Proposal to Initiate a New Instructional Program for an
Interdisciplinary Master of Natural Resources Degree
May 2009
Oregon State University
College of Forestry
Forest Ecosystems and Society
Forest Engineering, Resources and Management
College of Agricultural Sciences
Agricultural and Resource Economics
Crop and Soil Science
Fisheries and Wildlife
Rangeland Ecology and Management
College of Liberal Arts
Political Science
Philosophy
Sociology
Speech Communication
College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences
Marine Resources Management
College of Science
Botany and Plant Pathology
Environmental Sciences
Geosciences
Index
Sections
1. Program Overview -------------------------------------------------------------------2. Course of Study ----------------------------------------------------------------------3. Accreditation of the Program ------------------------------------------------------4. Evidence of Need --------------------------------------------------------------------5. Similar Programs in the State ------------------------------------------------------6. Resources ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pages
3
4
14
14
17
17
Appendices
Appendix A:
Appendix B:
Appendix C:
Appendix D:
Appendix E:
Budget and Financial Planning ---------------------------------------24
Library Evaluation ------------------------------------------------------44
Liaison Comments ------------------------------------------------------57
Outside Support and Interest ------------------------------------------94
List of Natural Resources Courses available through the Natural
Resources Distance Learning Consortium ----------------------------- 106
Appendix F: MOU between CoF and E-Campus ------------------------------------ 120
2
1. Program Overview
a. Proposed CIP number: 03.0201
b. Brief overview of the proposed program, including description of the academic area
and a rationale for offering the program at this time
Managing natural resources is a complex problem involving production, ecological, social,
economic and ethical systems, which affect and, in turn, are affected by the others. The
proposed Master of Natural Resources (MNR) degree is designed to engage university scientists
and world-wide natural resource professionals in a process that integrates diverse perspectives
about natural resource situations at the state, regional, national, and international levels. The
MNR degree will assist agency and industry personnel meet their self-improvement goals. It
will be helpful to anyone looking for an advanced degree in natural resource management,
especially people with at least two years of experience in a natural resource disciplines.
The proposed 45-credit MNR curriculum is organized into three sections: core (18 credits), area
of emphasis (18 credits), and capstone project (9 credits). It will be taught as a distance, on-line
curriculum, although it may be possible for some students to work toward the MNR degree while
in-residence at Oregon State University (OSU). Most of the courses proposed for the MNR
degree are already taught both in-residence and online, although some modification to certain inresidence courses will be necessary for them to be included in the proposed on-line curriculum.
In addition, courses from the Natural Resources Distance Learning Consortium (Appendix E)
can be used to augment courses currently taught through OSU Extended Campus (Ecampus).
Faculty members listed below already teach online courses at OSU and will be asked to serve on
the Graduate Faculty of this degree program. The MNR degree will be offered as a non-thesis
option only, similar to a Master of Business Administration, Master of Agriculture, or Master of
Forestry.
The MNR degree will facilitate learning by natural resource professional men and women who
work in settings that require integrating multiple disciplines to find solutions to natural resource
issues. There is an increasing recognition that natural resource problems are multifaceted. Thus,
current disciplinary-based thinking must be complemented with knowledge about, and
experience with, additional ways of framing and resolving problems. This type of learning
methodology is not common in modern in-residence, university teaching, so pedagogical
techniques that bring together new ideas, methods, and ways of thinking must be developed and
tested. We intend to integrate multiple disciplines through the curriculum, assignments, and case
study projects tailored to the student’s own design, student work groups and mentors, and
evaluation of instruction. Students achieving the MNR degree will integrate concepts and
approaches developed throughout the entire program into a final case study project. Students also
will learn about the various disciplinary components that make up a natural resource problem
and the solution to it.
None of the programs offered by the Oregon University System (OUS) provide for a graduatelevel curriculum in natural resources. Most programs that address issues and questions of natural
resources are at minimum two-year degrees that require a thesis. The intensity, breadth, and
3
integrative components of the proposed MNR make this a unique effort to OSU and within the
OUS.
We base the need for the Master of Natural Resources degree on correspondence and inquiries
from students about the Sustainable Natural Resources (SNR) Graduate Certificate. The SNR
Graduate Certificate is an 18-credit program developed by OSU professors through grant
funding from OSU Extended Campus. In the single year since SNR courses were offered in
winter 2007, it successfully attracted graduate students from government, industry and the
private sector, and inquiries from potential students in 31 states and 25 countries. Currently,
there are 26 students enrolled in the SNR courses and 18 enrolled in the Certificate program. In
addition there have been 154 inquiries to Ecampus and 54 additional inquiries to the College of
Forestry about the Certificate. Most of these students inquire about further training such as an
on-line Master of Natural Resources degree. At this time there is no degree at OSU that satisfies
this request, and only four online MNR programs exist in the entire country. Thus the intent of
this proposal is to assist OSU in filling this instructional gap.
The combination of university personnel and other state-wide support puts OSU in a unique
position to sponsor an MNR degree. For example, OSU is internationally recognized for its
Land Grant University extension, research, and teaching in natural resources and ecology, as
well as its National Sea, Space, and Sun Grant Programs. In addition, the State of Oregon is one
of the first in the U.S. to implement forest practices laws, environmental protection, and
comprehensive statewide land use planning legislation. Oregon Department of Forestry was the
first state agency to use the Montreal Process Criteria and Indicators sustainability framework to
assess the status of forestlands across the state.
c. When will the program be operational, if approved?
If approved, the program will become operational in fall 2010. We will begin promoting the
Master of Natural Resources degree as soon as we receive its approval. The first student will
graduate from the program during academic year 2011-2012.
2. Course of Study
a. Briefly describe the proposed curriculum
The MNR curriculum is organized into three main sections: core (18 credits), area of emphasis
(18 credits) that may be one of the Graduate Certificates at OSU, and capstone project (9
credits), following the format of the highly successful undergraduate degree in Natural
Resources. According to the Graduate School Policy, 50% of the courses in the MNR degree
program will be stand-alone graduate courses. The MNR will be taught as a distance education,
on-line curriculum with the core area divided into four sections: overview/introduction (3
credits), ecology/production (6 credits), human systems (6 credits), and methodology (3 credits).
Most of the courses listed below are taught in-residence as well as online. Students enrolled in
the MNR degree may take courses in either manner, online or in-residence, depending on their
location and personal situations.
4
Table 1: Overall Programmatic Framework*
MNR
Overview/
SECTIONS Introduction
3 credits
Core (18
credits)
THEMES
Ecology/Production Human Systems
6 credits
provides
breadth
Area of
Emphasis
(18 credits)
provides
depth
Capstone
Project
(9 credits)
6 credits in 3 or
more areas:
Economics
Policy
Sociology
Ethics
Communication
Methodology
3 credits
May be a certificate:
Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
Marine Resources Management (MRM)
Sustainable Natural Resources (SNR)
Water Conflict Management and Transformation (WCMT)
Fisheries Management
Or no certificate – student designs option
Master’s Case Study** Choose one option:
Option 1: 9 credits of MNR 506
Option 2: 6-7 credits of MNR 506 plus 2-3 credits from an Independent Study
Project or internship that was completed as part of an 18-credit graduate
certificate.
* See Table 2 (below) for course offerings
** Nine total credits of Capstone Project are required. If the Area of Emphasis chosen by the student is a
graduate certificate that includes a Capstone Project. Up to 3 credits from a certificate may be used to satisfy
an equivalent number of credits of the required 9 credits of the MNR Capstone Project. The remaining 6 –8
Capstone Project credits must be satisfied by MNR 506 (Table 4). If option 2 (above, Table 1) is chosen, the
student must take an additional Core course to make up for the substituted 1– 3 credits (so that the
Certificate Project or Internship credits will not be counted twice toward the 45 credits required for the
MNR degree).
Table 2: MNR Curriculum by section (Core courses, area of emphasis, and Capstone
Project)
CORE COURSES (18 credits from three thematic areas) Provides breadth. Must be
courses that are not already being used to satisfy units in area of emphasis.
THEME: Overview/Introduction (3 credits)
Course
Title
MNR 5XX
Introduction to Sustainable Natural Resources
Credits
3
Offered
online
new course
5
THEME: Ecology/Production
(select 6 credits)
Course
Title
CSS 599
Special Topics in Crop Science & Social
Science
Biology of Invasive Plants
FS 548
FES 5XX
FES 5XX
FOR 445*
FW 527
FW 535
FW/HIST 570
FW 579
FW 581
SNR 530
SNR 531
SNR 532
SNR 533
SNR 534
SNR 535
RHP 583
RHP 588
Below-ground Ecosystems
Carbon Sequestration in Forests: Principles,
Policy, Possibilities
Ecological Restoration
Principles of Wildlife Diseases
Wildlife in Agricultural Ecosystems
Ecology & History: Landscapes of the
Columbia Basin
Wetlands & Riparian Ecology
Wildlife Ecology
Ecological Principles of Sustainable Natural
Resources
Sustainable Silviculture
Planning Agroforestry Projects
Alternative Forest Products
Reduced Impact Timber Harvest
Sustainable Management of Aquatic/Riparian
Resources
Radiation Biology
Radioecology
Credits
1-3
3
3
Offered
online
√
requires
modification
new course
new course
2
4
4
3
3
3
4
3
1
2
1
1
1
4
3
requires
modification
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
THEME: Human Systems (select 6 credits from at least 3 of the 5 areas)
Title
Economics
AREC 534
Environmental and Resource Economics
3
Economics of Sustainable Natural Resources
3
Requires
modification
√
Ecological Policy
Special Topics
Environmental Politics and Policy
International Environmental Politics & Policy
3
1-3
4
4
√
√
√
√
3
3
√
√
SNR 521
Policy
FW 620
GEO 599
PS 575
PS 577
Sociology
FW/FOR/SOC 585
SOC 521
Consensus and Natural Resources
Social Change and Modernization
Credits
Offered
online
Course
6
SOC 526
SOC 580
SOC 581
SNR 520
Ethics
PHIL 540
PHIL 543
SNR 522
WS 550
WS 525
Communication
COMM 59X
FOR 493*
GEO 518
PS 515
Social Inequality
Environmental Sociology
Society and Natural Resources
Socially Sustainable Natural Resources
4
4
4
3
√
√
√
√
Environmental Ethics
World View and Environmental Values
Basic Beliefs and Ethics in Natural
Resources
Ecofeminism
Gender and Technology
3
3
√
√
Environmental Conflict Resolution
Environmental Interpretation
Geosciences Communication
Politics and the Media
1
3
3
3
4
3
4
√
√
√
Requires
modification
√
Requires
modification
√
THEME: Methodology (select 3 credits)
BOT 540
CH 590
FS 523
Field Methods in Vegetation Science
Computer Programming for Scientists
Natural Resources Data Analysis
GEO 565
Geographic Information Systems and
Science
Advanced GIS Applications in the
Geosciences
Methods of Data Analysis
GEO 580
4
3
4
3
4
4
√
√
Requires
modification
√
√
Requires
modification
Requires
STAT 512**
Methods of Data Analysis
4
modification
AREA OF EMPHASIS (18 credits) Provides depth. May be a Certificate. A Certificate may not be used to
satisfy core requirements.
Contact Person
Certificate and website address
Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
Dawn Wright
http://www.geo.oregonstate.edu/ucgis/teaching.html
Marine Resources Management (MRM)
Michael Harte
http://www.coas.oregonstate.edu
Steve Radosevich
Sustainable Natural Resources (SNR)
Badege Bishaw
http://www.cof.orst.edu/SNRcertificate
Water Conflict Management and Transformation (WCMT)
Lynette de Silva
http://www.transboundarywaters.orst.edu/training/curriculum.htm
Fisheries Management
Dan Edge
http://ecampus.oregonstate.edu/online-degrees/graduate/fisheriesSTAT 511**
7
management/
Paul Doescher
Student designs own options (No Certificate)
Capstone Project (9 credits) See table 1 for detailed options on how the Capstone Project requirement may
be satisfied.
MNR 506
Master’s Case Study
9 credits
new course
* Currently offered online as undergraduate course; only modification required is proceeding to offer these
courses at the graduate level with additional workload for graduate students.
**Currently offered in-residence as graduate courses; need modification for online delivery.
Table 3: Existing graduate courses that require modification for online delivery
Course
Title
Credits
FS 548
Biology of Invasive Plants
3
AREC 534
Environmental and Resource Economics
3
COMM 59X Environmental Conflict Resolution
3
GEO 518
Geosciences Communication
3
FS 523
Natural Resources Data Analysis
4
STAT 511
Methods of Data Analysis
4
STAT 512
Methods of Data Analysis
4
Table 4: New courses that require development for MNR program
Course
Title
FES 5XX
Below-ground Ecosystems (requires new Category II
proposal)
FES 5XX
Carbon Sequestration in Forests: Principles, Policy,
Possibilities
MNR 506
Master’s Case Study (Capstone Project)
MNR 511
Introduction to Sustainable Natural Resources
Credits
3
2
9
3
Student Advising
As a graduate degree program, every student enrolled in the MNR must have a Graduate
Advisory Committee (GAC) to determine a course of study. The student’s graduate advisory
committee will consists of a professor from the student’s chosen area of emphasis, one other
professor, reflecting either breadth (core area) or depth (area of emphasis) of the student’s
curriculum and Graduate School representative. The faculty member directing the student’s area
of emphasis would serve, in most cases, as the student’s primary advisor/mentor.
The GAC will meet on-line at the beginning of the student’s academic program to establish a
viable study plan (list of courses). The GAC also will meet on-line at least once more at the
conclusion of the degree to discuss the merits of the MNR capstone project that will be submitted
by each student.
Successful completion of a final oral examination is required for all master’s degrees (Graduate
Catalog: Policies Governing Master’s Degree Programs). Students are required to meet at
8
Oregon State University for this examination with his/her GAC to defend the course of study and
Capstone Project.
Admission Requirements
For admission, students will be required to have earned at least the equivalent of a Bachelor of
Arts (B.A.) or Bachelor of Science (B.S.) in one of the following areas of study: natural and life
sciences, natural resource management, forestry, agriculture, fisheries, wildlife, environmental
studies, environmental sciences, public policy, or social sciences. College transcripts will be
required as part of the admission process. This course-work grounding will make it feasible to
master material in the other areas of study.
Graduate credits earned at OSU prior to admission to the MNR program may be applied toward
the MNR degree as transfer credits if they meet the requirements outlined in Table 2 and comply
with current OSU Graduate School credit transfer policies.
In addition, it will be necessary for students to have worked professionally for at least two years
in one of the following areas: natural resource management, natural resource policy,
environmental science, or environmental policy. Professional experience serves two purposes.
First, experience gives each student a real-world background that will be useful to place the
academic material in context and can be shared with other students to contribute to the overall
learning experience. Second, each student will be required to use his/her experience to develop a
Capstone Project, the completion of which is a degree requirement (page 8). A description of
each student’s professional experience will be required for admission.
Domestic students will be required to submit GRE scores, and international students will be
required to submit both GRE and TOEFL scores for admission, along with at least two letters of
recommendation. Students will be selected for admission by a three-person admission
committee consisting of the MNR director and two other faculty members.
b. Describe new courses, include course numbers, titles, credit hours, and course
descriptions
We have introduced four new courses in the MNR curriculum, this includes: (i) MNR 5XX
Introduction to Sustainable Natural Resources (3 credits), (ii) FES 5XX Below-ground
Ecosystems (3 credits), (iii) FES 5XX Carbon Sequestration in Forests: Principles, Policy, and
Possibilities (2 Credits) and (iv) MNR 506 Master’s Case Study (9 credits). Funding for the
development of these courses and modifications of other courses for online instruction are
funded through an MOU with Ecampus (Appendix F).
MNR 5XX Introduction to Sustainable Natural Resources (3 credits)
Prerequisite: Bachelor’s degree. Undergraduate biology or ecology course recommended.
9
This is an introductory overview course and a degree requirement for all students seeking a
Master of Natural Resources degree. It should be taken during the first term that a student
enrolls in the program.
Course Content – Goals and Objectives
The purpose of this course is to present students, regardless of their disciplinary background,
with an overview of the interdisciplinary aspects of natural resource management. We will
discuss concepts and principles related to the economic, environmental, social, cultural, ethical,
and policy components of resource management, and evaluate different methods of balancing
competing interests in order to manage natural resources sustainably. We will examine global
natural resource issues and international collaborative efforts to address them, through the lens of
sustainable development. Key drivers of natural resource policy and key stressors of natural
resources and ecosystems will be analyzed. The course will conclude with an analysis of the role
of ethics, social justice and communication in the management of natural resources, and an
overview of graduate certificate programs available within the MNR degree. Through this
multifaceted introduction, students will discover a particular area of emphasis on which they
would like to focus during their MNR degree.
Measurable Student Learning Outcomes
By the end of MNR 5XX, students will demonstrate their ability to:
ƒ Identify and characterize multiple aspects of sustainable natural resource management
ƒ Analyze key drivers of natural resource policy and key stressors on natural systems
ƒ Evaluate methods of balancing competing interests in natural resource management
ƒ Comprehend the complexity of global natural resource issues, international collaboration
and the role of natural resource management in sustainable development
ƒ Analyze ethical aspects and broad social impacts of natural resource management decisions.
Student mastery of the above outcomes will be demonstrated through weekly substantial and
thoughtful reflections on assigned readings (e.g. five 2 – 3 page papers posted on the on-line
discussion board and thoughtful weekly responses to other students’ postings), and submission of
a term paper (12 – 15 pages) that integrates the concepts and principles presented throughout the
course and applies those principles to an analysis of a current natural resources management
issue. Grades will be based on quality of writing, organization of ideas, understanding of basic
concepts and principles, and ability to extend beyond what is currently known or thought.
FES 5XX Below-ground Ecosystems (3 credits):
Prerequisite: Undergraduate-level Biology or Ecology.
This course describes the physical and biological components of below-ground ecosystems and
their interactions. It examines the relationships between producers and decomposers in the soil.
The main topics of the course are briefly described below:
Soil food web. Examines producer and decomposer organisms and their relationships in different
soil systems. The role that soil microorganisms play in the carbon flow of below-ground
ecosystems is analyzed. Stability between producers and consumers is essential in any terrestrial
10
ecosystem. Competition for carbon sources among consumers regulates the stability of their
populations.
Vegetation and soil processes. Plants are the major energy (carbon) producers that sustain the
heterotrophic microorganism populations in the soil. Plant species diversity influences the type
of soil microorganisms present in the soil. Nitrogen fixation, mycorrhizal activities and
decomposition depend directly on the above-ground plant communities.
Function of soil biological diversity. Diversity of soil microorganisms provides resiliency to
below-ground ecosystems. All microorganism species have an ecological niche that is essential
to maintain the soil processes in the ecosystem. Population fluctuation of any species may affect
the soil processes in time and space but their function could be sustained by other species with
similar niches.
Land use and its effects on soil processes. Diverse human activities may modify soil processes
and cause instability of soil ecosystems. The degree to which soil processes are affected depends
on the severity and length of disturbance. Both agriculture and forestry practices have short- and
long-term effects on soil ecosystems. Populations of soil microorganisms undergo constant
fluctuations that affect the above-ground vegetation and the soil physical properties, thereby
changing the landscape.
FES 5XX Carbon Sequestration in Forests: Principles, Policy, Possibilities
(2 Credits).
Prerequisite: Undergraduate-level Biology or Ecology.
In this course we will examine the processes controlling the sequestration of carbon in the forest
system including the forest itself and wood products. We will also examine how forests can be
managed to sequester carbon as well as the important economic, policy, and other constraints.
Lectures, readings, discussion, simulation models, and home work will be used to cover the
material.
Topics included will be: 1) the importance of the carbon cycle and relevance to global change; 2)
how the carbon cycle works at different time and space scales; 3) how the carbon cycle is
measured at different time and space scales; 4) parts of the forest carbon cycle; 5) Use of
simulation models; 6) manipulating the store of carbon in forests; 7) scaling, and uncertainty
specific to the carbon problem; 8) economics of forest carbon sequestration; 9) policies to
manage forest carbon sequestration.
The objective of each part of course:
Readings will be diverse, covering the basic carbon cycle (biological and geological); the
impacts to climate, ocean, terrestrial, and social systems; how these systems function in
controlling the carbon cycle; and policies to manage forest carbon sequestration. In addition to
learning about the topic, reading will help the student develop skills to read quickly.
Lectures will provide the needed background to understand the readings and begin thinking
about how the carbon cycle can be managed.
11
Online discussions will be used to build skills to summarize and critique key science findings.
Students will be graded on their ability to articulate the subject matter and participate in an
interesting discussion.
Homework, aside from reading, will help students think through important issues and understand
the basics of modeling and uncertainty analysis. Student also will use of a simple, but integrated
model to test ideas about carbon sequestration in forests.
A final report allows the student to integrate the information from lectures, discussions, readings,
and laboratory and homework into a coherent analysis of a problem. The grade will be based on
the quality of the writing, organization of the report, understanding of basic principles, and
ability to extend the problem beyond what is currently known or thought.
Learning outcomes:
After completing this course students will be able to:
Describe the major global changes associated with increased atmospheric carbon dioxide and
other greenhouse gases and identify key uncertainties and risks.
