Senate Committee for Quality Assurance Periodic Review of the Department of History
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
SENATE COMMITTEE FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE PERIODIC REVIEW OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY of FINAL ASSESSMENT REPORT May 2012 Membership of Internal Review Subcommittee (IRS) External Reviewers: Dr. Françoise Noël, Professor, Nipissing University Dr. Kevin Kee, Canada Research Chair in Digital Humanities & Associate Professor, Brock University Facilitator: Dr. Nonita Yap, SEDRD The Internal Review Committee (IRC) received the Final Assessment Report for the Department of History from the IRS on 25 February 2012. The IRC now presents an Executive Summary of the review, which includes the following: - Introduction - Summary of the review process - Review Committee’s recommendations - Administrative responses to the report from the Chair, Dean, and Provost INTRODUCTION The Department of History is a mid-sized teaching, research and service unit, one of five in the College of Arts, and a prominent participant to the Bachelor of Arts degree in terms of educational offerings to undergraduates. In addition to providing a full History education to Honours and General B.A. students, the Department’s teaching provides inputs to other programs, including the Bachelor of Engineering, the International Development B.A., the European Studies B.A., the Criminal Justice and Public Policy B.A., and others. The Department participates fully in research, as home to two research chairs and a shared large-scale collaborative research project in digitized census research, which has become known as a prominent venture in the field of digital Humanities. The History Department is also home to the vibrant Centre for Scottish Studies, with its strong promotion of research and its remarkable outreach among the Scottish diaspora. History Department members are active in a wide range of service capacities, reflecting a strong Departmental tradition of engagement with the communities around us, and high level of participation in the strategic aims of the University. At the Graduate level, the History Department is a partner with Wilfred Laurier University and the University of Waterloo History Departments in the long-established and highly successful Tri- University MA and PhD programs. Hence, as a Joint Graduate Program, it is subject to a separate IQAP review that will be conducted by the University of Waterloo, the academic home of its current Director. Academic Programs included in Review: History, BA SUMMARY OF THE REVIEW PROCESS Submission of Self-Study by Department: 11 December 2011 (due 1 November) Site visit: 16/17 February 2012 Final Assessment Report received: 25 February 2012 Response of Chair: requested, 27 February 2012; received, 16 March 2012 Response of Dean: requested, 16 March 2012; received, 23 March 2012. Response of Provost: requested, 28 March 2012; received, 23 April 2012. The IRS conducted their site-visit to review the Department's undergraduate academic program on February 16 and 17, 2012. Their agenda included meetings with (in chronological order): Anthony Clarke, Assistant Vice-President (Graduate Studies); Ann Wilson, Acting Dean, College of Arts; Peter Goddard, Chair of the Department of History; Edna Mumford, Department of History Undergraduate Secretary, and Barbara Mitterer, Department of History Administrative Assistant; seven undergraduate students (including members of the History Society Executive); eleven History department faculty members; Library staff members Scott Gillies, Head, Information Resources, and Helen Salmon, Information Resources Librarian; members of the department Undergraduate Committee (Peter Goddard, Jesse Palsetia, Renée Worringer); Serge Desmarais, Associate Vice-President (Academic). The IRS was available for meetings with department faculty from 1:30-3:30 on Friday afternoon, but none were requested. An exit interview with Assistant Vice-President Anthony Clarke had been reserved, but it was deemed unnecessary, and instead the IRS met with Anthony briefly by phone. REVIEWERS’ RECOMMENDATIONS The previous assessment of the Department, a "Senate Review", occurred in 2000. The 2000 Review recommendations called upon the department to: i. involve undergraduates in the research process; ii. seek ways to overcome resistance to cross-cultural appointments; iii. continue to sustain Scottish Studies interdisciplinary program; iv. secure funding for graduate and undergraduate Teaching Assistants; v. secure funding for Tri-University graduate integration. Twelve years later, the IRS saw evidence that each of these recommendations had been implemented. In their Review Report, submitted 25 February 2012, the IRS considered that the Department is offering a high-quality undergraduate program. They were impressed by the collegiality among the faculty, which has been created and supported by strong and consistent leadership and mentorship of new faculty. The faculty members are producing important research that is also accessible to their students. They are engaged, thoughtful and student-focused and the relative youth of the faculty members bodes well for the Department's future research and teaching. Recommendations 1. We recommend that the Department review the teaching practices and modes of delivery, and cultivate and support innovation within DE courses. 