring process that the university was embarking on. The questionnaire received 50 responses, 30 which were lengthy. Responses for the questions are summarized below each question as it was asked.

1. How would your experience have differed if you had not been in a Faculty with three other related programmes?

Everyone who responded said that the presence of the Faculty's four programmes contributed significantly to giving their education or pedagogical experience a broader perspective both academically and socially. All respondents felt that the formal and informal connections between the four Programmes were essential to their professional and personal learning environment. The combination made them consider the specific facets of the human environment more seriously as they designed for and in the natural environment. Their presence also helped them gain insights into the driving forces and paradigms of what others do without having to understand the detailed mechanics of each of the other professions. Everyone felt that this interdisciplinarity gives EVDS a significant professional and academic advantage over other faculties. Some even felt that the nature of EVDS, an umbrella faculty for diverse but complementary programmes, should be promoted as a model to the rest of the university in this time of restructuring.

2. What do you feel are the essential qualities of EVDS that must not be lost in any restructuring scenario?

The greatest call was to maintain EVDS's

  1. distinct philosophy (identity),
  2. interdisciplinarity,
  3. faith in higher learning to impart "professional" training,
  4. the professional flexibility and openness towards individual needs which results from the above shared values and Faculty space.

3. How important is it to you that programmes in EVDS become or remain accredited?

All respondents endorsed the accreditation that the Programmes of Architecture and Planning have already achieved. Environmental Science and Industrial Design students felt that the accreditation of Architecture and Planning could only reflect well on their Programmes (as long as levels of resources remained sufficient to provide them with quality teaching resources (faculty and staff numbers and time)).

4. Are there new or better ways that EVDS can serve the four programmes it administers? Are there new or related disciplines that could or should be included in the Faculty of EVDS?

Many felt that EVDS's mandate should include some concrete mechanisms to increase the Faculty's public exposure both on and beyond the University of Calgary campus.

Some respondents felt that EVDS currently supports too much segregation between the Programmes and that it should somehow formalize interaction between these Programmes acadernically and spatially (within the building). At times EVDS's interdisciplinairity is seemingly token in nature. Many felt that EVDS could increase its interdisciplinarity by enhancing courses available in fields that bridge the current Programmes such as: health and the built environmerlt, environmental management, legal information and policy analysis, land and urban design, landscape architecture, risk assessment, life cycle assessment, ecosystem management, tourism, environmental planning, interior design, and environmental conservation for the four Programmes. Industrial Design student their programme expanded, perhaps to include graphic design. EVDS might also do well to increase the number of faculty with appointments in more than one Programme. Some respondents felt that in order to survive, EVDS should remember that interdisciplinarity means more than just some combination of Architecture, Environmental Science, Industrial Design, and Planning. If the Faculty is to cut back its offerings, it should include University of Calgary courses that relate to the different fields students generally pursue in this Faculty in lists at the back of the EVDS course outline booklet.

All respondents felt that it was imperative to work on delivering what EVDS has currently taken on before introducing brand new disciplines to the mix. Many reiterated their appreciation of the Faculty's academic flexibility and its autonomy.

In summary, 100% of respondents endorsed and encouraged a greater emphasis to be placed on the aspects of the Faculty's interdisciplinarity and professionalism. They requested that the Faculty strengthen its work, research and course material to reflect this endorsement. They also reiterated the importance of maintaining accreditation for both the Architecture and Planning programmes. Finally, a majority of the responses called for EVDS to make some concrete effort towards raising its profile both on campus and in its respective professional communities in Canada.

[ Top of Page | Table of Contents | Intervention | Previous Article | Next Article ]