Describe the global carbon cycle and recognize the differences between the biological and
geological carbon cycle.
Describe the elements of the carbon cycle ecosystems (stands), landscapes, and global scales as
well as describe in general terms how each is measured and what its major controls are.
Design experiments to test the effect of alternative management systems on carbon sequestration
Integrate the policy, economic, and ecological constraints on dealing with the carbon cycle.
MNR 506 Master’s Case Study (9 credits):
Course description: Students will identify an important natural resource problem within their
country, region, or organization, and a particular area of land, water, or a wildlife species/habitat
for which the problem is especially significant. Students will learn to pose, frame, and analyze
the various components of the problem and, at the end of the term, present possible resolutions.
Approach: After approval of a natural resource problem by MNR 506 Instructor, students will
identify a faculty mentor from the pool of MNR instructors who have agreed to serve as mentors.
List of faculty; pages 17-21. The mentor will assist the student in posing, framing, and analyzing
the natural resource problem. Students must work through a set of eight weekly assignments
relating to course instruction and reading material to assure that satisfactory progress is made
throughout the term. The class will discuss and provide feedback with each other, professors and
mentors on each assignment and the overall case study project. Thus students will learn about
other natural resource problems and issues while working on their own project. A final written
12
report must be submitted to the faculty mentor and Program Director/ Advisor at the end of the
term.
Learning outcomes
ƒ Develop a practical case study in sustainable natural resource management.
ƒ Develop a procedure to implement the case study by the student’s organization or agency.
ƒ Incorporate principles, concepts, and approaches learned throughout the entire curriculum.
Final Examination
Successful completion of a final oral examination is required for all master’s degrees (Graduate
Catalog: Policies Governing Master’s Degree Programs). Students are required to meet at
Oregon State University for this examination with his/her Graduate Advisory Committee to
defend the course of study and Capstone Project (MNR 506).
c. Provide a discussion of any nontraditional learning modes to be utilized in the new
courses, including, but not limited to: (1) the role of technology, and (2) the use of
career development activities such as practica or internships.
The MNR degree is envisioned to be on-line, although some students may opt to take some of
the listed classes in-residence. Thus we expect a high level of use of on-line teaching
technologies in each of the four new courses (FES 5XX, FES 5XX, MNR 506, MNR 511) as
well as in the existing courses which comprise this degree program. In addition, the
development of the new MNR 506 course (above) will provide practical experience and the
opportunity for students to prepare a work plan for resolving natural resource problems. This
Capstone Project portion of the MNR degree may be completed as a practicum or internship
which will help students hone their skills in addressing real-world problems faced by land
managers.
The MNR 506 Master’s Case Study project (Capstone Project) is a problem-solving experience.
It will be conducted by all Master of Natural Resources students as the capstone of their
academic program at Oregon State University. Case study projects provide students with
experience that approximates a future work environment while also providing client
organizations with solutions to complex natural resource issues and useful products. This project
focuses the substantial capabilities of our students and faculty on real-world natural resource
problems faced by agencies, institutions, and organizations. Project ideas may be generated by
faculty, students, or the student’s organization or agency.
d. What specific learning outcomes will be achieved by students who complete the course of
study?
The proposed MNR degree is an integrated curriculum with courses, a case study, and readings
coordinated throughout the Program by the MNR Director. Students will work on a Capstone
Project throughout the MNR course of study with a graduate committee (GAC) consisting of a
major professor from the student’s chosen area of emphasis, one other faculty mentor and
Graduate School representative who will help each student frame and analyze a problem
important to his/her country, organization, or region. The experience of students working on
similar but separate natural resource problems is an important integrative aspect of this degree.
13
Each student will come to the MNR degree with an idea for the degree project from his/her home
organization or country (see MNR 506 above). Students will also learn about case study
methods, provide written progress updates, and make a final report that will be available to the
entire MNR degree membership. Specific learning outcomes for the overall MNR degree
include:
ƒ Demonstrated skill in integrative thinking and collaborative learning across several
disciplines within the natural resource professions.
ƒ Familiarity with a wide variety of disciplinary knowledge and capacity to apply knowledge
to natural resource problems at multiple scales.
ƒ Ability to construct a study project about a specific policy issue using multiple data
collection techniques, cross-disciplinary interactions, and integrated analysis methods.
e. Is there a maximum time allowed for a student to complete this program? If so, please
explain.
There is no maximum time allowed to complete the MNR degree, other than the seven year limit
already imposed by the Graduate School. We expect that full time students could complete the
program in about two years (six academic terms, excluding summer term).
3. Accreditation of the Program
There is currently no organization that accredits this type of degree. There are some
organizations that accredit traditional disciplines in the Natural Resources, such as the Society of
American Foresters and Society of Range Management. However, these organizations are
highly disciplinary in orientation and commonly review entire departments or colleges, rather
than only components of them.
a. If applicable, identify any accrediting body or professional society that has established
standards in the area in which the proposed program lies.
NA
b. If applicable, does the proposed program meet professional accredited standards? If it
doesn’t, in what particular area(s) does it appear to be deficient? What steps would be
required to quantify the program for accreditation? By what date is it anticipated that
the program will be fully accredited?
NA
4. Evidence of Need
a. What evidence does the institution have of need for the program? Please be explicit.
(Needs assessment information may be presented in the form of survey data; summaries
of focus groups or interviews; documented requests for the program from students,
faculty, external constituents, etc.).
14
Conversations with professionals from around the country and with current and prospective
students in the Sustainable Natural Resources Graduate Certificate alerted us to the need for the
MNR degree at Oregon State University. There were 154 inquiries to Ecampus about the
Graduate Certificate in 2007 and 2008. In addition, there were 54 queries to the College of
Forestry (CoF) as of November 2006. Most potential students inquiring to CoF ask about the
availability of an online Master of Natural Resources degree. Currently, there is no online MNR
degree at OSU. Only four institutions in the U.S. offer degree programs that are similar to this
proposal: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, University of Idaho, Utah State
University and Texas A&M University.
With this background information, we conducted three meetings with faculty representatives
from the Colleges of Agriculture, Forestry, Liberal Arts, and Science, and Departments of
Agricultural and Resource Economics, Fisheries and Wildlife, Rangeland Ecology and
Management, Environmental Science, Forest Science, Geoscience, Sociology, and Marine
Resource Management about the development of an MNR degree at OSU. These meetings took
place on August 6, 20, and 27, 2007 (Appendix C). There was unanimous support for an on-line
offering of the MNR. However some concerns were expressed by two faculty members about
offering a new in-residence degree at OSU (Appendix C).
We also discussed our proposed MNR degree with eleven representatives of the Natural
Resources Distance Learning Consortium who participated in the 7th Biennial Conference on
University Education in Natural Resources (held in Corvallis on March 13-15, 2008). Present
were educators from California State University at Sacramento, Mississippi State University,
North Carolina State University, Northern Arizona University, Stephen F. Austin State
University, The Pennsylvania State University, University of Idaho, University of Montana,
University of Tennessee at Martin, Utah State University, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University, and Washington D.C. offices of the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land
Management, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, as well as Oregon State University (Appendix
D). There was overwhelming support for this degree, especially online, by the representatives of
these organizations. The Washington D.C. representatives of USFS and BLM spoke
convincingly of the immediate need for an advanced degree in Natural Resources or a related
discipline to be available to federal employees working in natural resource fields (Appendix D).
In addition, we discussed the Master of Natural Resources online degree program with Dr.
Melaku Bekele, Dean of the Wondo Genet College of Forestry and Natural Resources at
Hawassa University in Ethiopia (Appendix D). He believes that the online MNR program would
be a very valuable resource for his faculty and for other natural resource professionals worldwide who cannot afford to come to the United States to attend an in-residence advanced degree
program. He offered to facilitate further collaboration between OSU, USAID and Wondo Genet
College of Forestry and Natural Resources.
b. Identify statewide and institutional service-area employment needs the proposed
program would assist in filling. Is there evidence of regional or national need for
additional qualified individuals such as the proposed program would produce?
15
Increasingly, natural resource management practices are being certified through third party
organizations, which define operational indicators of sustainability, productivity, or risk and then
help organizations find ways to assess progress towards such goals. There is a need in both
certification organizations and natural resource agencies/companies for individuals who
understand the complexity of natural resource systems in order to determine the impacts of
current and planned management practices. Oregon’s continued leadership in natural resource
management will require individuals with the knowledge, experience, and networks that can be
gained from degree programs such as the proposed MNR. Also see 4a (above) and Appendix D.
c. What are the number and characteristics of students to be served? What is the
estimated number of graduates of the proposed program over the next five years? On
what information are these projections based?
The MNR degree is designed primarily for people working in the disciplines of natural resource
management, natural resource policy, environmental science, or environmental policy. We
expect to enroll about 20 students per year, after an initial lag time of 2 to 3 years during which
time enrollments will build. This expectation is based on current Ecampus and CoF inquires
about the SNR Certificate and availability of a master’s degree in natural resources (Appendix
D). Without the MNR degree, it is unlikely that these professionals would attend OSU, since all
indicate that they are locked into a location or level with their agency or company. It is therefore
impossible for them to physically move, even for one term. All existing in-residence graduate
programs at OSU and other institutions require a minimum of two years to complete.
d. Are there any other compelling reasons for offering the program?
There is increasing recognition that natural resource problems are multi-faceted and complex;
current disciplinary-based thinking must be complemented with knowledge about and experience
with additional ways of framing and resolving problems. The MNR is designed to facilitate the
learning of all students, especially professionals, who must work in settings that require the
integration of multiple disciplines and viewpoints in order to find solutions to natural resource
issues. This type of learning situation is not common in the modern university. This MNR is
designed to integrate multiple disciplines through curriculum requirements, assignments, a case
study project of the student’s own design, and evaluation of student work by mentors, professors
and other students.
e. Identify any special interest in the program on the part of local or state groups (e.g.,
business, industry, agriculture, professional groups).
Conversations and informal correspondence with forest certifiers, nonprofit organizations,
companies and educational organizations strongly support development of this MNR degree at
OSU. This effort is perceived as building on and extending existing strengths of OSU into
educational areas, i.e. natural resource sustainability, currently not addressed by other
institutions. Students that have inquired about the SNR Certificate and represent potential
students for the MNR degree are listed in Appendix D. Other people with whom we have
specifically discussed this degree are also included in Appendix D.
16
f. Discuss considerations given to making the complete program available for part-time,
evening, weekend, and/or place-bound students.
With the development of the MNR degree through Extended Campus, part-time, evening and
weekend professional non-residents, as well as residents, will have the opportunity to participate
in the program while continuing with their careers and family commitments.
5. Similar Programs in the State
None
a. List all other closely related OUS programs.
None of the programs offered by the Oregon University System provide for a graduate level
curriculum that appeals to or can be completed by working professionals. The intensity, breath
and integrative components of the proposed MNR graduate degree program are a unique effort to
OUS.
b. In what way, if any, will resources of other institutions (another OUS institution or
institutions, community college, and/or private college/university) be shared in the
proposed program?
All of the resources required for the MNR degree are located at Oregon State University.
However, it is possible that some on-line students may wish to access information at other
colleges or universities in the state, or elsewhere, for example through the Natural Resources
Distance Learning Consortium (Appendix E).
c. Is there any projected impact on other institutions in terms of student enrollment
and/or faculty workload?
There is no projected impact on other institutions because all of the resources required for the
proposed Graduate Program are located at OSU. All of the proposed courses already exist with
the exception of four new courses, and seven that require some modification for on-line delivery.
6. Resources
a. Identify program faculty, briefly describing each faculty member’s
expertise/specialization. Separate regular core faculty from faculty from other
departments and adjuncts. Collect current vitae for all faculty, to be made available to
reviewers upon request.
Core Faculty – Coordinating Committee
Badege Bishaw, Ph.D. (Instructor, Forest Ecosystems and Society) specializes in agroforestry,
sustainable forestry, and international forestry. His major project work includes agroforestry and
17
international forestry teaching, research, and outreach in Ethiopia, South Africa, Kenya and
Ghana. He served as Director of the International Programs for the College of Forestry, Oregon
State University from 2004- 2007. He has been a core team member of the Sustainable Forests
Partnership at OSU since 1994, and Vice President for the national Sustainable Forests
Partnership (2006 – present). He was co-director of two USAID-funded Higher Education
Partnerships between Oregon State University and South African and Ethiopian universities and
research institutions. Through these collaborative efforts he has developed a curricula for
Agroforestry and Natural Resource education, research and outreach programs in South Africa
and Ethiopia. He teaches courses in International Forestry and Planning Agroforestry Projects.
Paul S. Doescher (Professor, Forest Ecosystems and Society) has taught at Oregon State
University since 1982. Currently, he is Director of the Undergraduate Natural Resources Degree
Program and President-elect of the OSU Faculty Senate. His current research emphasizes
ecology and restoration of native species on arid and forest ecosystems subjected to wildfire and
invasion by exotic plants. Past research has focused on physiological ecology of rangeland and
forest species and reforestation of southwest Oregon forests. Currently he teaches courses in
Natural Resources, Forest Ecology and Ecological Restoration. Past coursework included
coursework in Rangeland Management, Arid Land Plants, Arid Land Biomes and Arid Land
Plant Physiology.
Steven Radosevich (Emeritus Professor, Forest Ecosystems and Society) is also Adjunct
Professor of Crop and Soil Science and of Philosophy at Oregon State University. He is the
author of the only textbook on the ecology of weeds and invasive plants (3rd edition), over 150
scientific papers, and a book of essays about farming, forestry and family in the Pacific
Northwest. His current research includes population biology and ecology of invasive plant
species, influence of humans on plant succession, forest restoration, and the ethics of natural
resource development. He established the OSU Sustainable Forestry program in 1995. His
teaching includes the graduate course in Biology of Invasive Plants and the on-line overview and
capstone courses in Sustainable Natural Resources (SNR).
Graduate Teaching Faculty
The graduate faculty for the MNR program will consist of faculty currently teaching online
graduate courses that are relevant to the MNR program (Table 5). We contacted each person
listed in Table 5 to affirm his/her interest in being a graduate faculty member of the MNR degree
and inform the Graduate School of positive responses when this Category I proposal is approved.
A list of courses for the proposed MNR degree is provided on pages 5 through 8 of this proposal.
Each of these courses is currently taught at OSU, and most of them are already taught on-line by
approved teaching faculty. All of these courses and instructors have approved Category II
proposals and teach the courses as regular, permanent courses at OSU. Curriculum vitae for
instructors are available.
This list of teaching faculty does not include names of all faculty teaching in the previously
approved certificate programs listed in Table 1, which may be used to satisfy the Area of
Emphasis as part of the MNR degree requirements.
18
Table 5. Master of Natural Resources teaching and mentoring faculty
Department
Faculty and Specialization
Agricultural &
Resource Economics
Penelope Diebel, Associate Professor
Agricultural Policy, Natural Resource Economics
Communications
Gregg Walker, Professor
Collaborative Learning, Conflict Management, Decision-Making,
Communication
Chemistry
Walter Loveland, Professor
Nuclear Chemistry Techniques Applied to Environmental Problems
Crop & Soil Sciences
Kimberly Hannaway, Instructor
Sustainable Agriculture, Forage
Fisheries & Wildlife
Bruce Dugger, Assistant Professor
Waterbird Ecology, Conservation and Management; Wetland Ecology
Robert Lackey, Professor
Ecological Policy; Science, Policy, and Environmental Protection
Randy Moore, Instructor
Wildlife Ecology, Avian Biology
Doug Robinson, Associate Professor
Avian Ecology, Tropical and Aridlands Ecology
David Sampson, Professor
Marine Biological Resources, Modeling Fishery Systems
Forest Ecosystems &
Society
Badege Bishaw, Instructor
Sustainable Forestry; Agroforestry
Efren Cázares, Assistant Professor
Mycorrhizal Ecology, Below-ground Ecosystems
Paul Doescher, Professor
Ecology and restoration of native species, rangeland, physiological
ecology
Rick Fletcher, Instructor
Sustainable Silviculture, Forest Certification
19
Dave Perry, Professor Emeritus
Sustainable Ecological Principles, Ecosystem Structure and Processes
Steven Radosevich, Professor Emeritus
Ecology of invasive plants, sustainable forestry
Mark Reed, Senior Instructor
Ecological Restoration
Mark Harmon, Professor
Ecosystem succession processes, nutrient cycling, carbon
Dave Stemper, Instructor
Environmental Interpretation
Forest Engineering &
Resource Management
John Bailey, Associate Professor
Silviculture, Fuels and Fire Management, Adaptive Ecosystem
Management
Loren Kellogg, Professor
Forest Operations, Interaction of Harvesting and Silvicultural Systems
Geosciences
Roger Nielsen, Professor
Analytical Geochemistry, Igneous Petrology
Dawn Wright, Professor
GIScience, Ocean Informatics, Marine and Coastal Geography, Coral
Reefs
Nuclear Engineering
& Radiation Health
Physics
Kathryn Higley, Professor
Radiation Biology, Radiochemistry, Radioecology, Societal Aspects of
Nuclear Technology
Philosophy
Madronna Holden, Instructor
World Views, Environmental Values, Ecofeminism
Tony Vogt, Instructor
Environmental Ethics
Political Science
Robert Sahr, Associate Professor
Political Communication and Public Opinion
Brent Steel, Professor
Sustainability Science, International Environmental Politics and Policy,
Public Policy
20
Sociology
Lori Cramer, Associate Professor
Rural Sociology, Natural Resource and Environmental Sociology
Mark Edwards, Associate Professor
Research Methods and Statistics, Public Policy, Food Insecurity
Denise Lach, Associate Professor
Environmental Natural Resource Sociology, Water Conflict and
Dispute Resolution
Courtesy and Adjunct Faculty
Some adjunct faculty teaching in the online Certificates are included in this proposal for an MNR
degree. Each of the courses and instructors teaching in the Certificate programs has been
approved through the Category II process. In addition, faculty and other qualified personnel (e.g.
agency or other university personnel) not teaching online course in the MNR may serve as
Graduate Advisory Committee as proposed by the guidelines for graduate degrees (Graduate
Guidelines)
Joe Kerkvliet, Adjunct Professor
Economics of Sustainable Natural Resources
Leon Liegel, Research Associate
Alternative Forest Products, Inventory & Monitoring
Jack Mortenson, Adjunct Professor
Wildlife Diseases
Mark Spence, Adjunct Instructor
Historical Landscape Ecology
Pam Van Londen, Adjunct Instructor
Computer science, technology and art
Program Administration
The MNR degree will be housed in the College of Forestry and administered by a committee
consisting of its Director and the Directors of each certificate (areas of emphasis for the MNR
degree) because certificates are housed in various Colleges and Departments at OSU. In addition
the Administrative Committee will be supplemented with two at-large members who represent
colleges with a strong teaching component in the MNR degree. The Administrative Committee
will meet annually and terms of appointment will be selected among its membership.
The Committee will submit an annual progress report to each participating College Dean and
ECampus about student enrollment and financial status of the degree program. We expect the
MNR program to be self-sufficient within 3-5 years.
21
b. Estimate the number, rank, and background of new faculty members who would need
to be added to initiate the proposed program in each of the first four years of the
proposed program’s operation. What commitment does the institution make to meet
these needs?
None
Program Funding: This degree will be funding neutral or profitable for all colleges and
departments in the program. A budget for the proposed MNR degree was developed by
Ecampus and the College of Forestry staff for the first four years of this degree program
(Appendix A, Section A and C). This budget is based on the distribution of funds received from
Ecampus administration, tuition for online courses and projected fixed annual expenses
(overhead) for a part time Director/Advisor and administrative assistant.
We propose that online course tuition be shared among the participating Departments or
Graduate Certificates according to the present Ecampus formula (Appendix A, Section C). All
departmental participation for the degree is based on courses already taught online, we do not
propose any revenue sharing among departments or colleges, other than that which already exists
with Ecampus. Thus, no MOU is required between College of Forestry and participating
departments. In addition, Ecampus administration will provide significant support up to selfsufficiency for the first three years of the Program (Appendix A, Section E, letters from Provost
Randhawa and Interim Associate Provost King) since the MNR degree will benefit the entire
OSU campus.
We expect tuition revenue to support overhead costs as the MNR degree builds momentum.
Ecampus will provide funding (Appendix A, Section E) to defray overhead costs during the
initial three years of the degree program. This funding will continue until the degree program
reaches financial self-sufficiency based on enrollment-generated revenue. The MNR degree is
expected to be self-sufficient from student online tuition within 3 years (Appendix A, Section A
and B). Twenty students taking 12 credits of MNR only courses or 13.28 students taking 18
credits of COF and MNR courses are necessary to break even (see appendix A, Section A and
B). The MNR Program will be housed in the College of Forestry and the revenue generated from
COF and MNR courses will flow to the college for program administration and instructor pay.
Short-term funding for administrative costs of the MNR degree is supported by Ecampus
administration, online tuition and the College of Forestry.
The campus benefit from this degree program is expected to be $12,546 ($278.80 X 45 credits)
for every student that completes the degree. Of this $12,546, 50% goes to Ecampus and 50%
goes to the Department. Faculty Salary and OPE ($129.20 X 45 credits) $5,814is covered by
student tuition.
c. Estimate the number and type of staff support needed, if any, in each of the first four
years of the program.