2. We recommend that the Department, or the university, provide a clear explanation to students of the course selection rules, so that the process is more transparent. 3. We recommend that the Curriculum Committee continue their review of prerequisites, and that with few exceptions only program level prerequisites remain, and only in exceptional situations. 4. We recommend that the Department create an e-mail policy that applies to all courses and that encourages both faculty and students to communicate by email only in cases where this is warranted. 5. We recommend that the University's IT services unit survey faculty impressions of the current grade loading software and take steps to implement improvements where necessary. 6. We recommend further resources in Canadian/North American history. 7. We recommend that the Department conduct an annual review of teaching assignments in the three categories of on-campus, Distance Education and Guelph-Humber courses and monitor the quality of the Distance Education and Guelph-Humber courses. 8. We recommend that the Department continue to monitor the student-faculty ratio, that the department and College determine an acceptable maximum student-faculty ratio and that resources be distributed in a manner that this maximum ratio not be exceeded. Report: Internal Sub-committee Review of the Guelph University Department of History Undergraduate Academic Program Submitted by Françoise Noël, Ph.D. (Professor, Nipissing University), Kevin Kee, Ph.D. (Canada Research Chair in Digital Humanities and Associate Professor, Brock University) February 25, 2012 Introduction We reviewed the Department's undergraduate academic program on February 16 and 17, 2012. Our agenda included meetings with (in chronological order): Anthony Clarke, Assistant Vice-President (Graduate Studies); Ann Wilson, Acting Dean, College of Arts; Peter Goddard, Chair of the Department of History; Edna Mumford, Department of History Undergraduate Secretary, and Barbara Mitterer, Department of History Administrative Assistant; seven undergraduate students (including members of the History Society Executive); eleven History department faculty members; Library staff members Scott Gillies, Head, Information Resources, and Helen Salmon, Information Resources Librarian; members of the department Undergraduate Committee (Peter Goddard, Jesse Palsetia, Renée Worringer); Serge Desmarais, Associate Vice-President (Academic). We were available for meetings with department faculty from 1:30-3:30 on Friday afternoon, but none were requested. An exit interview with Assistant Vice- President Anthony Clarke had been reserved, but we did not think it necessary, and instead met with Anthony briefly by phone. As per our itinerary, we completed our review at 4pm Friday afternoon. The previous assessment of the department, a "Senate Review", occurred in 2000. The 2000 Review recommendations called upon the department to: i. involve undergraduates in the research process; ii. seek ways to overcome resistance to cross-cultural appointments; iii. continue to sustain Scottish Studies interdisciplinary program; iv. secure funding for graduate and undergraduate Teaching Assistants; v. secure funding for Tri-University graduate integration. Twelve years later, we saw evidence that each of these recommendations had been implemented. Our review was the first -- of an academic department -- since the introduction of the "Guide to Developing and Assessing Learning Outcomes at the University of Guelph" (January 2012). As might be expected during the implementation of a new process, we encountered several procedural challenges. Most notable among these was that the "History Department Self Study", and the two documents that were to guide our evaluation and writing of this report (the "Objectives of the Internal Review of Departments/Schools" and the "Check List for External Consultants") were at times not aligned (for reasons that will be explained in section (a) below). Moreover, the "Self Study" document prepared by the department addressed matters that we have not been called upon to address in our report. 1 On the recommendation of Assistant Vice-President Anthony Clarke, our report follows the "Objectives of the Internal Review of Departments/Schools", and the