HR: 1340h
AN: ED13B-1143    [Abstracts]
TI: Building Strong Geoscience Programs: Perspectives From Three New Programs
AU: * Flood, T P
EM: tim.flood@snc.edu
AF: St. Norbert College, Geology Department, John Minahan Science Hall, DePere, WI 54115-2099 United States
AU: Munk, L
ED13B-1143 AF: University of Alaska Anchorage, Department of Geological Sciences, 3211 Providence Drive, Ankorage, AK 99508 United States
AU: Anderson, S W
ED13B-1143 AF: Black Hills State University, Department of Science, USB9102, Spearfish, SD 57799-9102 United States
AU: Anderson, S W
ED13B-1143 AF: Planetary Science Institute, 1700 E. Ft. Lowell, Suite 106, Tuscon, AZ 85719 United States
AB: During the past decade, at least sixteen geoscience departments in the U.S. that offer a B.S. degree or higher have been eliminated or dispersed. During that same time, three new geoscience departments with degree-granting programs have been developed. Each program has unique student demographics, affiliation (i.e. public institution versus private liberal arts college), geoscience curricula and reasons for initiation. Some of the common themes for each program include; 1) strong devotion to providing field experiences, 2) commitment to student-faculty collaborative research, 3) maintaining traditional geology program elements in the core curriculum and 4) placing students into high quality graduate programs and geoscience careers. Although the metrics for each school vary, each program can claim success in the area of maintaining solid enrollments. This metric is critical because programs are successful only if they have enough students, either in the major and/or general education courses, to convince administrators that continued support of faculty, including space and funding is warranted. Some perspectives gained through the establishment of these new programs may also be applicable to established programs. The success and personality of a program can be greatly affected by the personality of a single faculty member. Therefore, it may not be in the best interest of a program to distribute programmatic work equally among all faculty. For example, critical responsibilities such as teaching core and introductory courses should be the responsibility of faculty who are fully committed to these pursuits. However, if these responsibilities reduce scholarly output, well-articulated arguments should be developed in order to promote program quality and sustainability rather than individual productivity. Field and undergraduate research experiences should be valued as much as high-quality classroom and laboratory instruction. To gain the support of the administration, departments should engage fully and proactively in the complimentary areas of assessment and long range planning. Along the same line, a programmatic mission statement that emphasizes the basics of geology, in conjunction with an emphasis on critical thinking and skill development, should drive recruitment of students and faculty rather than chasing curricular trends. Finally, the successes of your program, faculty and students should be deliberately and persistently publicized.
DE: 0840 Evaluation and assessment
SC: Education and Human Resources [ED]
MN: Fall Meeting 2005