22
One 0.25 FTE MNR degree Director; we also propose one 0.20 FTE MNR degree clerical
support (Appendix A, Section A)
Job Description MNR Director
Coordinates the teaching and administrative activities of the MNR, chairs the MNR
Administrative Committee, work closely with Ecampus and administers funding of the MNR
program, chairs Admission committee, ensures quality and completeness of student course work
and capstone project and attends student defense of the capstone project. Prepares an annual
progress report of the degree and submits it to the Deans of each college and Ecampus.
d. Describe the adequacy of student and faculty access to library and department
resources (including, but not limited to : printed media, electronically published
materials, videotapes, motion pictures, CD-ROM and online databases, and sound files)
that are relevant to the proposed program (e.g., if there is a recommended list of
materials issued by the American Library Association or some other responsible group,
indicate to what extent access to such holdings meets the requirements of recommended
list).
All facilities are present at OSU or on-line and are adequate.
e. How much, if any, additional financial support will be required to bring access such
reference materials to an appropriate level? How does the institution plan to acquire
these needed resources?
No additional funding is needed. The MNR is expected to be self-sustaining from tuition within
2 to 3 years after its initiation (Appendix A).
f. Identify any unique resources (in terms of buildings, laboratories, computer
hardware/software, internet or other online access, distributed-education capacity,
special equipment, media, and/or other materials), beyond those now on hand,
necessary to offer this program. How does the institution propose that these additional
resources will be offered?
None. However, During the time this proposal was being prepared, the College of Forestry was
reorganizing into three departments. The former Department of Forest Science has been
combined with part of the former Department of Forest Resources, which are now called the
Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society, effective July 1, 2008. For any references to
Forest Science or Forest Resources in this proposal, please substitute Forest Ecosystems and
Society (FES). For example, course names beginning with FS or FOR have not been changed as
of December 2008, so for now the list of courses for the MNR degree uses the designators FS
and FOR.
23
Appendix A – Budget and Financial Planning
24
Proposed Administrative Expenses for MNR degree
A. Proposed Administrative Expenses
Position
Director
FTE (0.25)
OPE (@52%)
Clerical support
FTE (0.2)
OPE (@ 56%)
Total
Expense ($/year)
13,866
7,210
9,352
5,236
35,664
Ecampus support
Total
-30,000
5,664
B. Break even enrollments. The break even calculation described here is based on the
Ecampus funding model. Ecampus tuition revenue is shared across three campus segments
in an 80-10-10 split, allocated to the academic department-Ecampus-Central
Administration respectively. Tuition is set in alignment with main campus tuition (see
Section C for details).
Break even enrollments described (below) assumes 4 years (12 academic terms) to complete
a degree. When each student takes only 12 required MNR credits plus 33 credits from other
online courses (Tables 2, 3 and 4), only 3.17 new students are needed for the degree to meet
the proposed administrative expenses (above) during the first three years. After 3 years
19.92 new students are needed each year to meet the proposed administrative expenses.
Credits /student
12 credits of MNR only during year 1-3
12 credits of MNR only after year 3
# of students revenue generated /year
3.17
5,676.00
19.92
35,665.00
CoF and MNR Courses and Revenue
Course
MNR 5xx
MNR 506
FS 548
FES 5xx
FES 5xx
FOR 445
FS 523
Totals
Title
Introduction to
Sustainable Natural Resources
Case Study
Biology of Invasive Plants
Below-ground Ecosystems
Carbon sequestration in forests
Ecological restoration
Natural Resources data analysis
Credits
3
9
3
3
2
4
4
28
$/course
447.60
1,342.80
447.60
447.60
298.40
596.80
596.80
4,177.60
25
C. OSU Extended Campus Tuition Revenue Sharing and Instructor Pay
Academic Year 2009
The tuition revenue sharing model for Ecampus credit courses has been in place since Summer Term 2003. The
college/academic department receives 80% of the tuition revenue generated by each course (separate from the
distance education and technology fees) through budget transfers at the end of each term. The academic department
can choose to both hire and pay course instructors directly or may elect to have Ecampus pay instructors who have
been approved by the department. The instructor wage and payroll benefit expenses processed by Ecampus are
charged directly into indexes designated by each college.
Instructors will be paid up to a maximum of 180 SCH per term (60 students in 3 credit courses; 45 students
in 4 credit courses).
• The 180 SCH limit will be calculated per instructor, not per course.
• Pay rates will remain the same: $55 per undergraduate SCH and $85 per graduate SCH.
• These SCH can be a mix/match of undergraduate or graduate, but the maximum is 180 SCH.
• At 180 undergraduate SCH, the pay would equal $9,900.
• If all 180 SCH were graduate level, the maximum pay would be $15,300 (very unlikely due to lower
enrollments in graduate courses).
• PEBB benefits (health insurance) will not be initiated by Ecampus pay. (180 SCH will be equivalent to
0.49 FTE)
• This 180 SCH cap will also apply to the maximum allowed for overload pay.
Fall 2008, Winter 2009, Spring 2009, Summer 2009 Ecampus Tuition
Course Level
& SCH
Undergraduate
1 SCH
3 SCH
Graduate
1 SCH
3 SCH
OSU Tuition X
80%
=
Department
Allocation
OSU Tuition X 10%
=
Program Inventory
Development
OSU Tuition X 10%
=
OSU Central
Administrative
Services
$128
$384
$102.40
$307.20
$12.80
$38.40
$12.80
$38.40
$348
$1044
$278.40
$835.20
$34.80
$104.40
$34.80
$104.40
OSU Tuition*
Graduate and undergraduate tuition rates are consistent with the published tuition rates for a single three credit
course on both the Corvallis and Cascades campuses.
Students also pay a technology fee and a distance education fee. The Technology Fee is fee revenue to the OSU TRF
fund. The Distance Education Fee covers items necessary to the delivery of distance courses such as the
development and production of online and video courses, Blackboard licensing fee, financial and registration
services, and online student services. The distance education fee replaces the fees that on-campus, resident students
pay such as student health services, athletic fees, incidental fees, and residence building fees.
Under the Ecampus Revenue Allocation Model (ERAM), state budget dollars available to the College/Department
will be based on BAM formula weighted values and the prior year SCH/FTE production of the program running
through Ecampus. These state funds will be distributed to the College/Department as budget at the beginning of the
academic year (i.e. Fall Term).
26
27
D. Budget – Year One
29
D. Budget – Year Two
30
D. Budget – Year Three
31
D. Budget – Year Four
32
E. Communications with Provost Sabah Randhawa about MNR Budget
January 30, 2009
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Radosevich, Steven R.
Friday, January 30, 2009 3:43 PM
Randhawa, Sabah
Bishaw, Badege; King, Dave; Bradoch, Alfonso
RE: MNR Proposal
Good afternoon, Dr Randhawa. I am sorry to have not gotten back to you sooner. However, I am on
campus infrequently anymore and I wanted to discuss this matter with Badege Bishaw first. We are into
the first phases of the Category I approval process, particularly the Budgets and Fiscal Planning
Committee. Dr. Warner has been most helpful in this respect. We are making some changes to the
document to be more clear about how the administrative costs will be met. In addition we are including
an email that Dr. David King sent to you and me (Nov. 6, 2008) indicating the source of funds during the
first three years.
As we proceed through this process, Badege and I will include you, Dr. King, and Dr. Bradoch in any
modifications to the Category I proposal that are necessary. sr
_____________________________________________
From:
Randhawa, Sabah
Sent:
Thursday, January 29, 2009 10:22 PM
To:
Radosevich, Steven R.; Bishaw, Badege
Subject:
MNR Proposal
Importance:
High
Steve and Badege, I understand that the FS Budgets and Fiscal Planning Committee have asked you for clarification on budget‐related items in the proposal. One of the questions that has been brought to my attention is administrative support for the program during the start‐up phase and in particular, the ability of University to support a new program in a difficult fiscal environment when we will be going through a major budget reduction in the next few months. I realize that we had earlier discussions about this issue. I think it is important that the source of funds for administrative support (as coming from eCampus portion of the revenue and development funds) is identified in the proposal, both for transparency as well as to address the concern that precious few E&G dollars will be directed to new programs when existing programs are being downsized. I would suggest that you provide this clarification to the FS B&FP Committee. Alternatively, if you would like, I would be glad to do so. Please let me know. Sabah 33
Communications with Provost Sabah Randhawa about MNR Budget
November 16, 2008
From: Randhawa, Sabah
Sent: Sun 11/16/2008 12:25 PM
To: Radosevich, Steven R.
Cc: King, Dave
Subject: Proposed MNR Degree
Steve,
I appreciate the effort that you and your colleagues are investing in developing an
interdisciplinary Masters Program in Natural Resources. Per our earlier discussions, the
University will provide $30,000 towards the administration of the program for a period
of up to three years at the inception of the program. It is expected that the participating
academic units will match the institutional support with an equivalent amount towards
a projected $60,000 program administrative costs. It is my understanding that the
business model calls for student enrollment projections that will result in a self-support
situation after three years.
Sabah
Sabah Randhawa
Provost and Executive Vice President
Oregon State University
624 Kerr Administration Building
Corvallis, Oregon 97331-2153
Phone: 541-737-0733
Fax: 541-737-3033
Email: [email protected]
34
Communications with Provost Sabah Randhawa and Dr. David King, Associate Provost
about Funding MNR Degree
November 6, 2008
From: Randhawa, Sabah [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 9:22 PM
To: King, Dave
Cc: Heiligman, Nancy; Reed, Scott; Bradoch, Alfonso; Templeton, Lisa; Fisher, Dianna; Babcock, Carol;
Radosevich, Steven R - ONID; Bishaw, Badege
Subject: RE: Proposal to initiate Masters in Natural Resources
Dave—Thank you very much for your willingness to partner with the academic units in
supporting the program in the development/start‐up phase.
Steve—Please modify the Category I budget for administering the program, per Dave’s email below. With this change, the proposal can move through the approval process.
Thanks,
Sabah
_____________________________________________
From: King, Dave
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 4:51 PM
To: Randhawa, Sabah
Cc: Heiligman, Nancy; Reed, Scott; Bradoch, Alfonso; Templeton, Lisa; Fisher, Dianna; Babcock, Carol;
Radosevich, Steven R - ONID; Bishaw, Badege
Subject: RE: Proposal to initiate Masters in Natural Resources
Importance: High
Sabah, Extended Campus will provide the bridge funding needed (est. $30,000) along with the departments involved to cover the masters program in Natural Resources until it can become self sufficient. We are keenly interested in the program’s success and have been willing all along to try to do what was needed to make that happen. I’m sure you understand the concerns expressed by the supporters of this program are as much about interdisciplinary programs in general as they are this particular Extended Campus supported online program. The Curriculum Council is set to discuss the online MNR tomorrow. Dianna Fisher is representing Ecampus at that meeting. I’ll make sure she understands we are willing and ready to support the online master of Natural Resources program, if that has any value in the Council’s discussion.
Dave
35
Dave King
Interim Associate Provost
University Outreach and Engagement
Oregon State University
541-737-3379 EESC
541-737-3810 Ecampus
541-602-2386 cell
[email protected]
_____________________________________________
From: Randhawa, Sabah
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 2:17 PM
To: King, Dave
Cc: Heiligman, Nancy
Subject: Proposal to initiate Masters in Natural Resources
Dave,
Nancy and I have been discussing the budget associated with the interdisciplinary
academic proposal for a masters program in Natural Resources. As you know, this is a
program fully delivered via eCampus that is expected to self sufficient in 3-5 years. The
issue has been support for the administration of the program (about $60,000) during
the start-up phase of the program. The participating departments are willing to pick up
50% of the administrative costs. We would like to see eCampus pick up the remaining
50% for a period not to exceed three years. Were you to do so, what will be the effective
return to eCampus and how will this work for eCampus fiscal sustainability?
Thanks,
Sabah
36
Communications with Provost Sabah Randhawa about MNR Budget
September 15, 2008
From: Radosevich, Steven R.
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 11:06 AM
To: Randhawa, Sabah; Bradoch, Alfonso
Cc: Adams, Tom; King, Dave; Bishaw, Badege; Reed, Scott
Subject: RE: Masters of Natural Resources
Hello Dr. Randhawa. Dave King and Alfonso Bradoch were members of the team that created
the funding model for the MNR Cat I proposal (See Appendix A). It is based on the current
allocation of e-campus funds and on administrative costs (that I determined by consulting with
the FS administrative assistant) to run the MNR degree on a sustained basis--about
$60,000/year. In addition, we are proposing 3 options in the CAT 1 for funding the
administrative costs for the MNR degree. These options are listed below (See also page 21).
The one that we favor, considering the recently completed liaison with the draft Cat I proposal, is
option 2 which we visited with you about several weeks ago.
We also expect a short-fall in revenue to support overhead costs as the MNR degree builds
momentum. E-Campus has agreed to provide supplemental funding to help defray overhead
costs during the initial years of the degree program. This supplemental funding will continue
until the degree program reaches financial self-sufficiency based on enrollment-generated
revenue, at which time the supplemental funding will be paid back to E-campus according to the
same procedure as described in the 3 options.
As you suggest, I will attempt to set up a meeting with Drs. Loveland and Heiligman within the
week and inform you of that outcome. sr
Funding models:
We propose three funding models for the MNR degree. The following options are considered:
(1) Department revenue sharing. We propose that on-line course tuition be shared among the
participating Departments or Graduate Certificates according to the present E-campus formula
(Appendix A [attachment above]). In addition, to meet the overhead costs of the MNR degree
we propose that tuition received from students in the MNR degree be allocated according to
student-contact hour and funds be removed by E-Campus until overhead costs for administration
of the MNR degree are met. Once administrative costs for the degree are achieved, proceeds
from tuition will be allocated according to the existing E-Campus formula (Appendix A;
attachment above). An MOU is attached (Appendix F) that specifies this funding agreement.
Although this is our proposed funding model for the MNR degree, some concerns were raised
during the liaison process.
(2) Department revenue share plus Campus Administration support. In addition to department’s
revenue and cost sharing, campus administration should provide some support since the MNR
degree will benefit the entire OSU campus. This kind of support already exists for other
interdisciplinary graduate programs on campus (e.g. Environmental Sciences). This is similar as
37
option 1, except that campus administration provides a significant level of support (e.g. 50%) of
the annual administrative costs of the MNR degree. We believe that all departments will agree
to cost sharing of MNR administration under this option.
Thus the manner of funding the MNR degree and other on-line interdisciplinary degrees is the
subject of discussion by the Provost and Deans of Colleges affected by the proposed degree. We
expect to have the question of campus-wide support and financial sustainability of on-line
interdisciplinary degree programs resolved by the completion of this Category I process.
(3) In the event no resolution is reached with option 2, we will proceed with option 3 for funding
the MNR administration costs. Some departments who are unwilling to contribute to
administrative overhead will be removed from the MNR program and their courses will be
removed from the MNR curriculum. Students will select such courses from a list proposed by the
Natural Resources Distance Learning Consortium for graduate education.
c. Estimate the number and type of staff support needed, if any, in each of the first four
years of the program.
One 0.5 FTE MNR degree Director/Advisor (Appendix A) and 0.20 FTE MNR degree
administrative support (Appendix A )
From: Randhawa, Sabah
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 9:19 AM
To: Bradoch, Alfonso; Radosevich, Steven R.
Cc: Adams, Tom; King, Dave; Bishaw, Badege; Reed, Scott
Subject: RE: Masters of Natural Resources
Steve,
I am sorry I have not been able to respond to the emails on this proposed programs earlier.
Before I bring this up with the relevant deans, is there a “revenue/cost model” that you all
(proposers/eCampus) are proposing for initiating and sustaining this proposal? I am afraid that
if I discuss this with the deans, the question that will be asked is the model that is being
proposed and its implications for units/colleges, and that will bring us back to the drawing
board. I suggest that some members of the proposal development team work with Dave to
develop a straw budget model for the program. I think you have elements of the model already
developed; the key issue is building an administrative component and how it is to be sustained
over time. It will also be helpful to get Nancy Heiligman’s input and perspective into that model.
Walt Loveland, who chaired the University Budget Committee (UBC) the past two years,
including extensive discussions on funding of interdisciplinary programs, may also be helpful in
this regard. Having a model with input from the Budget’s Office and the UBC will help to move
this along.
Sabah
From: Bradoch, Alfonso
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 8:34 AM
To: Radosevich, Steven R.; Randhawa, Sabah
Cc: Adams, Tom; King, Dave; Bishaw, Badege
Subject: RE: Masters of Natural Resources
38
Good morning Sabah.
I was only able to attend the meeting with Dr. Boggess, but I suspect his reactions and concerns
were mirrored in the meetings with the other Deans. As Steve commented, Dr. Boggess saw the
value of this program and agreed that the Graduate School was the best 'home' for this program,
but as anticipated he too was concerned over how the program would achieve sustainability. He
commented that the issue of how to budgetarily sustain interdisciplinary programs has been an
ongoing question for OSU. He understood, however, that Ecampus' unique funding model
provides opportunity for creation of a funding model that could solve this conundrum, at least for
those interdisciplinary programs offered via Ecampus. He also commented that undergraduate
interdisciplinary programs, such as the Natural Resources Bachelor's degree, suffer from the
same sustainability issues and understood that these too must be addressed. That said, Dr.
Boggess seemed supportive of the proposed Masters of Natural Resources and the effort to create
a funding pathway.
Alfonso
Alfonso Bradoch
Director, Department and Student Services
OSU Extended Campus
4943 The Valley Library
Corvallis, OR 97331-4504
541-737-9116
From: Radosevich, Steven R.
Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2008 6:15 PM
To: Randhawa, Sabah
Cc: Adams, Tom; Bradoch, Alfonso; King, Dave; Bishaw, Badege
Subject: RE: Masters of Natural Resources
Sabah. All of the Deans supported our Category 1 proposal. They liked the concept presented in the
Category 1 of an Interdisciplinary degree, especially one offered on-line. Several were surprised that
OSU offers so many graduate courses on-line. They all seemed to realize that the degree being
proposed should become self-sufficient a few years after it starts. However all of them also indicated that
budgets were very tight and that a mechanism needed to be found that supported interdisciplinary
programs for the good of the campus. None seemed to have a very good notion of how to do this.
All of the Deans liked the idea of having the program housed in the Graduate School, rather than in a
specific College or Department. Dr Francis, however, was concerned that her budget could not handle
any more interdisciplinary programs. Each Dean offered some specific ideas on how the Cat I could be
improved (which we took note of) , but none had any specific suggestions for creating or improving the
funding model.
Badege Bishaw was present with me at all of the meetings. Other listed above were present at one or
more meeting. Perhaps they also can share their insights about the meetings with you. I will be gone all
of the coming week. Thank you for asking for more detail. sr
From: Randhawa, Sabah
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 5:04 PM
39
To: Radosevich, Steven R.
Cc: Adams, Tom; Bradoch, Alfonso; King, Dave; Bishaw, Badege
Subject: RE: Masters of Natural Resources
Steve, I would like to know the reaction of the deans when you and/or others presented the proposal to them, specifically your read of their support (or lack of) for the proposal and questions and issues that were raised in those conversations. Thanks, Sabah From: Radosevich, Steven R.
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 2:58 PM
To: Randhawa, Sabah
Cc: Adams, Tom; Bradoch, Alfonso; King, Dave; Bishaw, Badege
Subject: Masters of Natural Resources
Good afternoon Dr. Randhawa.
This note is to let you know that we have informed each of the Deans about the MNR interdisciplinary
degree, as you requested.
Hal Salwasser, Dean CoF
Sally Francis, Dean Graduate School
Bill Boggess, Dean CoA
Sheman Bloomer, Dean of Science
Larry Roper, Dean, CLA
8/12/08
8/12/08
8/14/08
8/15/08
8/25/08
Thank you for meeting with us last Monday. sr
40
Communications with Provost Sabah Randhawa about MNR Budget
September 26, 2008
From: Radosevich, Steven R.
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 11:44 AM
To: Randhawa, Sabah
Cc: Adams, Tom; King, Dave; Bishaw, Badege; Reed, Scott; Doescher, Paul; Bradoch, Alfonso; Loveland,
Walter D - ONID; Heiligman, Nancy
Subject: RE: Masters of Natural Resources
Dr. Randhawa. We have met with both Drs. Loveland and Heiligman about the funding model for the
proposed MNR program as you suggested. Alfonso Bradoch and Badege Bishaw attended the meeting
with Dr. Loveland and we were joined by Paul Doescher and Carol Lehto for the meeting with Dr.
Heiligman. Both Drs. Loveland and Heiligman were supportive of developing a funding model that
involves support for the administrative costs of the MNR degree by central administration. It was
suggested that the long term sustainability of this interdisciplinary degree (after the next year or perhaps
two) be funded from the 10% of funds received by central administration from e-campus tuition. Dr
Loveland indicated that he would be contacting you via email concerning this matter, while Dr. Heiligman
indicated that long-term funding of the MNR degree should be an issue for discussion at the next budget
committee meeting. This suggestion is basically option 2 that we propose in our existing Category I
proposal and the one-page information sheet that we provided you before our meeting with you last
month.
