412
M. Bardecki et al.
their own projects, causes, or startup companies (Castillo and Meyer 2018; Zone
Learning n.d.). Moreover, while we do not as yet have robust data on employment
success, a number of graduates from the first and second EUS cohort have moved on
to graduate programs at both the Masters and Ph.D. level, where they are studying
at universities across Canada.
Notwithstanding many notable achievements of the EUS program and its students,
there has been some regression from the initial program proposal to incorporate interdisciplinary measures in the practical operation and delivery of the program. Rather
than developing, as was initially envisioned, an interdisciplinary council incorporating representation from other schools and departments across the university, oversight for the EUS program was fully absorbed into the Departmental Council of
Geography & Environmental Studies. Similarly, all new faculty hiring has been of
individuals with a background in Geography (although one Engineer has been hired
in a sessional capacity to teach a waste management course).
In addition, the collaborative strength underpinning the program at its inception
has been hard to maintain as personnel, particularly as those of school and department chairs who were party to the original agreements, move from their positions
and where new administrators often need individually to be convinced of the merits
of their academic involvement in EUS. Disciplinary self-interest has meant that difficulty has arisen in assuring that EUS students have equal and free access to courses
outside the control of their home department. Understandably, given the choice, if
numbers are restricted, EUS students may be sidelined. This is particularly true in
professional programs where academic “turf” may be seen as needing protection,
and in courses that have mandatory laboratory components where seating and access
to equipment is limited. On the other hand, there is a certain degree of centripetal
character to students’ course selection: that is, given students are predisposed, and
perhaps encouraged, to limit the scope of their course choice, they have disproportionately opted for those courses with the EUS code. This is also reflected in the
relatively low enrolment numbers in the EUS Minor.
Finally, the effort during the process of designing the EUS curriculum to ensure
that the program could be offered with a need for relatively little in the way of new
resources has led to a chronic level of underfunding, particularly in that the original financial analysis was based on conservative enrolment numbers (some 30%
lower than current). Nonetheless, six new faculty have been hired to teach in program—revitalizing the Department and dramatically increasing research funding and
productivity.
8 Conclusion
There has been a focus in the literature on the analysis of appropriate pedagogical
approaches to teaching sustainable development. The first lesson that we draw from
our involvement with the development of the EUS program is that interdisciplinarity
is possible within a department/school structure. However, our experience, and the
M. Bardecki et al.
their own projects, causes, or startup companies (Castillo and Meyer 2018; Zone
Learning n.d.). Moreover, while we do not as yet have robust data on employment
success, a number of graduates from the first and second EUS cohort have moved on
to graduate programs at both the Masters and Ph.D. level, where they are studying
at universities across Canada.
Notwithstanding many notable achievements of the EUS program and its students,
there has been some regression from the initial program proposal to incorporate interdisciplinary measures in the practical operation and delivery of the program. Rather
than developing, as was initially envisioned, an interdisciplinary council incorporating representation from other schools and departments across the university, oversight for the EUS program was fully absorbed into the Departmental Council of
Geography & Environmental Studies. Similarly, all new faculty hiring has been of
individuals with a background in Geography (although one Engineer has been hired
in a sessional capacity to teach a waste management course).
In addition, the collaborative strength underpinning the program at its inception
has been hard to maintain as personnel, particularly as those of school and department chairs who were party to the original agreements, move from their positions
and where new administrators often need individually to be convinced of the merits
of their academic involvement in EUS. Disciplinary self-interest has meant that difficulty has arisen in assuring that EUS students have equal and free access to courses
outside the control of their home department. Understandably, given the choice, if
numbers are restricted, EUS students may be sidelined. This is particularly true in
professional programs where academic “turf” may be seen as needing protection,
and in courses that have mandatory laboratory components where seating and access
to equipment is limited. On the other hand, there is a certain degree of centripetal
character to students’ course selection: that is, given students are predisposed, and
perhaps encouraged, to limit the scope of their course choice, they have disproportionately opted for those courses with the EUS code. This is also reflected in the
relatively low enrolment numbers in the EUS Minor.
Finally, the effort during the process of designing the EUS curriculum to ensure
that the program could be offered with a need for relatively little in the way of new
resources has led to a chronic level of underfunding, particularly in that the original financial analysis was based on conservative enrolment numbers (some 30%
lower than current). Nonetheless, six new faculty have been hired to teach in program—revitalizing the Department and dramatically increasing research funding and
productivity.
8 Conclusion
There has been a focus in the literature on the analysis of appropriate pedagogical
approaches to teaching sustainable development. The first lesson that we draw from
our involvement with the development of the EUS program is that interdisciplinarity
is possible within a department/school structure. However, our experience, and the