7.0  Conclusions: A Look Back and to the Future

7.1  Project Accomplishments
7.2  The Broader Outlook for Undergraduate
Development Studies

 

7.1 Project Accomplishments
In general, the project met its overall goal of assessing the state of undergraduate Development Studies programs in Canada. It exceeded its project objectives by both sponsoring further collaborative planning among the program coordinators and completing some of the groundwork necessary to prepare for Phase Two. Several benefits have also been gained from the collaborative opportunities afforded by the project such as the following:

  • Opportunities for student exchange. Under the framework of CUSEC (Canadian Universities Student Exchange Consortium), two Calgary students are spending full-year terms at St. Mary's and Dalhousie as part of their Development Studies programs. A student from New Brunswick plans to spend an academic term at Calgary next year. Possibilities also abound for students to participate in field courses with a development focus offered by other universities.
  • Opportunities for information exchange and enhanced program planning. Information about other similar programs around the country provides a useful base from which one can assess one's own program and do strategic planning. Calgary, for example, conducted a program evaluation of its undergraduate Development Studies program resources and curriculum using data from the study as a point of comparison. Information from other program syllabi was also useful in strengthening material for Calgary's own core offerings. The Trent program has started a newsletter which is distributed internally and externally to the other programs.
  • Opportunities for enhanced teaching approaches. Sharing of information among programs has identified novel course offerings such as the "virtual course", or one that is offered entirely on-line, with students not just from the host university but also from around the world. Such courses are also able to take advantage of expertise and facilitation from international participants. Such courses have been available from St. Mary's. Both Guelph and Wilfrid Laurier have cooperated in this mode of course delivery as well.
  • Opportunities for program promotion. Heightened awareness among programs of their internal strengths, appeal to students, and perceived importance of the field has encouraged coordinators to enhance their promotional efforts, both internally and externally. Efforts to underscore the significance of these programs in the context of university globalization efforts have intensified.
  •  

7.2  The Broader Outlook for Undergraduate
Development Studies      (top of page)
The primary focus of this study has been to describe the various undergraduate Development Studies programs in Canadian universities. In general, we have found an academic field that has progressively grown in the last ten years since the first examination of the field was conducted. The growth has been in the numbers of programs with majors and minors in various universities, the numbers of students interested in the field, and the perceived importance of this academic area among those who coordinate, study, and teach in, these programs.

It is a program area that has developed in spite of daunting odds: limited financial resources, a small teaching resource base that often is "borrowed" from or shared with other academic areas, a university environment increasingly constrained by budget cuts, and external stakeholders such as NGO's and international assistance agencies undergoing similar cutbacks.

Despite these constraints, we have found a vigour, dedication, and idealism among the programs' administrative, instructor and student populations that have become fertile ground for these programs to flourish. Other factors in the external environment provide further reason for optimism. These include the increasing attention to globalization efforts within universities, a growing openness to interdisciplinarity and interdisciplinary programs within these academic environments, and changes in the international environment such as more open economies and the proliferation of communication and information technologies which support an increasingly international outlook.

A number of challenges remain for these programs, embodied in the following questions:

  • How do we continue to merge theory and practice? Both students and instructors recognized the importance of understanding theoretical ideas within which to frame development issues. However, both also pointed to the need to bring theory closer to development practice, recognizing that lessons from the field are as likely to enrich the theory-building activities in academia.
  • How do we enrich our resource base through collaborative activities? A number of programs have already begun to share instructional resources through joint course development and course offerings. The opportunity to learn from each other by sharing more information on curricula, research studies by program instructors and students those teaching and and
  • How do we expand educational opportunities for our students? These opportunities have been described in terms of opportunities to study or work abroad and to enhance career prospects. Discussions among instructors and practitioners emphasized the need to expand our definitions of development and to communicate these to our students, many of whom still think of development in terms of overseas work, primarily in the "third world". The opportunities for doing development work right here in Canada ought to be more fully explored and exploited.
  • How do we expand the impacts and benefits of development studies to other areas of the university? The benefits gained by exposure to international issues and to issues that surround development processes in all countries should be more widely available beyond the small pool of students who major or those who teach in the field. Encouraging students with majors in other disciplines to minor in this area is one step in this direction. The bigger challenge is to attract those from areas not traditionally linked with development studies such as students from the sciences and engineering and those from management.

In considering these questions throughout this study, we have summarized some recommendations that have been articulated in the various phases of our information-gathering activities:

1. Differential fees for visa students should be condemned and strongly opposed. International students add to the diversity and vitality of any university and, while not necessarily involved directly in development studies programs, contribute to these programs in a number of ways. Students, instructors and coordinators were unanimous in making this recommendation.

2. The classroom environments for the study of development should be enhanced by diversifying content, resources and pedagogy.

3. Linkages between development studies programs and the institutional nodes within the field of development such as the professional and academic association, CASID, the journals, and organizations such as WUSC should be strengthened.

4. Programs should strengthen their linkages with NGO's in their local communities. This could increase opportunities for closer connections between theory and practice, expand volunteer, coop or work-study opportunities for students, and further enhance ties between the university and the community. These linkages also allow programs to expand their conceptions of development practice beyond the international or "developing world" arenas.

5. Programs should continue to promote their interdisciplinary base. In recent years, an increasing openness to interdisciplinarity has given more currency to such areas as environmental studies and international or development studies.

6. University administrations should continue to support interdisciplinary programs like Development Studies and should facilitate efforts at greater inter-faculty and interdepartmental collaborations.

7. Programs and their university administrations should further promote efforts at inter-university collaborations. CUSEC, or the Canadian University Student Exchange Consortium, is an excellent step in this direction. Collaborative instructional development efforts should also be encouraged.


Where do we go from here? Collaborative planning among the programs has identified two opportunities to meet these challenges. First is through a Summer Institute designed to meet the objectives of curriculum enhancement. Such an Institute will attempt to strengthen instruction at the core level by exposing instructors to the range of interdisciplinary issues in the field, provide exposure to theory-practice issues, provide training in innovative pedagogical approaches, and provide a basis for developing teaching resource materials.

The second is through an On-Line Resource network. This electronic link will continue to link the programs together, to share information and resources, and to promote research, teaching, and educational opportunities.

These are small but significant efforts to meet the larger goal of strengthening undergraduate Development Studies in Canada.

   Top of Page           Table of Contents