I have attached copies of both documents. sr
From: Randhawa, Sabah
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 9:19 AM
To: Bradoch, Alfonso; Radosevich, Steven R.
Cc: Adams, Tom; King, Dave; Bishaw, Badege; Reed, Scott
Subject: RE: Masters of Natural Resources
Steve,
I am sorry I have not been able to respond to the emails on this proposed programs earlier.
Before I bring this up with the relevant deans, is there a “revenue/cost model” that you all
(proposers/eCampus) are proposing for initiating and sustaining this proposal? I am afraid that
if I discuss this with the deans, the question that will be asked is the model that is being
proposed and its implications for units/colleges, and that will bring us back to the drawing
board. I suggest that some members of the proposal development team work with Dave to
develop a straw budget model for the program. I think you have elements of the model already
developed; the key issue is building an administrative component and how it is to be sustained
over time. It will also be helpful to get Nancy Heiligman’s input and perspective into that model.
Walt Loveland, who chaired the University Budget Committee (UBC) the past two years,
including extensive discussions on funding of interdisciplinary programs, may also be helpful in
this regard. Having a model with input from the Budget’s Office and the UBC will help to move
this along.
Sabah
From: Bradoch, Alfonso
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 8:34 AM
41
To: Radosevich, Steven R.; Randhawa, Sabah
Cc: Adams, Tom; King, Dave; Bishaw, Badege
Subject: RE: Masters of Natural Resources
Good morning Sabah.
I was only able to attend the meeting with Dr. Boggess, but I suspect his reactions and concerns
were mirrored in the meetings with the other Deans. As Steve commented, Dr. Boggess saw the
value of this program and agreed that the Graduate School was the best 'home' for this program,
but as anticipated he too was concerned over how the program would achieve sustainability. He
commented that the issue of how to budgetarily sustain interdisciplinary programs has been an
ongoing question for OSU. He understood, however, that Ecampus' unique funding model
provides opportunity for creation of a funding model that could solve this conundrum, at least for
those interdisciplinary programs offered via Ecampus. He also commented that undergraduate
interdisciplinary programs, such as the Natural Resources Bachelor's degree, suffer from the
same sustainability issues and understood that these too must be addressed. That said, Dr.
Boggess seemed supportive of the proposed Masters of Natural Resources and the effort to create
a funding pathway.
Alfonso
Alfonso Bradoch
Director, Department and Student Services
OSU Extended Campus
4943 The Valley Library
Corvallis, OR 97331-4504
541-737-9116
From: Radosevich, Steven R.
Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2008 6:15 PM
To: Randhawa, Sabah
Cc: Adams, Tom; Bradoch, Alfonso; King, Dave; Bishaw, Badege
Subject: RE: Masters of Natural Resources
Sabah. All of the Deans supported our Category 1 proposal. They liked the concept presented in the
Category 1 of an Interdisciplinary degree, especially one offered on-line. Several were surprised that
OSU offers so many graduate courses on-line. They all seemed to realize that the degree being
proposed should become self-sufficient a few years after it starts. However all of them also indicated that
budgets were very tight and that a mechanism needed to be found that supported interdisciplinary
programs for the good of the campus. None seemed to have a very good notion of how to do this.
All of the Deans liked the idea of having the program housed in the Graduate School, rather than in a
specific College or Department. Dr Francis, however, was concerned that her budget could not handle
any more interdisciplinary programs. Each Dean offered some specific ideas on how the Cat I could be
improved (which we took note of) , but none had any specific suggestions for creating or improving the
funding model.
Badege Bishaw was present with me at all of the meetings. Other listed above were present at one or
more meeting. Perhaps they also can share their insights about the meetings with you. I will be gone all
of the coming week. Thank you for asking for more detail. sr
42
From: Randhawa, Sabah
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 5:04 PM
To: Radosevich, Steven R.
Cc: Adams, Tom; Bradoch, Alfonso; King, Dave; Bishaw, Badege
Subject: RE: Masters of Natural Resources
Steve, I would like to know the reaction of the deans when you and/or others presented the proposal to them, specifically your read of their support (or lack of) for the proposal and questions and issues that were raised in those conversations. Thanks, Sabah From: Radosevich, Steven R.
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 2:58 PM
To: Randhawa, Sabah
Cc: Adams, Tom; Bradoch, Alfonso; King, Dave; Bishaw, Badege
Subject: Masters of Natural Resources
Good afternoon Dr. Randhawa.
This note is to let you know that we have informed each of the Deans about the MNR interdisciplinary
degree, as you requested.
Hal Salwasser, Dean CoF
Sally Francis, Dean Graduate School
Bill Boggess, Dean CoA
Sheman Bloomer, Dean of Science
Larry Roper, Dean, CLA
8/12/08
8/12/08
8/14/08
8/15/08
8/25/08
Thank you for meeting with us last Monday. sr
43
Appendix B – Library Evaluation
44
45
46
OSU Libraries Evaluation of Collection and Access to Support
New Instructional Program for Master of Natural Resources (MNR)
Overview
The request for a library assessment for this new instructional program leading to a Master of
Natural Resources has arrived at a critical time. It has been our practice to assess the
current/historical strength of the collection and look at collecting levels specific subject areas and
from that information infer if added resources are needed.
OSUL budget has been flat for the past five years during which time the price of serials/journals
(the lion's share to the OSUL materials budget) has increased at an annual rate of 5-8%. As a
result, our monographs budget has been cut by 50%. Although our monographs budget has been
reduced, we have mitigated this situation with increased reliance on Interlibrary Loan (ILL) and
resource sharing through Summit and with other libraries. We are pursuing collaborative
collection development with libraries in the Orbis Cascades Alliance to focus our buying power
on what matters most to Oregon State University and to avoid unnecessary duplication of titles
among the institutions. In the current economy we can expect cuts to the library budgets at the
University of Oregon, University of Washington, Portland State University, and Washington
State University, on whose collections in natural resources and public policy our OSU students
and' faculty depend. It is inaccurate to say: "all of the resources required for the MNR degree are
located at Oregon State University," (p. 18) though it is understood that this statement refers to
the curriculum offered.
OSUL has been shoring up the collection using money from gift funds for the past 5 years. This
was never intended to be more than a stop gap and beginning in AY 2008/09 OSUL began
another round of cuts of its serial collection. We are planning for an additional cut of some 30%
cut to the serials collection over the 2009/11 biennium. For example, crop/soils, fisheries,
wildlife, forestry, and rangeland serials will be cut by over $19,000 in the next two years. In
addition we will cut the general biology fund which underwrites these areas by $84,000. These
cuts are not temporary. They need to be sustained in subsequent years. There is no way to protect
the Natural Resources serials/journal collection from these cuts. Assuming a flat budget, in
subsequent years we will need to cut an additional 5-8% annually to keep up with inflation. Any
strengthening of the collection in one area will need to be the result of sustained new funding or
by further cuts. The reality is that if this or any other program wants to move forward, the
forward movement must consider that OSUL will be supporting access to content through a
combination of some journal subscriptions and an increased use of resource sharing, specifically
a heavy reliance on ILL and/or document delivery.
OSU Libraries (OSUL) has not had the opportunity to comment on the burgeoning extended
campus programs and library service/collections. Extended campus programs highlight the need
for "electronic access" to the library collection and where this is not possible physical document
delivery. While Extended Campus has provided a base figure for this for the past three years, that
amount is not linked to increased enrollment nor is it linked to the ;. costs of building an
electronically accessible collection. E-access to monographs ~ is a desirable future for such a
program. When available, providing multiple users access to an e-book requires payment of an
additional 50%.
47
The emphasis on this bleak picture is to make clear the point that even though our assessment
indicates the collection is marginally adequate, maintaining "marginal" adequacy is an optimistic
goal. The bad and the good news is that OSUL is not alone and has been collaborating within the
Orbis/Cascades Alliance and the Greater Westem Library Alliance for several years to negotiate
affordable collections. There are also glimpses of a solution in the form of a truly shared research
collection within OUS.
Collection Assessment for MNR
In 2003 OSUL provided a library review for the Certificate in Sustainable Natural Resource
program which at that time was planned as an in-residence certificate. OSUL received no
additional funds for the collection though we noted that our area of greatest weakness when
compared with our peers for this program was in the social aspects of natural resource
management and sustainability. In the 2006 library assessment for the Applied Economics
Program found the library collection to be only marginally adequate.
Government Documents:
US Federal and State agencies' documents are the heart of any natural resources collection. In
this area, OSUL has always had a strong collection and there is little reason to believe it will be
diminished in the future. OSUL recently joined with the libraries at UO, PSU and the State
Library of Oregon to provide a full but distributed repository of government documents. The
agencies for which OSUL is the full depository for Oregon are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture (USDA)
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
National Oceanographic Data Center
National Marine Fisheries Service
Oceanic and Atmospheric Research Office .Federal Aviation Administration (FM)
Dept. of the Interior (which includes the Forest Service, National Parks Service, Bureau
of Land Management, and so on)
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
National Science Foundation (NSF)
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission .
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
•
•
•
•
•
Students interested in Oregon will find a wide array of documents from state agencies as well.
Most state and federal agency documents are published electronically now though not all are
provided a persistent URL. The State Library in Oregon is attempting to provide this service.
Government documents from other countries are more likely to need interlibrary loan.
Public Domain, Open Access and Copyright:
Researchers employed by US federal agencies cannot transfer copyright to publishers (even forprofit journal publishers). For that reason databases like the US Forest Service's TreeSearch can
become a site for "one stop shopping." OSU researchers can participate in this decommoditization of research findings by being aware of author rights. In most cases it is possible
48
to retain the right to deposit pre- and/or post-prints of their scholarly writing in the
ScholarsArchive@OSU, our institutional repository (http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/dspace/). In
that way the content of their research findings will be freely available in perpetuity.
Monographs (See Appendix I):
We looked at the number records in the OSUL catalog compared with Summit (the library for
the Orbis/Cascades Alliance) and WorldCat. The later serves as "the universe" of cataloged
material.
A few relevant call number ranges were examined and revealed the shift to policy as an area of
collecting emphasis since 2005. A comparison of policy related natural resources monographs
added to the OSUL in comparison to Summit and World Cat holdings shows that we are now
collecting at a level that is on par with institutions having a longer history of public policy
program emphasis (UW, UO, etc.). However, to build a public policy collection that is truly on a
par with these institutions, we should be collecting at an even higher rate in order to catch up.
While it is clear that the OSUL collection is adequate in most natural resource areas the fact that
students have access to the Summit holdings serves them well by providing a venue for direct
borrowing of titles not owned by OSUL. The figures for WorldCat provide sufficient proof that
no library can stand alone in providing monographs and highlight the fact that all graduate
students and their faculty must anticipate use of Interlibrary Loan for at least some of their
monograph needs.
Collecting electronic books, e-books would be the preferred format for this program.
Unfortunately as is the case for e-journals, as libraries elect to provide .their users with e-access
to books they also enter into licensing agreements that prevent them from providing access to
users outside their institution (e.g. OSU users cannot view e-books in the UW collection unless
we also have purchased the same title). So in supporting e-campus programs with e-book
purchases we can at best buy 2 books where we could once have purchased 3 and, other things
being equal, in doing so, we are not adding to the greater Orbis/Cascades consortium collection.
Core Journals for this program (see Appendix II):
Defining the set of journals needed to support this program is problematic in its diversity. Rather
than looking at the "top-ranked" journals in all of the disciplines represented by this proposal, we
elected to survey the writings of the graduate faculty members named in the proposal (p. 19-22).
Using the Web of Science (only peer-reviewed content), we identified all articles published by
these individuals and also those articles which cited those articles. From that set, we compiled a
list of journals and noted the number of times a journal was mentioned. Since different
disciplines and journals have differing rates of citation in general, we did not count number of
times cited, rather number and title of journals citing the OSU author's articles.
Using five mentions as a threshold, we compiled a list of 65 journal titles noted in Appendix II.
The current cost of maintaining access to these titles requires an investment of over $116,000 in
addition to retaining subscription to other resources (JSTOR, BioONE.1, ASABE, and Annual
Reviews) which bring this total to $158,777.
49
Of these 65 titles, three (Climate Research, EcoScience and Forestry) are not/no longer in the
collection as of 2009 and would require an additional annual investment of $1534 to reinstate.
The good news is that OSUL provides electronic access to the other 62 titles. In addition the
journal Land Use Policy ($1015) which we received as part of a package but which we will need
to purchase in 2010, has been requested to bolster the applied economics program by a member
of the forestry faculty. Given the extended campus audience for this program, adding access to
complete backset packages (where available) would be a desirable goal. This could be achieved
with one time funding, and might include:
•
•
Complete back set of tri-society journals online for $1000 + $1 DO/year maintenance fee
would be treated as a "serial" expense.
Complete backset of NRC journals (Canadian Research Journals): $11,000
Subject-Specific Indexes and Abstracts
The library subscribes to various databases that provide access to the literature (both popular and
scholarly which support this proposal and the study of natural resources and their management.
Examples include the following:
•
•
•
•
•
Aquatic Science and Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA), 1972-present
CAB Abstracts (1972-present)
EBSCOHost: Newspaper Source (good for tracking public opinion)
Lexis Nexis Academic (access to legal literature)
Web of Science (Science and Social Science Citation Index), (1970- present)
A complete list of available databases is found at:
(http://osulibrary.oregonstate.edu/research.php.db.php?arg=A
http://osulibrary.oregonstate.edu/research)
A database which is missing our collection and would be most a most desirable addition to
improve access to public policy literature is the Public Affairs Index (1973 to present) at an
annual cost of $4,350.
Access costs:
Access to finding aids like the databases above, does not assure access to the references found
however, since it is our practice to subscribe to the online-only versions of journals, other things
being equal, there should be little difference between the access afforded an on-campus student
and an extended campus student. But areas of research interest are likely to be local and for that
reason we can assume that students outside the state and certainly outside the country will be
interested in access to material not in (or accessible from) the OSUL website. For such
interlibrary loan activity, the current average cost to the library is $28/article. We anticipate the
reliance on interlibrary loan to increase as serials titles are cut, though there is no reason to
assume this will be felt more acutely by students in the natural resources.
Library staff and expertise:
Bonnie Avery is the subject librarian for the Natural Resources program. In that capacity, she
provides instruction as requested either In-class or via the web, responds to reference inquiries,
and develops materials to assist faculty members and students in their research.
50
The collection in natural resources is built by Bonnie Avery (Forestry and Rangeland
Resources), Laurie Bridges (Business and Economics), May Chau (Agriculture), Valery King
(Social Sciences), Margaret Mellinger (Engineering), Hannah Rempel (Biological Sciences) and
Andrea Wirth (Geosciences). Providing access to items not owned by OSUL is the domain of the
Interlibrary Loan and Summit staff both at OSUL and at lending libraries. Additional services for
on campus students include the physical attributes of the libraries including excellent computer
facilities, study areas for individual and group work, and practice rooms for students.
Extended campus students also need document delivery services from the OSUL collection. In
this regard they have an advocate and troubleshooter in Maureen Kelly, the extended campus
librarian at the OSU Cascades campus. Extended campus students and faculty can select a
version of the OSUL website which highlights their needs.
In Summary
At this moment in time the OSUL collection is marginally adequate to support the MNR
proposal. Areas of inadequacy are primarily in the social science/public policy area where we
have not traditionally needed to build a graduate level collection. Given the extended campus
focus of this program, purchasing backsets to some of the major journal packages not currently
available would be advisable. This would require a one-time investment. Finally, as we bring the
OSUL journal budget under control, there is some reason to believe that the monographs budget
would returned to its former level.
There is one action each MNR faculty could take immediately in order to become part of the
long-term solution to the problem of how to pay for access to scholarly information. This is to
understand their author rights and more specifically include the right to "self-archive" (preferably
in the OSU ScholarsArchive@OSU) when signing away their copyright to a journal publisher.
Information about author rights can be found at: http://www.arl.ora/sparc/author/index.shtml
While not required, to bring the OSUL collection up from marginal to adequate to support this
program would cost an additional annual investment of $2550 for journals, $4450 for databases
and platform fees, $2800 for additional monographs in the area of public policy and a one-time
investment of $12,000 for journal backsets. Beyond that, in order to purchase e-book with a
multiple user license when available, OSUL would need an increase of an additional 50% in its
monographs funds for various fund codes.
Submitted with respect,
Bonnie Avery
Natural Resources Librarian
2/27/09
51
52
53
54
55
56
Appendix C – Liaison with OSU Instructional Units
MNR Exploratory Group Meetings
Liaison Letter
Liaison Responses and communication
Reply and commentary to Liaison
We indicate below questions and our responses to a draft Category I proposal from various OSU
Schools and Departments (7 departments and 3 graduate programs). We have addressed
questions either in these responses or directly on the revised Category I proposal from the
Graduate School.
57
Summary of Master of Natural Resources Exploratory Group Meeting
August 6, 2007
Present: Steve Radosevich (FS), Paul Doescher and Susan Morré (FR), Bill Lunch (PS), Gregg
Walker (COMM), Ursula Bechert (PSM), Stan Gregory and Samuel Chan (FW), Jim Johnson
(Forestry Extension), Lynette de Silva (Geosciences), and Paula Minear and Alfonso Bradoch
(Ecampus)
Status of MNR degree development: exploring development of online and onsite program, no
Category 1 proposal yet. Have been receiving 4 – 5 requests per week from students interested
in an MNR degree, both online (from people who are unable to leave a location or job to come to
OSU), and onsite from people who want an advanced degree in natural resources. Many are
seeking job advancement and feel this is the key for them.
A handout of current certificate programs and potential MNR degree components, and an
analysis of current online offerings reveal many relevant courses and certificates are already
available onsite, and some are already available online, while others would need to be adapted to
online teaching. Survey shows online graduate certificate programs seen as nimble, flexible,
and relevant. A 45-credit non-thesis MNR could have 18 credits from one of the existing
certificate programs for depth, 6 credits of Ecology/Production, 9 credits of Human Systems
(choose 3 areas from Policy, Economics, Sociology, Ethics, Communication), and 6 credits of
Methodology (Statistics and Research Methods).OSU is in the process of joining the Distance
Learning Consortium, and perhaps in the beginning the economics and statistics courses could be
taken from other members of the Consortium, until an online course is developed here. Lisa
Ganio may be interested in developing an online statistics methods course. Fifteen credits can be
transferred to a master’s degree at OSU.
Benefits of developing an online MNR degree: The demand from agencies and students exists
– there is a demonstrated need to combine knowledge in natural resources, communications,
sociology, business, and economics to reach consensus on current and future issues. Although
there are already Masters of Public Policy, Marine Fisheries Management, Environmental
Science, and Water Resources at OSU, the distance education component is unique to this MNR
proposal.
Discussion points:
1) NR currently has no core at OSU. Courses are very interdisciplinary and spread out across
many departments and colleges at OSU, and communication among us has much room for
improvement. Programs are diffuse, not well integrated, and it is difficult for potential students
and their parents to clearly understand what all is available and get degree program information
to guide enrollment decisions. There needs to be a good web portal and online advising to more
effectively provide information to students. Reply: University Advancement has set up a new
unit for web marketing to integrate programs, and the Registrar wants a web portal (cost:
$300,000).
58
2) Students don’t get the same experience online as onsite. Are all-online degrees something we
want to offer? Conclusion: onsite is first choice for those who can come here; online is an
important alternative for those who are unable to physically relocate here. Offer courses online
and onsite to meet needs. Important for online MNR to have a two week face-to-face component
in the field.
3) There is a proliferation of MNR degrees already across the country. Conclusion: Several
MNR programs exist at other universities and are successful, but hardly any are available
entirely online. The two-week field component would differentiate us from other universities.
Those who cannot travel can do an internship in their own community. OSU is losing natural
resources students to Portland State University and we need to offer what is in demand in the 21st
century to stay relevant. We can offer separate degree designations in different tracks
(Environmental Science, Geosciences, Environmental Economics, etc.).
4) Agencies need to make the distinction between non-thesis and thesis masters because they
differ in depth of science and research background. Conclusion: that doesn’t diminish the need
for or value of a non-thesis MNR; an applied research project or internship can be rigorous; it is
as relevant as an MBA or MEA, which are both non-thesis; many employees of government
agencies need the credentials of a master’s degree to supplement their experience in order to
advance. Both thesis and non-thesis master’s degrees increase critical thinking skills and
employability. Agencies need employees who can integrate disciplines to solve complex natural
resource problems.
5) Need to integrate colleges, avoid duplicating already existing programs, and move away from
protecting territory. Who is the university? It is us. We need to fix the old system to
allow/support interdisciplinary degrees, but how do we solve the issue of departments competing
with each other for dollars and protecting their turf? Department heads and deans need to
support interdisciplinary degrees, but the current administrative structure is inflexible and
resources are limited. Under current structure, NR programs generate $1.5 million through
Ecampus (by far the largest online undergraduate enrollment is NR), which is returned to
departments, and $800,000 onsite, with no money returned to the NR program. We need
structural changes. Meaningful change usually comes from groups like us, not from the top.
Timing is good with focus on creating web portal already. Name recognition is critical –
marketing is tied to the psychology of choosing one degree program over another. PSM does not
take the place of MNR.
