Cal Poly Pomona

P&R Responses for recommendation 72

Recommendation 72
Department Geography Program
Consensus Opinion 13 out of 13 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation
The Geography Program

The faculty associated with the Geography program feel that the P & R process is fatally flawed due to a grossly inadequate process of consultation and almost non-existent information sharing, which resulted in a set of recommendations for sweeping changes based on unspecified, poorly defined and often contradictory criteria. In addition, despite PRPC’s claimed “desire to use mission-driven criteria for budget allocation rather than historical FTE targets”, the recommendations return again and again to numerical performance as measures of educational value. Moreover, there is no consistency regarding the desired balance between building majors and GE/service teaching. Consequently, the P&R process as imposed would not result in a strong, new identity, merely in a mistaken identity. Finally, we have consulted with colleagues in other programs and it is clear that our strenuous objections to the P& R process reflect the majority opinion among University faculty.

Geography acknowledges the kind comments of the committee regarding our substantial contribution to the university. We are surprised that the observation that “[t]he program grew at an above average rate compared to other programs on campus between 2000 and 2005” does not seem to the committee to contradict its concern that “[t]he number of majors is not large enough to sustain upper division coursework.” (143) The over fifty majors are distributed among three options, but share a core curriculum. Is the PRPC suggesting we should not be offering upper division courses in geography? GIS in particular cannot be taught to large rooms of people, and we are certain the university appreciates our leadership in the GIS area.

The program now has a fully developed outcomes assessment plan, which has been in place since Spring, 2007, as is the case with Anthropology. Also listed under quality concerns is the statistic that less than 70% of upper division FTES are taught by tenured/tenure-track faculty. We were unaware that the use of adjunct faculty to teach upper division courses was restricted or ill-advised; we use our teaching staff in ways appropriate to their experience and qualifications.

The recommendation that Geography “begin collaboration with other programs described in our recommendations … etc.” is offensive to us. (144) Geography faculty already teach in Regenerative Studies (Wu and Young), collaborate with ENV faculty on assigned facilities management projects (Wu) and collaborate in grant writing with ENV, AG and Engineering faculty (Reibel). We understand the objective of gaining Cal Poly Pomona distinction for its environmental programs, and we believe we have already achieved this goal.

Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendations not submitted through the forms are available in this folder. They mainly consist of Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat documents. If none were submitted for this recommendation, the folder will be empty.