At the Planning and Budget Committee meeting on May 9th, 2019, four FGSA executive members, Nicole, Juliana, Emmett and Julian, and two other FGSA members, Janani and Peter K. were present. Following the Provost's address about the restructuring details, Nicole gave a 3 minute speech, addressing the committee about the students' concerns about the overall restructuring. The speech is added at the end of this post. Following the speech, there were a handful of questions such as :
The motion carried with no oppositions. The next step is to be voted on by the Agenda Committee for recommendation which will be held May 21st, 2019. This is a closed session meeting meaning public attendance is not allowed. The next step will be in an open session with the Academic Board May 30th, 2019. The FGSA plans to be in attendance. Speech made by Nicole to the Planning and Budget Committee Opener: My name is Nicole, I am a PhD Candidate in the Faculty of Forestry and the Forestry Graduate Students’ Association Chair. Over the past 5 months we have met with students, faculty and staff to discuss this proposal. We believe that the proposed restructuring does not serve the University’s mission, and that forestry education is being misrepresented. The proposal says this is a unanimous decision, however, 3 out of the 7 faculty members that did not agree, moved to other departments, and the proposal wasn’t voted on by the Forestry Faculty Council. Ask: We ask for stronger institutional and financial safeguards before the restructuring to ensure forestry can flourish. We have made several suggestions that echo those made in the external review, and Alumni, and faculty member consultation. None of these suggestions have been incorporated in the proposed restructuring document. They are: 1. Retain the distinct identity of Forestry by making it a high level Extra Departmental Unit (EDU). This will also keep Forestry’s interests intact by allowing Forestry to have administrative autonomy, and is important for professional support especially for the re-accreditation process in 2020. 2. Make the details more explicit, namely,
In the vague statements of the proposal, there are no guarantees the 1 million dollar funding will go strictly to the Forestry program over the long term or that the new FTEs will serve Forestry’s diverse needs rather than only the needs that relate directly to architecture, landscape or design. We have been told to wait until we move under Daniels before we smooth out the details but this is a strategy based on trust. Since the start of the restructuring we have had a strained relationship with the administration, and the mutual trust is not there. Moving Forestry under a high level EDU would resolve this. The history of this restructuring goes back over two decades when the undergraduate unit was suspended at a time when interest in forestry dwindled. The situation today is different – the success of our Professional Masters and research-based program shows the massive uptake of interest and relevance of forestry, particularly in a changing climate. U of T is one of 2 forestry research centers in Ontario, a province whose forest industry alone employs 44,000 people and is worth 13 billion dollars. The restructuring proposal only gives a financial and no academic rationale. It is unclear how it would help financially if faculty, staff, and programs remain the same. If $1 million and 5 FTEs are available to help rejuvenate this Faculty, why close it? The $1 million would increase our budget by 30% alone. Also, moving under architecture would incur extra costs, like the emotional cost of removing a 112 year old Faculty, and the cost of rebranding forestry under architecture. Moving Forestry under a high level EDU would resolve this. Close Forestry in Architecture could be something novel and rewarding, but, if done badly, could result in the loss of Canada’s oldest institution of Forestry, a pillar of higher education and research excellence at a time when Canada’s forests face unprecedented change. Especially since this would be the first Faculty closing at UofT, this process should be taken with consideration and time. We have an opportunity to put aside the legacy of conflict between forestry and the administration and set this growing and vital field on a sound financial and academic footing. We urge you to improve the restructuring proposal – remember that you chart the course not for next fiscal, but for the next century.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Links & Important InfoGoverning Council Minutes
|
Forestry | Faculty of Forestry Restucturing |