Action items:
1) The MNR Exploratory Group members are encouraged to suggest additional current courses
for onsite MNR degree.
2) Stan Gregory will be the champion for creating the web portal, with help from Ursula
Bechert.
3) Send a short paragraph to Susan ([email protected]) describing your current
natural resource programs, to aid in the development of a Category 1 proposal and the
59
development of an OSU web portal and online advice to help students and parents understand
available choices in NR courses and programs.
4) MNR Exploratory Group standing meeting is every Monday at 10 am in Richardson 109B.
All are welcome to attend. Most of group is available to attend on August 20. Bring ideas.
60
Master of Natural Resources Exploratory Group
Summary of 8/20/2007 Meeting
Present: Paul Doescher, Steve Radosevich, Ursula Bechert, Badege Bishaw, Lynette de Silva,
Michael Harte, Selina Heppell, Denise Lach, Susan Morré
Discussion points:
ƒ Can a student get both a certificate and an MNR? Think yes, because can get MRM
certificate and then a Master of Science. (Paul will check with Sally Francis at the Graduate
School and the Graduate Council.)
ƒ Discuss course list and potential additions: capstone project has a big writing component, so
perhaps add a writing component in methodology (none currently online); Fisheries Biology
and some Communications courses are writing intensive
ƒ Who will advise MNR students? Consider cohort advising (Aaron Wolfe found it worked),
instructors, or ask provost to add FTE, merit, or $ incentives for advising; Ex: undergrad
NR has master advisor, Ecampus advisor, and program director helps; MRM program has
.25FTE advisor for 30 students
ƒ Need deans of all participating colleges on board up front and work together; then talk to
provost
ƒ Although other programs with some overlap, need MNR for marketing value, recognize
demand is there; job descriptions/career paths for NR specialists
ƒ MNR with concentrations in certificate areas GIS, SNR, Water conflict, etc.
ƒ Deans Bloomer and Francis recognize MNR could fill need for umbrella for
interdisciplinary programs with overlapping areas and diffuse NR offerings that need better
coordination/comm.
ƒ Could drop some existing programs in favor of MNR (ex: Environmental. Sciences NR
concentration)
ƒ MNR would be terminal degree like MF, MBA, M Fine Arts
ƒ Very positive response from USFS and BLM to online MNR idea
ƒ Undergrad NR has helped develop relationship with agencies, contacts, potential funding
sources to help meet their personnel needs; Land Grant University has obligation to meet
workforce needs, train competent land managers, is professional.
ƒ Over $2.5 million generated for university by undergrad NR students, need new funding
model for interdisciplinary programs to get student credit hour $ to support programs instead
of returning all to departments
ƒ Ecampus likely $75,000 for online MNR program development, many courses already exist
ƒ MNR will need dedicated director, personnel to teach and advise
ƒ Category I process – what budget needed to make it work?
Concerns:
ƒ Some programs already at full capacity, hard to find advisors among busy faculty for
internship and capstone projects (see suggestions above to address this concern)
ƒ Many grad courses taught by courtesy faculty, but advised by tenure faculty
ƒ Need budget line for office supplies/services so stop using Ecampus money to backfill cuts
(need more $ from legislature)
61
ƒ Maintain quality of existing programs, not overburden faculty, where young faculty best
spend time
Consensus: Overall really good idea worth pursuing, with support from coordinators of MRM,
MFM, PSM, SNR, and WCMT as part of potential concentrations. Next: identify important
mechanism, components and processes to move forward; meet with deans, then provost; identify
key faculty.
62
Master of Natural Resources Exploratory Group
Summary of August 27, 2007 Meeting
Present: Steve Radosevich, Paul Doescher, Badege Bishaw, Jim Johnson, Susan Morré (all
College of Forestry); Roger Nielson (Department Head, Geosciences); Mike Borman (Interim
Department Head, Rangeland Resources), Andrew Plantinga (Agricultural Resources
Economics)
Reiterate marketing value of MNR name and current demand from students, agencies, employees
ƒ Overview of Sustainable Natural Resources Graduate Certificate, 3-4 inquiries per week
about a MNR online.
ƒ Undergraduate NR degree most popular by far online and onsite. Numerous requests for
MNR from these undergrads.
ƒ Important to offer online and onsite, could be at same time.
Review of draft MNR degree components handout – missing online Economics, Statistics,
Communications and Writing components; consider developing online version of:
ƒ Bill Jaeger’s AREC 534 NR Economics would be logical for MRM, FW, Geosciences,
Forestry concentrations
ƒ Roger Nielson’s GEO 518 Technical Writing course
ƒ Potentially one of Gregg Walker’s communications courses?
ƒ Lisa Ganio’s Statistics course?
Discussed NR Distance Learning Consortium – joint venture agreement between US Forest
Service and Virginia Tech, has about a dozen participating institutions; currently 80 students
enrolled; students register at one institution, can take classes at any of Consortium institutions;
OSU was invited and is in process of joining Consortium. Of members, University of Idaho has
all-online degree, Virginia Tech partly online, Stephen F. Austin has NR Interpretation focus.
Ecampus has up to $75,000 available for development of online MNR, need to respond to RFP.
Category I is mechanism to use, and buy-in from Colleges at the dean level is critical first step;
how to convince Colleges that this is important? Adds value because:
ƒ Agencies are converting technical positions to professional ones, so there is need for
advancement training; currently Univ. of Washington is providing 2-wk. short training
courses for credit and getting lots of agency students enrolled
ƒ MNR provides training, new skill set with demonstrated demand for career advancement
and more sustainable natural resource management.
ƒ MNR is a mechanism to reach students who would not otherwise come to OSU.
ƒ MNR provides outlet for graduate certificate programs to result in a masters degree, and
money flows back to departments.
ƒ Ecampus courses return hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to university
administration from student course fees, and departments are told to use Ecampus money to
fund other dept. needs.
Details to figure out:
63
ƒ Need financial structure in place for program administration to sustain interdisciplinary
programs like this; perhaps add .25 FTE for program administration?
ƒ Need time commitment and compensation mechanism. Advising done by whom? Who
funds? Similar need as MAg and MF for capstone course advising. Existing concern about
Environmental Sciences and MAIS students: advising takes up faculty time from
department but only returns a few hundred dollars to department, only worth it if faculty
member is interested in student’s research. Potential solutions: Cohort advising; core 5credit course that underwrites cost of program.
ƒ What commitments are required from departments and provost to have a quality program?
All present agreed that the MNR is a good idea well worth pursuing. Paul will meet with provost
next month about better funding for both the undergraduate NR program and the MNR, and will
meet with Sally Francis of the Graduate School to see what is feasible.
64
MNR QUESTIONS FROM AUGUST 2007 MEETINGS
Prepared by Susan Morré
19 September 2007
1) Is there a good reason to develop a new Master of Natural Resources degree online and on
campus? Is there a demonstrated need for an MNR degree?
A: There is a large demand from agencies, undergraduate students in the NR program, and
online inquiries for a MNR degree. Marketing of the program will be facilitated by the “Natural
Resources” name.
2) Are there other related degree programs that this would duplicate or overlap?
A: There are other courses in various aspects of natural resource education, but they are diffuse,
spread across many departments, and there is no convenient web portal or other information
source that provides comprehensive information. We propose to develop a NR web portal that
will link information for all NR-related certificate and degree programs to help potential students
and their parents more easily find what NR programs are available at OSU. An associated online
advising program would assist in providing this information to students to guide enrollment
decisions.
3) Are online degrees something we want to offer?
A: On campus courses are often the first choice for those who can come here; online courses are
an important alternative for those who are unable to physically relocate here. We propose to
offer MNR courses online and onsite to meet expressed needs. It would be important for an
online MNR program to have a two week face-to-face component in the field.
4) Are there already enough MNR degrees at other U.S. universities?
A: Several MNR programs exist at other universities and are successful, but hardly any are
available entirely online. The two-week field component would differentiate us from other
universities. Those who cannot travel can do an internship in their own community. OSU is
losing natural resources students to Portland State University and we need to offer what is in
demand in the 21st century to stay relevant. We can offer separate degree designations in
different tracks (Environmental Science, Geosciences, Environmental Economics, etc.).
5) Are agencies capable of distinguishing between non-thesis and thesis masters if the MNR is a
non-thesis degree?
A: Both thesis and non-thesis masters degrees increase critical thinking skills and employability.
Agencies need employees who can integrate disciplines to solve complex natural resource
problems. A non-thesis MNR has value for several reasons: an applied research project or
internship can be rigorous; it is as relevant as an MBA or MEA, which are both non-thesis; many
employees of government agencies need the credentials of a master’s degree to supplement their
experience in order to advance.
65
6) How do we solve the problem of different colleges and departments competing for money
from interdisciplinary programs?
A: We need to fix the old system to allow/support interdisciplinary degrees. Department heads
and deans need to support interdisciplinary degrees, but the current administrative structure is
inflexible and resources are limited. Under current structure, NR programs generate $1.5 million
through Ecampus (by far the largest online undergraduate enrollment is NR), which is returned
to departments, and $800,000 onsite, with no money returned to the NR program. We need
structural changes. Meaningful change usually comes from groups like us, not from the top.
Timing is good with focus on creating web portal already. Name recognition is critical –
marketing is tied to the psychology of choosing one degree program over another. PSM does not
take the place of MNR.
7) Who is the university?
A: It is us.
66
Correspondence with the Curriculum Liaison
Subject: Curriculum Liaison for Category I Proposal: Master of Natural Resources Program
From: Bishaw, Badege
Date: Friday, August 15, 2008 9:54 AM
To: Boggess, Bill; Bloomer, Sherman - COS; Roper, Larry D; Francis, Sally K - ONID;
Salwasser, Hal; Green, Cary; Capalbo, Susan; Karow, Russell; Edge, W. Daniel; Borman,
Michael M - ONID; Blaustein, Andrew R - ONID; Nielsen, Roger; Kimerling, A. Jon; Lunch,
William M - ONID; Kaplan, Jonathan - ONID; Gallagher, Sally K - ONID; Iltis, Robert S ONID; Adams, Darius M - ONID; Adams, Tom
Cc: Radosevich, Steven R.; Doescher, Paul; Steel, Brent; Lach, Denise; Walker, Gregg;
Bradoch, Alfonso; Shellhammer, Gina
The attached Category I proposal describes a new instructional program leading to Master
of Natural Resources degree. This will be an interdisciplinary degree, offered primarily
online, that brings together specific courses from various departments in the College of
Forestry, Agricultural Sciences, Science, and Liberal Arts. With this new program, your
unit might be proposed to teach one or more courses.
In accordance with the liaison criteria in the Curricular Procedures Handbook, this memo
serves as notification to your (college/department/program) of our intent to make this
curricular change.
Please review the attached proposal and send your comments, concern, or support to
Badege Bishaw ([email protected]) by Friday August 29, 2008. Your timely
response is appreciated.
Please note that a lack of response will be interpreted as support.
Thank you for your time and input.
Sincerely,
Badege Bishaw
Badege Bishaw, Ph.D.
College of Forestry
Oregon State University
Corvallis, OR 97331
Tel: 541-737-9495
Fax: 541-737-1393
67
_____________________________________________________________
From: Francis, Sally K.
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 5:17 PM
To: Bishaw, Badege; Radosevich, Steven R.
Cc: Fisk, Martin
Subject: Comments on Category I proposal
Badege and Steve,
Thanks for sharing the draft Category I proposal for a new master's degree program in natural
resources. I have taken a quick look at the proposal and am generally supportive of the idea. I am
writing now to communicate my concerns. Martin Fisk is copied because there are a number of
policy issues about which he can provide advice.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
What modifications will need to be made in order to offer a graduate degree fully online?
What policies will the Graduate Council need to revise?
The option of a 3-credit internship is offered. There are many who would argue that 3
credits is insufficient to support any meaningful internship experience at the graduate
level. Some description of what such an internship would look like would be very
valuable.
Table 2, page 6, indicates 1-16 credits in CSS 599. I believe this should be 6 credits.
Keep in mind that students' programs will need to have 50% of all credits at the standalone, graduate only level.
Table 1, page 5, last row--what is a "certificate project?" This needs explanation.
Table 1, page 5 and elsewhere in the document, the PSM certificate is listed as a possible
area of emphasis. I very strongly object to this. First, this certificate does not now exist.
But, more importantly, this certificate comprises a group of skills courses in areas of
communication, ethics, marketing, and so forth. It is a very important set of skills, but is
does NOT represent an area of emphasis that would be academically sound as the
foundation for a master's degree. In my opinion, a list of true areas of emphasis should be
presented, not a list of certificates. Using the present approach suggests that this degree is
nothing more than a marketing scheme to springboard off these certificates. Instead, some
actual areas of emphasis should be identified. Then, a note could certainly be added
indicating that incorporating a certificate within a degree program is acceptable. The
latter is a very different philosophical approach.
Every master's student must have a major professor and a committee that oversees his/her
work. The major professor is the person who signs the program of study along with the
director of the degree.
Why would the major professor not be the person who oversees the case study or the
internship? Why would each student seek a "mentor" rather than be guided by the major
professor?
A program setting meeting should be required for students in this degree as is required of
the MAIS degree.
68
•
•
•
•
•
Only 15 credits earned prior to admission to a master's degree program may be included
on the program of study.
The Graduate School has no standard or requirement for the GRE examination. This
should be set by the graduate faculty who offer the degree.
The program should have an admissions committee and/or a curriculum committee.
The program must establish a graduate faculty. This needs to be explicitly defined and
identified--it can not be whoever happens to be teaching in other certificate programs.
Criteria for membership need to be defined and a list of initial faculty members listed.
Again, the program administrative FTE is very generous compared to the other
interdisciplinary graduate degrees at OSU. Perhaps your funding model will permit this
level.
These, in addition to the comments I shared when we met, constitute my current concerns with
the draft proposal. As it moves forward, I will discuss it more fully with Martin Fisk and let you
know if there are additional issues that we believe need to be addressed.
Good luck with this project and let me know how we might be of assistance.
Sally
Sally K Francis
Dean, Graduate School
300 Kerr Administration Building
Oregon State University
(541) 737-4881
________________________________________________________________________
Response to Dr. Sally Francis: Graduate School
Bullet #1
We do not have this information; perhaps the Dean of the Graduate School can inform us about
any possible policy changes;
Bullet #2
See clarification on page 5; Table 1.
Bullet #3
We checked on Extended Campus online course catalog for CSS 599 and it has 1-16 credits.
However, we modified the listing in the MNR degree program to allow 1 – 3 credits to fit the
number of credits required in that section.
Bullet#4
Some of the courses proposed in the Cat I proposal are independent graduate credits and student
will take those courses to satisfy Graduate School requirements.
69
Bullet#5
See amendment on page 5.
Bullet#6
Dr. Francis objects to include the PSM Certificate as area of emphasis. However, other Deans
and professors request that it be included in the MNR degree. We leave it in the present category
I proposal but expect further discussion. We expect that some courses taught within the PSM
program will began to be popular with students enrolled in the MNR degree.
Bullet #7
See addition page 8.
Bullet #8
See addition page 8.
Bullet #9
See addition page 8.
Bullet #10
This comment is not different than any graduate degree; Graduate School Policy (Reference
Graduate Catalog).
Bullet #11
See admissions Para 1, page 9.
Bullet #12
See admissions Para 1 and 3, page 9.
Bullet #13
Graduate Faculty; see addition pages 16 through 20.
Bullet #14
Funding model: Given the amount of administration the Director must perform, e.g. student
admissions, membership on each student committee, liaison with various certificates, liaison
with Extended Campus, chair administration advisory committee; we feel the load administrative
support expected is appropriate.
From: A. Jon Kimerling [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 4:04 PM
To: Bishaw, Badege
Cc: [email protected]; Bloomer, Sherm
Subject: MNR Category I proposal comments from the Department of Geosciences
Bishaw, I have attached comments from several Department of Geosciences faculty members who are
involved with the study of natural resources. I hope these comments will be of help to your as you further
70
develop your proposal. I know that several of our faculty will be happy to discuss this proposal further
with you.
Sincerely,
A. Jon Kimerling
Interim Chairman
Department of Geosciences
Department of Geosciences comments on Master of Natural Resources Category I proposal
This proposed MS program allegedly (if read closely) is for professionals, but this is not clearly stated
up front. Also, apparently this will be an online degree, but this is not clear from the proposal. On the
cover it looks as though it involves lots of colleges, but it is to be administered by 3 COF faculty (one
of whom is retired), and none of the other colleges are represented. A number of sections of the
proposal are incomplete.
It is not appropriate for the College of Forestry to create an additional interdisciplinary degree in
natural resources at OSU without more in-depth involvement in administration and student advising
with the other colleges and departments, including Science, Agriculture, and Liberal Arts. Shared
administration is not only needed to provide adequate balance for a variety of student backgrounds,
but also to make the program feasible. For student advising, we strongly urge the designers of this
new degree to use the model for the Water Resources graduate program, in which students select
their advisors from a range of colleges and the department of the student’s advisor gets credit for
advising that student.
The proposal does not address the impacts and implications of climate change on natural resources. In
fact, the word "climate" appears nowhere in the proposal. I attach a link to letter that appeared in the
journal Science earlier this year (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/319/5863/573) on the
idea that climate stationarity is no longer a valid assumption and (in the context of water resources)
that managers must recognize this in order to develop flexible and informed approaches to resource
management. While the piece focuses on water resources, the same can be said of forest, wildlife, and
other natural resources.
The impacts of the Masters program on the Water Resources Policy and Management program has not
been considered. The lack of accreditation of the proposed degree means that the two degrees (Water
Resources Policy and Management and Natural Resources) although they have similar titles, are quite
different in terms of status and possibly in terms of academic rigor.
How does this program compare with other similar programs around the country? There was an instate comparison but because of the Ecampus aspect, it would be logical to assume that the program
would attract out-of-state students. We need to know how this program would stack up against
others.
Why isn’t Geography listed as one of the Human Systems areas along with Sociology, Policy, Ethics,
Communication, etc.? We have grad courses relevant to the human dimensions of NRM also.
I think there is a grad certificate in Rural Sustainability, too, that could be a good option along with
the other certificate programs in the Areas of Emphasis section. I would reiterate what Brent Steel’s
letter says about this – check with Bruce Weber in AREC re: current status of this program: “There is
a Rural Studies Graduate Certificate under development as part of the Sustainable Rural Communities
Initiative. It would be an excellent area of emphasis for the degree.”
GEO 599 – Special Topics – is listed as an option for fulfilling part of the policy requirement. Where did
that come from? My Land Use class (423/523) deals with NRM policy, as does 420/520 (Geog of
Resource Use) – they might be better GEO courses to include than 599.
71
I think the Methodology courses students can choose from should include at least one qualitative
methods option – Jo Tynon in the COF teaches one I believe, as does Kate MacTavish in HDFS. If the
program is to do justice to “human systems,” students should learn how to interpret qualitative data
as well as quantitative data.
In terms of other similar programs across the state, it might be worth as least mentioning U of O’s MS
and PhD program in Environmental Studies (http://envs.uoregon.edu/), although the online feature of
the proposed OSU program certainly makes it unique.
The contact person for the GIS Certificate Program probably should not be Roger Nielsen but Dawn
Wright.
The Geosciences department would welcome a truly interdisciplinary degree in Natural Resources, but
the current proposal is excessively narrowly focused on existing resources within the College of
Forestry.
Comments submitted on behalf of the Department of Geosciences by:
A. Jon Kimerling
Interim Chairman
Department of Geosciences
August 28, 2008
Response to Dr. Jon Kimerling: Department of Geosciences
Paragraph 2
Proposed degree will be offered primarily online and to natural resource professionals (see page
3, paragraphs 1 through 3). Also see Student Advising on page 8. For administration see
Program Administration on page 20.
Paragraph 3
See addition of new course FES XXX Climate Change, Forests and Carbon Management taught
by Harmon (page 9).
Paragraph 4
The MNR degree is primarily online whereas the Water Resources Policy and Management
(WRPM) degree is in-residence. We believe conflict is minimal for this reason. The MNR degree
is offered to natural resource professionals who can not come to the OSU Campus for even a
short time, in contrast to the WRPM degree. Students could specialize in Water Conflict
Management and Transformation (WCMT) in the MNR degree. No conflict was noted with the
Director of WCMT certificate.
Paragraph 5
See letter of support form Evans; Virginia Tech. University (Appendix D)
Paragraph 6
Courses in Geosciences are suggested in the Human Dimension depth area. Four courses are
offered by Geosciences but two of these are suggested for use in methodology. How can a
student fulfill a requirement with only two courses offered?
Paragraph 7
72
As soon as the Rural Sustainability graduate certificate is approved we will include it as an area
of emphasis.
Paragraph 8
Regrettably GEO 599 is the only one of these courses offered by Geosciences that is online.
When other courses such as GEO 503 and GEO 520 are offered to online students, they will be
incorporated into the MNR degree.
Paragraph 9
We will talk to Tynon and MacTavish to assess their interest in teaching their courses online.
However, FS 523 and STAT 511 and STAT 512 are concerned with qualitative as well as
quantitative data.
Paragraph 10
The Cat I requests that State System Programs similar to the MNR be identified. As such these
are none.
Paragraph 11
We added Dawn Wright as contact person for GIS Certificate Program.
Paragraph 12
A listing of all online courses is provided in the Cat I proposal. College of Forestry represents
only 8 of the 43 possible classes student may chose from, i.e. 18%. Hardly a dominate
component!
From: Dr. Mary Santelmann [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 10:19 PM
To: Bishaw, Badege
Cc: Francis, Sally K.; Fisk, Martin
Subject: RE: Curriculum Liaison for Category I Proposal: Master of Natural Resources Program
Dear Badege, Sally and Martin,
Attached is my response to the Category I proposal for the MNR program. Thank you for the
opportunity to comment.
I would also like to suggest that it is important to circulate such proposals at a time when those
who may be impacted are on campus to read and consider the proposal. I know that several
faculty members
who might wish to comment are out of town during August.
Please let me know if you need any further response.
Sincerely,
Mary Santelmann
73
Quoting "Bishaw, Badege" <[email protected]>:
> Dear Sally;
> Thank you for your e-mail and suggestion. It is okay with me Mary can review the Cat I
proposal for MNR program.
> I have attached with this e-mail the latest revised version of the Cat I proposal for Mary to
review.
> Thanks for your cooperation.
______________________________________________________________________________________
August 26, 2008
To: Curriculum Liaison for the Category I proposal: Master of Natural Resources Program
From: Mary Santelmann, Director, Water Resources Graduate Program
Subject: Response to Category I Proposal to Initiate a New Instructional Program for a
Master of Natural Resources Degree
This proposal for an online graduate degree in Natural Resources (MNR) makes a good case that
such a degree is desired by many prospective students. The authors are responding to the strong
interest expressed by some Federal agencies in developing opportunities for working
professionals to use distance education in pursuit of a graduate degree. However, as it stands, the
proposed program is poorly developed, unlikely to succeed in providing the innovative
interdisciplinary education it aspires to deliver, and it does not have a feasible budget plan.
I have several serious concerns about this proposal. The first is that it does not have a cohesive,
well-constructed curriculum with introductory courses uniquely designed to address the need for
interdisciplinary training of resource management professionals. The proposed curriculum design
is an assemblage of coursework from various units with a vaguely described “capstone” project
whose success will rely on the good will and energy of prospective advisors who are presumably
to be recruited from among the instructors teaching the online courses these students take.
Lack of a substantial set of faculty members committed to advising students in this degree
program is another serious obstacle to its success. When students have difficulty in finding
faculty members willing to advise them, or feel they do not get enough time and attention from
their advisor, they become disgruntled and angry. Advising is a critically important element of
any graduate degree program, and more concrete plans for advising are needed.
Another concern is that I do not believe that OSU has the funding or resources required to
deliver this program. We are limited in the number of faculty members who teach online courses
and would be asked to advise these students, by the ability of our instructional faculty to take on
large numbers of students in existing online courses, and we are very limited in financial
resources available for administration of existing interdisciplinary programs. The online degree
program proposed here would stretch inadequate resources even further.
74
I am also concerned that the proposed degree may not meet our desired standards for graduate
education (no thesis, no overview core courses specifically designed to meet the needs of
students in such a program, and courses delivered almost entirely online). In addition, because
the coursework could be delivered entirely online, unless specific precautions are taken to ensure
the identity of the person completing the course, there is the potential for students who are less
than honest to receive credit – or even a MS degree - for work that is not their own.
The proposed curriculum is still relatively vague. I am not yet convinced that as proposed here,
this program could deliver the graduate education that students deserve or that employers expect
from someone with an MS from Oregon State University.
I have expanded upon these concerns below.
1. Lack of courses developed specifically for the MNR students: The authors of the proposal
make a good case for the need for innovative new programs that can assist graduate students in
learning how to work on interdisciplinary projects and teams (section 4d, page 13) however, the
curriculum described is based on existing courses, with one new course listed (FS XXX belowground Ecosystems), and a capstone project that is very similar to what is currently offered
through the Environmental Sciences PSM program or any non-thesis option in existing
interdisciplinary degree programs at OSU
2. Lack of advisors committed to advising students in an online interdisciplinary program
On page 3, the proposal states that students would select advisors from those who teach online
courses used in the program. Have the faculty members who teach these online courses been
asked if they wish to advise distance students in a graduate degree program? Only three core
faculty members are listed and one teaching faculty member – the remainder of this section is not
complete. How many students would these four faculty members be willing to advise?
Instructors are already expressing concern that they are undercompensated for time and effort
invested in teaching Ecampus courses. If the prospect of being asked constantly to advise
distance students is added to the equation, we may see attrition in the ranks of those who are
currently teaching online courses. In my experience, there are many students in the
Environmental Sciences Professional Masters Program and in the interdisciplinary
Environmental Sciences MS program who have difficulty finding advisors, even when they are
on campus and can visit prospective advisors in person. I suspect that unless specific advising
assignments are made when students enroll, that the MNR students will have an extremely
difficult time finding advisors and that in many cases, advising these students on their capstone
projects will require more time and effort than advising graduate students face to face, since the
project will be their only interactive experience with faculty.
3. Budget :The proposed program leans heavily on the Ecampus courses developed by other
departments and programs and requests that tuition revenue from MNR students taking the
course that is returned to the unit teaching these online courses be shared with their program
(page 16). I have several objections to this budget model. First, these Ecampus courses have
been developed and are being taught by dedicated faculty members specifically for the purpose
of helping fund their own innovative programs. The budget model proposed here would
undermine the funding of the excellent interdisciplinary programs we currently offer. Second,
this will quickly become an administrative nightmare for the administration of the budgets of
units that teach Ecampus courses, adding to the time and effort spent in administering the courses
for the sole purpose of taking resources away from the units teaching them. Finally, I am
75
concerned that existing interdisciplinary programs are already underfunded. If additional
resources are made available for interdisciplinary graduate programs, the best use of these
resources would be to develop and strengthen existing interdisciplinary programs.
In summary, while elements of the proposal form the nucleus of a potentially good idea, the
current proposal is incomplete, poorly conceived, and should not be approved.
Sincerely,
Mary V. Santelmann, Director
Water Resources Graduate Program
_______________________________________________________________________
Response to Dr. Mary Santelmann, Water Resources Graduate Program
Paragraph 1 & 2
We developed the MNR degree following the design of the highly successful Undergraduate
Program in Natural Resources. Students in the MNR program are required to take several (18
credits) of Core courses which represent integration among the human and biological sciences. In
addition students are asked to integrate both Core course information and Methodology with a
selected Area of Emphasis into a Capstone project that is administered by a graduate committee.
See 5, 6, 7, 8, 17 and 20.
The Capstone course for the MNR as well as others has yet to be fully developed. This will
eventually require a full CAT II proposal.
Paragraph 3
See addition on page 21.
Paragraph 4
The funding model as proposed in Cat I is under significant discussion by the Provost and Deans
of the various colleges involved in the MNR degree. However, we offer 3 possible options for
funding (see page 21). At this point we are unable to foretell the Provost and Dean’s decision
about online interdisciplinary degree programs since it is under active discussion now.
In addition, each graduate student in the MNR program will have a Graduate Advisory
Committee (see page 8). The person on the Graduate Advisory Committee that assumes the
primary advisory role will receive up to 6 credits of graduate tuition for that assistance.
Paragraph 5
All surveys about online verses in-residence instruction indicate that distance education is at
least as rigorous and as honest as in-residence instruction. This question is philosophically based
and should be directed to the Office of Admission and Distance Education.
Please see letter from Evans, Virginia Polytechnical and State University, on the value of
Distance education, the proposed curriculum, and need for this degree by professionals.
76
From: Gallagher, Sally
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 10:51 AM
To: Bishaw, Badege
Cc: Cramer, Lori; Lach, Denise; Steel, Brent
Subject: FW: MNR program
After further discussion with faculty in the department, I would like to add additional detailed
comments in response to the proposed MNR program.
The Sociology Department is supportive of the Master's in Natural Resources (MNR) program as
it recognizes students' increasing interest in programs that provide interdisciplinary approaches.
As proposed, the curriculum looks adequate (under Sociology, the Consensus and Natural
Resources course should include the SOC designator (SOC/FW/FOR 585). However, we have
two major concerns with implementation of the MNR as proposed in the Category I proposal and
one note about "truth in advertising:"
1. As described in the paragraph below taken from the proposal, it is suggested that the MNR
be funded through capture of Ecampus overhead costs of MNR students regardless of the
program or department in which the e-class is taught. While it is indicated that once Forestry
administrative costs are met, the various departments will receive their appropriate overhead, it
may take years until the administrative costs are recouped and it is unfair and inequitable that the
participating teaching units carry this burden. Overhead costs from Ecampus classes taught by
faculty in Sociology as overload (i.e., in addition to their normal class load) are now used to fund
programs and activities in the Sociology department including teaching assistants, travel, and
miscellaneous supplies (long distance calls, copies, etc.) that are not included in the budget we
receive from the College of Liberal Arts. Removing the overhead costs from MNR students
eliminates any incentive for including these students in our graduate classes. If this funding
model is approved, Sociology will not participate in the MNR degree program.
We propose that online course tuition be shared among the participating Departments or
Graduate Certificates according to the present Ecampus formula (Appendix A). However to
meet the overhead costs of the MNR degree we propose that tuition received from students in the
MNR degree be allocated according to student-contact hour and funds be removed by Ecampus
until overhead costs for administration of the MNR degree are met. Once administrative costs
for the degree are achieved, proceeds from tuition will be allocated according to the existing
Ecampus formula (Appendix A). An MOU is attached (Appendix F) that specifies this funding
agreement.
2. As described in the Category I Proposal, students will work with a "mentor" to complete a
project and project paper. As discussed earlier with the proposers (and included in the comments
from Brent Steel in the liaison section of the proposal), the number of social science/human
dimensions faculty who can work with students is very limited. There are several existing
interdisciplinary graduate programs including the MPP, Water Resources, Marine Resources,
and Environmental Sciences as well as disciplinary programs including Geosciences, Forestry,
Economics, and Applied Anthropology that all require faculty working in the human-dimensions
77
of natural resource and environment to serve as advisors/mentors for graduate students. It is
increasingly difficult to provide first-class educational experiences for all of our graduate
students and it will only get worse as programs continue to proliferate unless some attention is
paid to the need for faculty in these fields. It would be a disservice to new students to accept
them in to a graduate program, accept their tuition money, and then not be able to find enough
faculty able to serve as mentors/advisors. Maybe Forestry is willing to take the lead in a
campus-wide conversation about the need for social scientists and others working in the human
dimensions of natural resources and the environment. To participate in the program, Sociology
would need at least one additional faculty line to meet demand for courses within our curriculum,
as we imagine would be the case in other participating CLA departments, particularly Political
Science.
Finally, as described in the Category I proposal, the MNR is designed primarily to "assist
agency and industry professionals meet their self-improvement goals" and is not structured as a
traditional thesis-based Master's Degree. While we recognize the value of providing education to
a wide range of students, we also believe that it is critical to ensure that employers and others
understand that this MNR degree does not require the design and implementation of an
individual research project (the traditional outcome of a Master's degree). Programs at OSU and
other universities that provide professionally-oriented degrees label them as such as (e.g. ,
Professional Science Master's Degree) and we recommend that the Master's in Natural Resources
also be labeled as a Professional degree.
Sally K. Gallagher
Professor of Sociology & Chair
Department of Sociology
Fairbanks 307
Oregon State University
Corvallis, OR 97331
(541) 737-5367
[email protected]
Response to Dr. Sally Gallagher, Department of Sociology
Paragraph 1
We are attempting to resolve this issue about meeting overhead costs for the MNR degree. In the
revised Category I proposal three options are proposed. These include:
1) A funding model as initially proposed.
We propose that online course tuition be shared among the participating Departments or
Graduate Certificates according to the present Ecampus formula (Appendix A). In addition, to
meet the overhead costs of the MNR degree we propose that tuition received from students in the
MNR degree be allocated according to student-contact hour and funds be removed by Ecampus
until overhead costs for administration of the MNR degree are met. Once administrative costs
for the degree are met, proceeds from tuition will be allocated according to the existing Ecampus
formula (Appendix A). An MOU is attached (Appendix F) that specifies this funding agreement.
78
2) Overhead costs are shared by participating departments and central administration.
3) Courses offered by OSU departments that choose to not participate in the MNR degree will
not be included in the MNR degree and students will select such courses from a list proposed by
the Natural Resources Distance Learning Consortium for graduate education (see Evans letter in
Appendix D and course list in Appendix E).
Paragraph 2
We agree with your concern. However, the College of Forestry and MNR have little to do with
hiring additional faculty, so there is little that we can do in this regard. However, the Provost has
initiated a discussion the Deans of the participating colleges in the MNR program to consider
funding of interdisciplinary degrees such as the MNR. We have amended the Category I to better
reflect the role of instructors participating in the MNR degree. Please see page 16 - 20 of the
revised Category I proposal.
Paragraph 3
Please see page 3, paragraph 2. It is quite common at OSU and other academic institutions to
offer non-thesis Masters degrees. OSU offers, for example, Master of Agriculture (MAg), Master
of Forestry (MF) and Master of Business Administration (MBA). These degrees are not
professional degrees, although they are offered for professionals in specific fields. Thus, the
MNR degree is simply a non-thesis option for a Masters degree.
From: Lunch, William
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 6:29 PM
To: Steel, Brent; Radosevich, Steven R.; Bishaw, Badege
Cc: Gallagher, Sally K - ONID; Lach, Denise
Subject: RE: MNR Feedback
Steve & Badege:
I simply want to underscore and reiterate the points Brent has made. The idea for a Master's in
Natural Resources is an excellent one that draws upon OSU's strengths, so I'm supportive.
But as I said at our meeting on Tuesday, I have some reservations about another graduate
program drawing on OSU's faculty the natural resources / environmental area and disciplines,
given the limits we discussed. After I had to leave, Brent reports on an in-depth discussion of the
budget model and on that score as well, I agree completely with him. The amount your proposal
recommends for faculty who would teach online is less than is currently being offered in similar
programs and would not provide incentives for participation. It would also be a problem for
departments that have the relevant faculty, so at least in Poli Sci, I would reluctantly have to
recommend against participation unless the numbers change in subsequent iterations.
But keep at it -- the fundamental concept is sound; it just needs tweaking (and more bodies).
The Best,
Bill
79
-----Original Message----From: Steel, Brent
Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 7:52 PM
To: Radosevich, Steven R.; Bishaw, Badege
Cc: Lunch, William; Gallagher, Sally K - ONID; Lach, Denise
Subject: MNR Feedback
Dear Steve and Badege,
Thank you for meeting with us social scientists yesterday concerning the new proposal for a
Master of Natural Resources (MNR) distance degree. This is an excellent initiative that has the
potential to attract an enormous number of new graduate students to OSU. I strongly support
this proposal and believe OSU should develop the degree. However, I have some concerns about
our/my ability to participate in the degree program.
First, the number of human-dimensions of natural resources/environmental faculty (social
scientists) available to participate as faculty mentors or committee members is severely limited
due to the proliferation of environmental and natural resource programs, degrees, and certificates
at OSU and the limited number of faculty. As an example, this year I’ve been on and/or chaired
18 graduate committees in departments and programs such Geosciences, Environmental Science
(PhD program), Water Policy and Management, Marine Resource Management, Education
(environmental education), Master of Public Policy (MPP), and AREC. All of these students are
pursuing topics dealing with the human dimensions of environmental/natural resource issues.
There are too many students for the faculty we now have. I have had to discontinue working
with students in many of these programs due to work load. Our MPP program—which has an
environmental policy track—is growing rapidly as well further limiting the ability of faculty in
Sociology and Political Science to participate in other programs. The sustainability of all these
programs and many new certificate programs not listed here are in jeopardy given existing staff.
Second, the budgeting model proposed for the MNR is problematic. The two Ecampus courses
you have listed from Political Science (PS 575 and PS 577) are taught by myself to help support
the MPP program, which I direct. The MPP program has been entirely funded by grants,
contracts and Ecampus revenues the last 6 years (including Ecampus tuition and ERAM). I take
no salary for the Ecampus courses and use the generated revenues to support graduate students in
our program. Currently, I receive approximately $99 per credit hour for an undergraduate
student (instructor pay and department allocation) plus ERAM. Your proposal would pay $85
per credit hour for a MNR student with Forest Science taking the departmental allocation (I don’t
know what happens with ERAM in the proposal). This is not a rational situation for our
program and I would not participate in such an arrangement. Teaching overtime for no pay and
less revenue is not a good incentive. I would rather limit enrollment to undergraduates. I
imagine this will be the case for some other departments/programs as well.
From my perspective, this program would require additional human dimensions faculty for
committees and instruction. There are far too few of us to continue supporting all these human
dimensions programs and provide quality graduation education. Maybe Forestry could allocate
80
more faculty resources to support this program? Secondly, I would strongly encourage a new
budget model that does not rely on other departments and programs to subsidize this degree.
This is very problematic. I could go into more detail on both of these matters if you wish.
Finally, if the faculty and budget situations were resolved, I have several suggestions for the
proposal:
>Add Prof. Roger Hammer’s (sociology) planned online methods course to the methods
requirement.
>There is a Rural Studies Graduate Certificate under development as part of the Sustainable
Rural Communities Initiative. It would be an excellent area of emphasis for the degree (once
again, if a different budget model were in place).
I hope these comments are useful. This is a great idea with enormous potential.
Respectfully,
Brent S. Steel
Professor and Director
Master of Public Policy Program
Rural Studies Program
Department of Political Science
Oregon State University
Corvallis, OR 97331
(541) 737-6133
http://oregonstate.edu/cla/mpp/
http://ruralstudies.oregonstate.edu/
Response to Dr. William Lunch and Dr. Brent Steel, Department of Political Science
Please see comments in response to Gallagher’s letter. In addition, we have amended the initial
Cat I. to reflect 3 options for funding equitably participation in the MNR degree. Hopefully,
option 2 will be chosen by the Deans and Provost to fund the overhead costs of the MNR degree
by the conclusion of the Cat I process. In the event neither option 1 nor 2 are chosen by the
Provost, we intend to proceed with the MNR degree using option 3.
81
Response to Dr. Daniel Edge, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife
82
83
____________________________________________________________________________
From: Adams, Darius
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 4:45 PM
To: Bishaw, Badege
Cc: Adams, Tom; McLain, Tom; Hobbs, Stephen; Salwasser, Hal
Subject: RE: Curriculum Liaison for Category I Proposal: Master of Natural Resources Program
Badege:
Thanks for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. Several members of the FERM
department provided input which I am summarizing.
The administrative structure of the new program is unclear. Will it be housed in the Grad School,
as is the case with some existing multi-departmental graduate programs, or in some other place?
What administrative officials in the University have signed-off on this proposal? Has this
program, and particularly the funding arrangements, been fully vetted with the appropriate
college deans, the Dean of the Graduate School and the Provost?
The budget accompanying the proposal seems to suggest that long-term Ecampus receipts will
cover the administrative costs of the program, but who will provide the start-up monies and how
will they be reimbursed? How will overall Ecampus revenues to the program be split between
participating departments/college? The details of this arrangement need to be spelled out.
[Should update budget references to reflect the recent COF reorganization.]
Proposal needs to be clearer about specific agreements to create online versions of key courses
now taught only on-campus and the faculty who have agreed to develop these courses.
Reliance on available online courses limits the scope of studies, e.g., there is no forest ecology
course.
Details: "Sustainable Silviculture" course - there are some changes in the works that are not
reflected in the proposal (e.g., course name change and increase to 3 credits).
Darius
Darius M. Adams
Professor and Interim Head
Department of Forest Engineering, Resources and Management
Oregon State University
Corvallis, OR 97331 USA
(541) 737-5504 Office
(541) 737-3049 Fax
http://www.cof.orst.edu/cof/ferm/People/adams_d.php
84
Response to Dr. Darius Adams Department of FERM
Paragraph 1
● At this point it is unclear where the Provost wants the MNR degree housed. It is most likely
that it will be based in the Graduate School.
● We are still in the Liaison process. Those Deans in the participating Colleges will be asked
once the Liaison process is completed.
Paragraph 2
Please see pages 20-22 of the revised MNR Category I proposal and responses to Gallagher and
Lunch and clarification in funding of the Category I proposal. In addition, Extended Campus will
commit additional supplemental funding to help defray overhead costs during the initial years of
the program offering.
Paragraph 3
All courses listed in Table 3 are now being revised for online presentation. In addition,
professors for new courses have been consulted and have agreed to create a new course for the
MNR degree.
Paragraph 4
SNR 530 is taught by Dave Perry and is almost exclusively Forest Ecology.
Paragraph 5
We can not discuss in this Category I “changes that are in the works”. However, we know that
SNR 531 is currently in the Cat II process with modifications to make it a 3 credit course.
From: Jensen, Edward C.
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 3:27 PM
To: Adams, Tom; Bishaw, Badege
Cc: Jensen, Edward C.
Subject: RE: Curriculum Liaison for Category I Proposal: Master of Natural Resources Program
Badege and Tom-Although I don't have official responsibility for reviewing CAT I proposals, I have several observations on
this one that might prove helpful in constructing the final proposal:
1) It's still not clear to me where this program will be housed and who will oversee administration of it.
Unless I'm not recalling correctly, the COF (FEC) has not yet approved it (pending a business and
administration plan)--but perhaps circulating this draft proposal is preliminary to securing that approval.
Where will the $$ come from to support the proposed administrative structure?
2) If this is truly an interdisciplinary program , I think it needs STRONG letters of support from the
partners. The cover letter indicates that no response will be interpreted as approval; in this case, I don't
think that's good enough.
85
3) the proposal indicates in several places that "independent study" is part of the program. I'm not sure
what that means (in terms of official coursework) or how it will be documented. It seems to me that it
could fall under: 501, 505, 506, or 510 (and perhaps others), but each of these has a separate and
distinct meaning--and some are used differently in different departments. Also there's language about "3
credits can be satisfied by either an internship or up to a 6-credit certificate project" that is not clear to
me.
4) The degree requires student group work. How will student group work be facilitated via distance?
5) One statement says "none of the programs offered by OSU provide graduate-level curricula in natural
resources." I think I know what you mean, but I think many others could object to this particular
characterization.
6) course choices in "ecology and production" seem too limited
7) MNR 506--since courses are offered by departments, what department will offer this? Whose
curriculum committee will oversee it (and any other MNR courses that might be proposed)?
8) learning outcomes: vary in quality and measurability. I don't thin they're sufficient to pass muster of the
Curriculum Council.
9) most web links to certificate programs don't take the reader directly to the appropriate certificate
programs, but rather to a more generic site that needs to be waded through to find the right link.
Hope some of this helps. --Ed
Dr. Edward C. Jensen
Associate Dean for Academic Affairs
College of Forestry
Oregon State University
Corvallis, OR 97331
e-mail: [email protected]
Phone: 541-737-2519
FAX: 541-737-2668
____________________________________________________________________________________
Response to Dr. Edward Jensen, COF
Paragraph 1
See response to Adams letter
Paragraph 2
See response to Adams letter
Paragraph 3
Please see response to Francis letter and modification in Category I proposal, page 5.
Paragraph 4
Doesn’t require student group work; where did you get that notion?
Paragraph 5
There are currently no online graduate degrees offered at OSU, other than certificates.
86
Paragraph 6
There are 18 courses in the Ecology and Production; we think this is sufficient for the students to
choose from.
Paragraph 7
Courses are also offered by programs. This course will have its own designator MNR 506.
Paragraph 8
This is a Category II matter (course context); not one of Cat I, which pertains to curriculum.
Paragraph 9
Will check to be sure direct links are provided where available.
From: Jensen, Edward C.
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 2:58 PM
To: Radosevich, Steven R.; Bishaw, Badege; Adams, Tom; Adams, Darius; Doescher, Paul
Cc: Jensen, Edward C.
Subject: RE: MNR Cat I
Just so we have something to chew on prior to this meeting, here are several concerns--either mine or
those of others with whom I've spoken:
1) who at the College level signs off on this CAT I proposal? Will it be a single Dean regardless of
whether it's COF, or CAS, or COS, or CLA, or COAS... or all of them who choose to self-identify as
participants in the MNR program, or the Graduate School, or.....? It's not just a question of who signs on
the dotted line, but who takes responsibility for fully reviewing the program. The answer is not clear to me
(but perhaps it is to others).
2) who will provide administration and support for this program and where will the $$ come from and how
will they be allocated to those who actually mentor students and teach classes? I've heard that it may be
centered in the Graduate School, but I'm not really sure what that means in terms of actual work to be
done. Has this been determined yet? The NR undergrad program continues to struggle with these issues
and I think they should be resolved for MNR before it moves through the CAT I process.
3) I've heard a number of folks express concerns over the apparent rigor of the program.
•
•
•
Many (perhaps most) of the courses do not have prerequisites--and this seems different from
most graduate programs. Is this a correct perception? If it makes sense for this program, let's
discuss why so that we're on the same page. What I've heard so far is that it will discourage
prospective students from entering the program, but is that sufficient rationale? With few
prerequisites, it causes people to ask what distinguishes this from an undergrad program (don't
shoot the messenger--I'm just relaying what I've heard from others).
I don't recall seeing any minimum qualifications for entry into the program (other than a BA/BS
and appropriate grades, and perhaps GREs). For example, will entering students either be
expected to have, or develop once admitted, some set of "competencies" in certain specific
areas--even if this means taking some undergrad courses?
I've also heard concerns that there's a high potential for a "mix and match" approach to selecting
courses based on a limited number of choices--and that this may leave major holes in the
background of graduates. I think this would be good to discuss.
87
No need for an e-mail exchange on this, I'm just trying to seed the discussion that will occur next week. -Ed
Dr. Edward C. Jensen
Associate Dean for Academic Affairs
College of Forestry
Oregon State University
Corvallis, OR 97331
e-mail: [email protected]
Phone: 541-737-2519
FAX: 541-737-2668
_____________________________________________________________________________
Response to Dr. Edward Jensen, COF
From: Radosevich, Steven R.
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2008 11:50 AM
To: Jensen, Edward C.; Bishaw, Badege; Adams, Tom; Adams, Darius; Doescher, Paul; Bradoch, Alfonso
Subject: RE: MNR Cat I
Ed. Unfortunately I don't think anyone answered your questions fully at our recent meeting about the
MNR Category 1 proposal on 9/22. Thanks for your time and effort. I will attempt to answer your
questions now, or to at least provide my perspective.
1. We are planning to have each of the Deans of the various Colleges that will benefit from the MNR
degree sign the Category 1 proposal. This matter is also being considered by Provost Randhawa, who
may chose to place the degree in the Graduate School. (He favors this option, since the proposed degree
is an interdisciplinary program.) Of course, this option could be superseded if a College wanted strongly
for the degree to be housed with it.
All Category 1 proposals receive an in-depth review by the Graduate Council, Curriculum Council, Budget
Committee and probably some other committees that I can't think of right now, then it is forwarded to the
faculty senate and OUS administration for their review. All this is stated in the guidelines for preparation
of Cat 1 proposals.
2. All this is stated in the draft MNR Category 1 proposal. However, the answers may be obscure there
because we are forced to submit the Cat 1 according to a format that is provided in the guidelines.
The degree program is intended to be self-supporting from on-line tuition. The actual administrative costs
for the degree are quite small and are outlined in the Cat 1 proposal. Because we anticipate a "ramp-up"
period of 1 to 3 years before the degree is at capacity, E-Campus will provide start-up funds for this rampup period. The degree program would pay the start-up funding back to E-Campus as the degree
becomes fully functional. E-Campus has projected for us that this will take about 20 full-time or 40 parttime students. The SNR Certificate attained 20 students in one-year.
Three funding options are presented in the draft MNR Category 1 proposal for administrative costs of the
degree. Option 1 has received some objections from certain departments, notably in Liberal Arts (only 2
departments). For this reason, option 2 is being considered by Provost Randhawa. In the event that
OSU central administration does not provide a solution to the temporary funding of administrative
expenses (the degree will eventually be self-supporting, in about 3 years), we intend to proceed with
option 3.
Instructors who actually teach classes will receive $85 per student contact hour according to the ECampus pay schedule for Instructors. These funds can either go directly to the instructor, as over-load
pay, or directly to the department as instructed by that department. In addition, up to 3 units of pay from
88
MNR 506 will go to each student's mentor, who will be a member of the student's GAC (Graduate
Advisory Committee). Since the MNR degree is a graduate degree, each student must have a GAC,
which determines student course work, area of emphasis, etc. In addition, there will be an Admissions
Committee and an Advisory Committee for the degree program that will provide student admission and
oversight, respectively. All this is described in the draft MNR Category 1 proposal.
3. All of these questions (3) relate to course rigor ( of on-line courses) and how courses will be selected.
I must point out that all of the courses listed in the MNR Category 1 proposal are approved courses, i.e.
they have all gone through the Category II process. Some require prerequisites, some do not. It is not a
matter for any of us to determine how instructors teach their courses. Since all of the courses listed have
undergone Category II review, we presume that they all fit the standards imposed by the University for
course instruction.
All students, because the MNR degree is a graduate degree, are required to have a GAC. This
committee, along with the student, selects the courses of study. In addition the list of courses taught at
OSU is augmented by the courses offered through the Consortium for Graduate Studies (see appendix in
the draft MNR Category 1 proposal), in case an appropriate course cannot be found at OSU. The
requirement for a GAC is a University requirement, regardless of where or what previous degree is held
by the student. I hope you and others are not confusing an undergraduate degree program with the rigor
that is imposed by the GAC in a graduate degree.
If you or others need further clarification, we will be happy to meet with you again. sr
_____________________________________________________________________________
From: Lynda Ciuffetti [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 9:15 AM
To: Bishaw, Badege - ONID
Cc: Ciufetti, Lynda - Email Forward
Subject: Category I Proposal: Master of Natural Resources Program - please
read
Hi Badege,
I have attached comments for the Category I proposal for a Masters of
Natural Resources Program in Forestry that I received from faculty
members in Botany and Plant Pathology. Sorry this is a bit late but I
hope it will still be helpful.
Best regards,
Lynda Ciuffetti
Comments on Category I proposal for MNR: Bruce McCune
Positives:
- Adds flexibility to OSU masters degree options
- Adds possibility for distance-based masters in natural resources
Negatives
- The curriculum seems light on methods; for jobs people need good training in
using tools of the trade. I see only 3 credits of this.
- The choice of core classes seems quite limited – some seem too specific for
the core: e.g., Principles of Wildlife Diseases and Special Topics in CSS.
89
-
(Nothing wrong with these courses, but I’m not sure I see how they are
“core”.)
No fire ecology in the core?
Graduates run the risk of having little depth in any one area – like a slightly
glorified BA degree.
Comments on Category I proposal for MNR: Mark Wilson
I have a few comments about the CAT I proposal for a Masters of Natural Resources.
The organizers invited me to participate in the 2007 discussions for this new program,
but I was unable to attend. I hope my comments don't now sound like sandbagging.
1. Some courses listed in the "core" often seem like a stretch to fit with natural
resources. Two examples are RHP 583 Radiation Biology and WS 525 Gender and
Technology.
2. The areas of emphasis largely describe certificates earned with 18 credits. The
exception is the Professional Science Masters program, which has curricula of 50+
credits. The proposal does not describe how students should cut the existing
requirements in third.
3. On page 15, the proposal states that "we propose that tuition received from students
in the MNR degree be allocated according to student-contact hour and funds be
removed by E-Campus until overhead costs for administration of the MNR degree are
met." I am not sure what this means in practice. I am concerned, however, that this
policy would decrease the tuition received by departments or instructors for courses not
otherwise involved in the MNR program. Those courses should not be penalized
financially for serving students in the MNR program.
4. Field experience seems to be virtually nonexistent in the current proposal. A spotcheck of the listed courses in the core showed only one course with a field component.
The special field experience noted in 2007 discussions ("It would be important for online
MNR to have a two week face-to-face component in the field.") is missing from the
current proposal.
The proposal should, at least, explain how its curriculum can be successful without tying
its content to the experience of natural resources in the field. Perhaps the capstone
course, MNR 506, which is described as a real-world case study, is intended to provide
this link. Perhaps the organizers believe that the target audience already has sufficient
field experience to relate on their own the online content to field conditions.
The proposal would be stronger, however, if it tackled these issues explicitly. I would
also be encouraged if the MNR program had a policy that its core courses will
incorporate pedagogic techniques that helped students relate their book learning to their
previous field experiences.
90
Comments on Category I proposal for MNR: Aaron Liston
I am director of the Applied Systematics in Botany track of the Professional Science
Master’s program. Since 2005, 5 students have successfully completed the program
and received a non-thesis master’s in Botany and Plant Pathology. One student is
currently enrolled in the program. Thus the program averages 1.25 students per year.
Students have taken 1-2 years to complete their degree, and there has been no
attrition.
About two years ago, I was at an initial meeting that eventually led to this proposal.
Ursula Bechert represented the Professional Science Master’s program at future
meetings, and I was not involved in the development of the current proposal. However,
I think the proposal is very worthwhile. In fact, I would like to propose the Applied
Systematics program in the Department of Botany and Plant Pathology be considered
an additional “Area of Emphasis” available to Master’s of Natural Resources Students.
In my opinion, the proposed MNR curriculum would better meet the needs of the
Applied Systematics students who currently take the PSM “Professional Cohort
Courses”. I also think it would enhance the Applied Systematics program by having the
current Internship requirement followed up by MNR 506, Master’s Case Study.
One significant difference between the Applied Systematics curriculum and the other
MNR areas of emphasis is that none of the core courses are offered through E-campus.
The required core courses all depend on the examination and identification of plant and
fungal specimens in the laboratory, and it is difficult to envision making these courses
available online. Would it be acceptable to have a MNR program that required on
campus courses?
Sincerely,
Aaron Liston
Professor of Botany and Plant Pathology
Director, Applied Systematics Program
Appendix I. Existing Applied Systematics Program Curriculum (51 credits
required)
Required Core Courses (19 credits total)
BOT 516 Aquatic Botany (4)
BOT 561 Mycology (4)
BOT 514 Agrostology (4)
BOT 565 Lichenology (4) or BOT 566 Bryology (4)
BOT 525 Flora of the Pacific Northwest (3)
Sample Electives (7 credits minimum)
BOT 542 Plant Population Ecology (3)
BOT 543 Plant Community Ecology (3)
BOT 540 Field Methods in Vegetation Science (4)
FOR 545 Ecological Restoration (4)
BI 570 Community Structure and Analysis (4)
AREC 534 Environmental and Resource Economics (3)
CSS 530 Plant Genetics (3)
GEO 565 Geographic Information Systems and Science (4)
91
Professional Cohort Courses (19 credits total)
PSM 511,512,513 Professional Skills Series (4)
PHL 547 Research Ethics (3)
COM 512 Communication and the Practice of Science (3)
PSM 565 Accounting and Finance for Scientists (3)
PSM 566 Management and Marketing Scientific Technologies (3)
PSM 567 Innovation Management (3)
Internship (6 credits minimum)
_____________________________________________________________________
Response to comments by Botany and Plant Pathology Department
Bruce McCune.
Positives--Thank you for the positive comments.
Negatives-• This new proposal lists 7 methods courses, totaling 26 units. All these courses are
offered on-line. It is, of course, up to the Graduate Advisory Committee (GAC) of each
graduate student in the MNR degree program to determine which course(s) will be taken
to satisfy the Methodology requirement.
• The selection of courses for each graduate student in the MNR degree program is
determined by the GAC. Courses listed in the current Category I proposal are all offered
on-line by OSU. This list is also augmented by the list of courses offered through the
Consortium of Graduate Studies (Appendix E). In the special case of CSS 599, the
appropriateness of this course will be determined by the GAC and depend on the topic
taught that particular term.
• FOR 445/545 is primarily about fire ecology. We could add FOR/RNG 536 Wildland
Fire Science & Management (4 credits, John Bailey) and FOR 554 Managing at the
Wildland-Urban Interface (3 credits, Bruce Shindler) if instructors are willing to adapt
existing courses for online offering.
• The Depth requirement is satisfied by at least 18 units of “Area of Emphasis”, which also
maybe a graduate Certificate. This amounts to 40 percent of the MNR degree.
Mark Wilson.
• The selection of courses of each graduate student in the MNR degree program is
determined by the GAC. Courses listed in the current Category I proposal are all offered
on-line by OSU. This list is also augmented by the list of courses offered through the
Consortium of Graduate Studies (Appendix E).
• It is up to the GAC to determine how specific courses will be added or cut from an
existing Certificate program (e.g. PSM Certificate) to determine an “Area of Emphasis”
in the MNR degree. Students could, of course, opt for the entire Certificate if they wish.
• Three funding models are currently proposed in the current version of the MNR Category
I proposal (page 21). We currently favor model 2, which is being seriously considered by
Provost Randhawa and the Council of Deans that will benefit from this program.
• We have addressed this issue explicitly in the Category I proposal (pages 9-12). Field
experience is not a requirement for this graduate degree. However, our experience with
92
the Sustainable Natural Resources Certificate indicates that nearly all students in the
Program have at least two years of professional experience. This experience is of great
value to all students taking SNR 506 and we suspect for MNR 506, as well. An inresidence requirement for face-to-face field experience is, unfortunately, untenable for an
on-line degree.
Aaron Liston.
We believe that the graduate program in Applied Systematics would be an excellent “Area of
Emphasis” for the MNR degree. Unfortunately few of the courses required by the Applied
Systematics Program are offered on-line. It would be up to a student that is in-residence and
his/her GAC to determine if Applied Systematics would be and acceptable area of emphasis.
While we have no objections to this suggestion, it would probably require a modification to
the current Category I proposal since the MNR degree is proposed as being primarily on-line.
93
Appendix D – Outside Support and Interest
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
Appendix E – List of Natural Resources Courses available through
the Natural Resources Distance Learning Consortium
106
Appendix E. Online Masters Degrees, Graduate Certificates, and Graduate Courses
offered by members of the Natural Resources Distance Learning Consortium
Downloaded 15 September 2008 from http://nrdlc.iddl.vt.edu/index.php
Members include: Virginia Tech, University of Idaho, Penn State, Stephen F. Austin University,
University of Montana, University of Tennessee Martin, and new members Oregon State
University and North Carolina State University. USDA Forest Service and Bureau of Land
Management are also members.
MASTERS DEGREES
NAME
MEMBER INSTITUTION
Master of Natural Resources
University of Idaho
Master of Geographic Information Systems
Penn State World Campus
Master of Natural Resources
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University
Master of Science in Agriculture & Natural Resources
Systems Management
University of Tennessee at Martin
Master of Science in Resource Interpretation Thesis
Based
Stephen F. Austin State University
Master of Science in Resource Interpretation NonThesis Based
Stephen F. Austin State University
CERTIFICATES OF GRADUATE STUDY
NAME
MEMBER INSTITUTION
Restoration Ecology Certificate
University of Idaho
Postbaccalaureate Certificate in Geographic
Information Systems
Penn State World Campus
Certificate of Graduate Study in Natural Resources
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University
Fire Ecology, Management, and Technology (UG)
University of Idaho
Fire Ecology, Management, and Technology (GRAD)
University of Idaho
Undergraduate Certificate of Achievement in Weather
Forecasting
Penn State World Campus
Postbaccalaureate Certificate in Community and
Economic Development
Penn State World Campus
Undergraduate Certificate in Turfgrass Management
Penn State World Campus
Advanced Undergraduate Certificate In Turfgrass
Management
Penn State World Campus
Certificate in Resource Interpretation
Stephen F. Austin State University
107
Postbaccalaureate Certificate in Geospatial
Intelligence
Penn State World Campus
Sustainable Natural Resources Graduate Certificate
Oregon State University
Courses
Course List
NAME
DEPT
INSTRUCTOR NEXT
CUS MEMBER
Introduction to Statistical
Program Packages (STAT
480)
Statistics
TBA
not
1
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Acquiring and Integrating
Geospatial Data (GIS 488)
Geographic
Information
Systems
TBA
10/2008
3
Penn State
World
Campus
Advanced Media and
Graphics (FOR 574)
College of
Forestry
Stephens
Williams
1/2008
3
Stephen F.
Austin State
University
Advanced Natural
Resources Economics (NRM
730)
Natural
Resources
Management
Mehlhorn
8/2008
3
University of
Tennessee at
Martin
Advanced Precision
Agricultural
Technologies for Agriculture Engineering
and Natural Resources
Technology
Management (AGET 782)
TBA
not
3
scheduled
University of
Tennessee at
Martin
Advanced Professional
Interpretation (FOR 580)
College of
Forestry
Stephens
Williams
1/2008
3
Stephen F.
Austin State
University
Advanced Soil and Water
Conservation Engineering
(AGET 720)
Agricultural
Engineering
Technology
Burcham
8/2008
3
University of
Tennessee at
Martin
Advanced Topics in Weather Meteorology
Forecasting (METEO 410)
TBA
8/2008
3
Penn State
World
Campus
Agricultural Management
(AGEC 671)
Agricultural
Economics
TBA
not
3
scheduled
University of
Tennessee at
Martin
Agricultural Risk Analysis
and Decision Making (AGEC
750)
Agricultural
Economics
Mehlhorn
1/2009
University of
Tennessee at
Martin
3
108
Alternative Forest Products
( SNR 533)
Ecampus
TBA
1/2009
Applied Multivariate
Statistical Analysis (STAT
505)
Statistics
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Basic Beliefs and Ethics in
Natural Resources ( SNR
522)
Ecampus
multiple
sections
9/2008
1
Oregon State
University
Cartography and
Visualization (GIS 486)
Geographic
Information
Systems
TBA
7/2008
3
Penn State
World
Campus
Colloquium (TURF 490)
Crop & Soil
Sciences
TBA
not
1
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Community and Economic
Development and
Leadership (CEDEV 500)
Community and multiple
Economic
sections
Development
8/2008
3
Penn State
World
Campus
Comprehensive Nutrient
Management Planning &
System Design (AGET 760)
Agricultural
Engineering
Technology
1/2009
3
University of
Tennessee at
Martin
Conflict Resolution and
Negotiation (CEDEV 404)
Community and TBA
Economic
Development
not
3.0
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Consensus and NR Issues (
SOC 485)
Ecampus
TBA
6/2009
3
Oregon State
University
Conservation Ecology (NR
5724)
Natural
Resources
Program
Trauger
1/2009
3
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute and
State
University
Curriculum-Based
Interpretive Programs (FOR
571)
College of
Forestry
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Stephen F.
Austin State
University
Ecological Economics (NR
5984)
Natural
Resources
Program
Czech
1/2009
3
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute and
State
University
Ecological Principles of
Ecampus
multiple
1/2009
3
Oregon State
Burcham
1
Oregon State
University
109
Sustainable Natural
Resources ( SNR 530)
sections
University
Ecological Restoration (
FOR 445)
Ecampus
multiple
sections
9/2008
4
Oregon State
University
Ecology (RNGE 221)
Rangeland
Ecology &
Management
TBA
8/2008
3
University of
Idaho
Economic and Social Issues
in Forest Recreation
Development (FOR 590)
Forestry
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Northern
Arizona
University
Economics of Sustainable
Natural Resource
Management ( SNR 521)
none specified
multiple
sections
9/2008
Oregon State
University
Environmental Applications
of GIS (GIS 487)
Geographic
Information
Systems
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Environmental Case Studies Ecampus
( ENSC 479)
TBA
9/2008
3
Oregon State
University
Environmental Ethics (NR
5194)
Natural
Resources
Program
Plyler
1/2009
3
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute and
State
University
Environmental History of
the United States ( HST
481)
Ecampus
TBA
9/2008
3
Oregon State
University
Environmental Law ( AREC
532)
Ecampus
TBA
4/2009
4
Oregon State
University
Environmental Philosophy
(ENVS 552)
Environmental
Science
TBA
not
3
scheduled
University of
Idaho
Environmental Philosophy
(ENVS 452)
Environmental
Science
TBA
5/2008
3
University of
Idaho
Field-Based Interpretive
Programs (FOR 570)
College of
Forestry
Coble
1/2008
3
Stephen F.
Austin State
University
TBA
not
1
scheduled
University of
Idaho
Fire Regime Condition Class Forest
(FOR 530)
Resources
3
110
Foundations of Federal Land Natural
Management (NR 5684)
Resources
Program
Evans
8/2008
Fundamentals of Mesoscale
Weather Forecasting
(METEO 361)
Meteorology
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Fundamentals of Tropical
Forecasting (METEO 241)
Meteorology
TBA
8/2008
Penn State
World
Campus
Geographic Foundations of
Geospatial Intelligence
(GEOG 497G)
Geography
TBA
not
3.0
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Geographic Information
Systems for the Geospatial
Intelligence Professional
(GEOG 884)
Geography
TBA
not
3.0
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Geographical Information
Analysis (GIS 586)
Geographic
Information
Systems
TBA
7/2008
3
Penn State
World
Campus
Geospatial System Analysis
and Design (GIS 583)
Geographic
Information
Systems
TBA
10/2008
3
Penn State
World
Campus
Geospatial Technology
Project Management (GIS
584)
Geographic
Information
Systems
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
GIS Application
Development (GIS 489)
Geographic
Information
Systems
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
GIS Applications in Fire
Ecology (RNGE 404)
Rangeland
Ecology &
Management
TBA
not
1
scheduled
University of
Idaho
GIS Applications in Natural
Resources (NR 402)
Natural
Resources
TBA
8/2008
1
University of
Idaho
GIS Database Development
(GIS 484)
Geographic
Information
Systems
TBA
7/2008
3
Penn State
World
Campus
GIS for Analysis of Health
Geographic
TBA
4/2008
3
Penn State
3
3
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute and
State
University
111
(GIS 497K)
Information
Systems
World
Campus
GIS Programming and
Customization (GIS 485)
Geographic
Information
Systems
multiple
sections
7/2008
3
Penn State
World
Campus
Global Issues in Natural
Resources (NR 5114)
Natural
Resources
Program
Hammett
8/2009
3
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute and
State
University
GPS Modernization for
Geospatial Professionals
(GIS 497I)
Geographic
Information
Systems
TBA
not
1
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Grazing Management
Techniques (PLSC 675)
Plant Science
Joost
1/2010
3
University of
Tennessee at
Martin
Human
Dimension/Restoration
Ecology (CSS 572)
Conservation
Social Sciences
TBA
1/2009
3
University of
Idaho
Human Dimensions of
Natural Resources (NR
5984)
Natural
Resources
Program
Lindsey
1/2009
3
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute and
State
University
Hydrologic Applications of
GIS and Remote Sensing
(GEOG 424)
Geography
TBA
not
3
scheduled
University of
Idaho
Independent Project in
Natural Resource
Sustainability ( SNR 506)
Ecampus
multiple
sections
9/2008
2
Oregon State
University
Independent Studies-GIS
(GIS 496)
Geographic
Information
Systems
TBA
10/2008
2
Penn State
World
Campus
Individual Project Work
(GIS 596C)
Geographic
Information
Systems
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Individual Studies (CEDEV
596)
Community and TBA
Economic
Development
not
3
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
112
Individual Studies-- Peer
Review (GIS 596A)
Geographic
Information
Systems
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Individual Studies-Capstone Project (GIS
596B)
Geographic
Information
Systems
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Interdisciplinary Recreation
Planning (NR 5644)
Natural
Resources
Program
Leopold
8/2008
3
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute and
State
University
International Environmental Environmental
Issues Seminar (ENVS 225) Science
TBA
not
3
scheduled
University of
Idaho
Internship Supervision and
Mentoring (GIS 495C)
TBA
not
1
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Internship--Turfgrass (TURF Crop & Soil
495)
Sciences
TBA
not
1-3
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Interpretive Leadership
(FOR 573)
College of
Forestry
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Stephen F.
Austin State
University
Interpretive Planning (FOR
572)
College of
Forestry
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Stephen F.
Austin State
University
Interpretive Research and
Evaluation (FOR 569)
College of
Forestry
Coble
1/2008
3
Stephen F.
Austin State
University
Interpretive Writing (FOR
568)
College of
Forestry
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Stephen F.
Austin State
University
Introduction to Multi-Sensor Geography
Data Fusion (GEOG 885)
TBA
not
3.0
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Introduction to Statistical
Program Packages (STAT
480)
Statistics
TBA
not
1.0
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Landcare (NR 5984)
Natural
Resources
Robertson
5/2008
Virginia
Polytechnic
Geographic
Information
Systems
3
113
Program
Leadership Development (
AG 521)
Ecampus
Institute and
State
University
TBA
1/2009
3
Oregon State
University
Management of Interpretive Park and
Resources (PRAD 760)
Recreation
Administration
Smartt
8/2008
3
University of
Tennessee at
Martin
Management of Interpretive Natural
Resources (NRM 760)
Resources
Management
Smartt
8/2008
3
University of
Tennessee at
Martin
Management of Recreation College of
Resources (RECM/FOR 495) Forestry and
Conservation
TBA
not
3
scheduled
University of
Montana
Managing the Wilderness
Resource (RECM/FOR 472)
College of
Forestry and
Conservation
TBA
not
4
scheduled
University of
Montana
Modern Wildlife
Management (NR 5984)
Natural
Resources
Program
Evans
1/2009
3
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute and
State
University
Natural Resource
Economics and Policy (
AREC 351)
Ecampus
TBA
9/2008
3
Oregon State
University
Natural Resources and
Community Values ( ANTH
481)
Ecampus
TBA
9/2008
3
Oregon State
University
Natural Resources
Natural
Communication Applications Resources
(NR 5854)
Program
Plyler
8/2008
3
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute and
State
University
Natural Resources Law and
Policy (NR 5344)
Natural
Resources
Program
Paul
1/2009
3
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute and
State
University
Open Web Mapping (GIS
597F)
Geographic
Information
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Penn State
World
114
Systems
Campus
Oral Interpretive Programs
(FOR 567)
College of
Forestry
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Stephen F.
Austin State
University
Outdoor Recreation Design
and Development (NR
5984)
Natural
Resources
Program
Leopold
1/2009
3
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute and
State
University
Partnerships and
Volunteerism (AEE 5154)
Agricultural and
Extension
Education
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute and
State
University
Planning Agroforestry
Projects ( SNR 532)
Ecampus
multiple
sections
1/2009
2
Oregon State
University
Planning and Decision
Making for Watershed
Management (CSS 573)
Conservation
Social Sciences
TBA
8/2008
3
University of
Idaho
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Population, Land Use, and
Municipal Finance (CEDEV
509)
Community and TBA
Economic
Development
not
3
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Principles of Community
Economic Development
(CEDEV 430)
Community and TBA
Economic
Development
8/2008
3
Penn State
World
Campus
Principles of Environmental
Toxicology (ENVS 509)
Environmental
Science
TBA
8/2008
3
University of
Idaho
Principles of Environmental
Toxicology (ENVS 409)
Environmental
Science
TBA
8/2008
3
University of
Idaho
Problem-Solving with GIS
(GIS 483)
Geographic
Information
Systems
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Penn State
World
Campus
Production of Biorenewable
Resources (NRM 722)
Natural
Resources
Management
Joost
8/2008
University of
Tennessee at
Martin
Planning GIS for Emergency Crop & Soil
Management (TURF 597G)
Sciences
3
115
Public Ecology:
Understanding and
Managing Human
Ecosystems in a Changing
World (PSCI 5364)
Political Science Robertson
1/2009
3
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute and
State
University
Public Lands and Realty
Principles (NR 5674)
Natural
Resources
Program
Evans
1/2009
3
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute and
State
University
Public Lands Valuation (NR
5984)
Natural
Resources
Program
Evans
1/2009
3
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute and
State
University
Rangeland Ecology (RNGE
459)
Rangeland
Ecology &
Management
TBA
8/2008
2
University of
Idaho
Reduced Impact Timber
Harvest ( SNR 534)
Ecampus
Kellogg
9/2008
Remote Sensing for the
Geospatial Intelligence
Professional (GEOG 883)
Geography
TBA
not
3.0 Penn State
scheduled
World Campus
Remote Sensing of Active
Fire and Post-fire Effects
(FOR 435)
Forest
Resources
TBA
1/2009
2
University of
Idaho
Restoration Ecology
Practicum (CSS 580)
Conservation
Social Sciences
TBA
6/2008
2
University of
Idaho
Rural Organization (CEDEV
452)
Community and
Economic
Development
TBA
3
not
scheduled
Penn State
World Campus
Science Based Fuels
Forest
Management Planning (FOR Resources
433)
TBA
1/2008
2
University of
Idaho
Socially Sustainable Natural Ecampus
Resources ( SNR 520)
multiple
sections
3/2008
3
Oregon State
University
Society and Natural
Resources ( SOC 481)
TBA
4/2009
3
Oregon State
University
Ecampus
1
Oregon State
University
116
Special Topics (GIS 597)
Geographic
Information
Systems
TBA
3
not
scheduled
Penn State
World Campus
Special Topics in Crop
Science and Soil Science (
CSS 599)
Ecampus
TBA
9/2008
116
Oregon State
University
Statistical Methods in
Agriculture and Natural
Resources (AGRI 741)
Agriculture
Darroch
1/2009
3
University of
Tennessee at
Martin
Strategic Management
Issues in Agriculture (AGEC
751)
Agricultural
Economics
Mehlhorn
6/2009
3
University of
Tennessee at
Martin
Sustainable Management of Ecampus
Aquatic and Riparian
Resources ( SNR 535)
TBA
1/2009
1
Oregon State
University
Sustainable Natural
Resource Development (
SNR 511)
Ecampus
multiple
sections
9/2008
1
Oregon State
University
Sustainable Silviculture (
SNR 531)
Ecampus
multiple
sections
1/2009
1
Oregon State
University
The Nature of Geographic
Information (GIS 482)
Geographic
Information
Systems
TBA
7/2008
2
Penn State
World Campus
The Turfgrass-Required
(TURF 235)
Crop & Soil
Sciences
multiple
sections
1/2008
3
Penn State
World Campus
Thesis Research (FOR 589)
College of
Forestry
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Stephen F.
Austin State
University
Thesis Writing (FOR 590)
College of
Forestry
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Stephen F.
Austin State
University
Topcis: Scientific Writing
and Presentations (AGRI
770)
Agriculture
Darroch
8/2008
University of
Tennessee at
Martin
Topics in Agriculture and
Natural Resources
Management (AGRI 77-)
Agriculture
TBA
1-6 University of
not
Tennessee at
scheduled
Martin
Turf and Ornamental Weed
Crop & Soil
TBA
not
3
3
Penn State
117
Control (TURF 238)
Sciences
scheduled
World Campus
Turf and Ornamental Weed Horticulture
Control- Horticulture (HORT
238)
TBA
3
not
scheduled
Penn State
World Campus
Turf Insect Pest
Management (ENT 317)
Entomology
TBA
5/2008
3
Penn State
World Campus
Turfgrass Cultural Systems
(TURF 425)
Crop & Soil
Sciences
TBA
8/2008
3
Penn State
World Campus
Turfgrass Disease
Management (PPATH 412)
Plant Pathology
TBA
8/2008
3
Penn State
World Campus
Turfgrass Edaphology
(TURF 434)
Crop & Soil
Sciences
multiple
sections
5/2008
3
Penn State
World Campus
Turfgrass Management
Systems (TURF 436W)
Crop & Soil
Sciences
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Penn State
World Campus
Turfgrass Nutrition (TURF
435)
Crop & Soil
Sciences
TBA
1/2008
4
Penn State
World Campus
Turfgrass Pesticides (TURF
230)
Crop & Soil
Sciences
multiple
sections
1/2008
1
Penn State
World Campus
Understanding Weather
Forecasting (METEO 101)
Meteorology
TBA
8/2008
3
Penn State
World Campus
Urban Ecology (NR 5634)
Natural
Resources
Program
Robertson
8/2008
3
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute and
State
University
Urban Wildlife (NR 5424)
Natural
Resources
Program
Lindsey
8/2008
3
Virginia
Polytechnic
Institute and
State
University
Virtual Field Exercise for the Geography
Geospatial Intelligence
Professional (GEOG 889)
TBA
not
2.0 Penn State
scheduled
World Campus
Watershed
Science/Management (FOR
462)
Forest
Resources
TBA
8/2008
Wetland Science (SOIL
Soil Science
Gale
1/2009
3
University of
Idaho
University of
118
630)
Tennessee at
Martin
Wetlands Restoration (FISH Fish and Wildlife TBA
540)
Resources
9/2008
3
University of
Idaho
Wilderness in the American
Context (RECM/FOR 471)
College of
Forestry and
Conservation
TBA
not
4
scheduled
University of
Montana
Wilderness Management
Planning (RECM/FOR 474)
College of
Forestry and
Conservation
TBA
3
not
scheduled
University of
Montana
Wildland Fire Ecology ( FW
446)
Ecampus
multiple
sections
9/2008
3
Oregon State
University
Wildland Fire Ecology ( FOR
446)
Ecampus
TBA
not
3
scheduled
Oregon State
University
Wildland Fire Management
and Ecology (FOR 426)
Forest
Resources
TBA
8/2008
3
University of
Idaho
Wildland Restoration
Ecology (RNGE 440)
Rangeland
Ecology &
Management
TBA
1/2009
3
University of
Idaho
Wildlife in Agricultural
Ecosystems ( FW 435)
Ecampus
TBA
9/2008
3
Oregon State
University
119
Appendix F: MOU between CoF and E-Campus
120
MOU for new Online Program Development between
OSU College of Forestry, Forest Science Department
and OSU Extended Campus
Natural Resources Masters Degree
OSU Extended Campus welcomes this opportunity to make this graduate degree available to a worldwide
audience. The Master of Natural Resources degree will be an important addition to OSU online programs
and will be an asset to students in many different areas of study.
Program Personnel
The College of Forestry agrees to assign a coordinator to serve as the main contact person to coordinate
development of this degree with Ecampus.
Funding Overview
Total Funding = $131,000
Disbursed in two major phases:
Phase 1: $46,000 for program coordination towards the preparation, submission and approval of the
MNR Category I proposal.
35% upon acceptance and approval of this MOU and Development Plan, which includes:
• the detailed timeline for CAT I proposal submission and approval;
• assignment of instructors/course developers to each course;
• timeline for course design, development, delivery.
55% upon submission of the CAT I proposal
10% upon CAT I full approval
Phase 2: $85,000 for course development, coordination and program delivery (upon CAT I approval).
44% for course development coordination, disbursed upon full CAT I approval
41% for course development
• All courses to be completed within one year of the CAT I approval, with the initial
offering of the program during fall term, 2010.
15% transferred upon completion of the project and acceptance of the final report.
Details of Budget Transfer per Program Component
Budget will be transferred to the College of Forestry as follows, except where otherwise indicated:
Phase 1 - Category I proposal, submission and curricular approval coordination: $46,000
On signing of agreement:
35% of Phase 1 Funding = $16,100
On submission of the CAT I proposal:
55% of Phase 1 Funding = $25,300
On CAT I full approval:
10% of Phase 1 Funding = $4,600
Total Phase 1 funding:
100% of Phase 1 Funding= $46,000
• The College of Forestry, in collaboration with College of Liberal Arts, College of Agricultural
Sciences, and the College of Science will prepare and submit a Category I proposal for the Master
of Natural Resources towards successful completion of the curricular approval process.
• The Category I proposal will be developed during spring 2008 and submitted to the Graduate
School in fall 2008.
• Approval of the Cat I proposal is expected to happen after one year in fall 2009.
• Course development will start after approval of CAT I proposal (fall 2009) and will be completed
summer 2010.
121
•
•
The program will begin offering the courses during fall term, 2010 and offer the full degree by
winter or spring term, 2012 (Pending approval of CAT I).
Each course will be offered a minimum of two terms per year to allow for successful student
progress towards completion of the degree. The sequence and timing of course design,
development, and offering are delineated in the Development Plan below (Table 1). Preliminary
syllabi for each of the courses are to be submitted with the Development Plan.
Phase 2 - Course Design and Development (upon CAT I full approval): $85,000
Course development coordination:
44% of Phase 2 Funding = $37,250
Course development:
41% of Phase 2 Funding = $35,000
• Course development will start after CAT I approval, projected for fall, 2009 and will be
completed by summer term, 2010.
• Course development funds will be disbursed per course based on the number of credits for the
course. Course development funds will be paid to the academic department in which the course
resides. Funds will be disbursed once a course is deemed complete and up to standards, and has
been reviewed by the appropriate designee of the College.
• 7 courses @ 3-4 credits each = 23 credits total (see Development Plan)
• Funding available upon completion of each course = $5000 per course
End-of-Project Report:
Total Phase 2 funding:
•
•
•
•
•
15% of Phase 2 funding = $12,750
100% of Phase 2 funding = $85,000
The College of Forestry in collaboration with College of Liberal Arts, College of Agricultural
Sciences, and the College of Science will develop seven courses, begin offering the courses
during fall term of 2010 and offer the full degree by winter or spring term 2012. Each course will
be offered a minimum of two terms per year. The sequence and timing of course design,
development, and offering are delineated in the Development Plan below. Preliminary syllabi for
each of the courses are to be submitted with the Development Plan.
Courses will be collaboratively planned, designed, and developed by the content providing
faculty (Course Developer) or their representatives and the Ecampus Project Development and
Training unit (PDT). The Ecampus contact for course development is: Dianna Fisher, Director
of Project Development and Training [email protected] - 541-230-4029.
All courses making up the distance degree will be focused on outcome-based learning and aligned
with the accrediting standards for learning outcomes established by the OSU Office of Academic
Programs. All courses in the proposed program will be developed using the best practices
framework for instructional design for distance education courses and programs, aligned with
OSU and national standards for distance education courses and programs, employing the
Blackboard course management system. Courses will be reviewed by designee(s) from the
relevant Colleges and Ecampus upon completion.
The Course Developer will engage in continued collaboration with the PDT from project
inception and will ensure course completion and approval of the course at least 2 weeks prior to
the initial term start. Completion status of the course is determined by the Extended Campus
Director of Project Development and Training. If the course is not complete in Blackboard and
ready to be taught at least 2 weeks prior to the start of initial term, the PDT Director will consult
with the Program Director concerning advisability of course cancellation.
As delineated in the existing MOU with the College of Forestry, Ecampus will provide (at no
project cost) basic course development and production including: instructional design with best
practices covering accessibility and copyright, project management, media development,
Blackboard course development, training, marketing, and on-going student and instructor support.
122
Use of Course and Materials
The Course Developer will have control of the substantive and intellectual content of materials subject to
review and approval of the Department/College. Course Developer shall receive credit as a named author
or a principal developer of the course. Additional authors may be added in accordance with their
contribution to the course and as determined by the Course Developer. Course Developer has the right to
remove his or her name from the course at any time, in coordination with the academic department and
Extended Campus. The Department can appoint others to teach the courses. Consistent with the rules of
the State Board of Higher Education, the Board owns the course and materials and OSU shall have the
exclusive right to offer the course, whether through internet, video transmission, IP Video, interactive TV,
or by other means, to any student at any location.
Sustainability of Program
In order to insure the sustainability of the Master of Natural Resources degree as a viable program into the
future, the Program will:
• Initiate discussions with the Graduate School, the Forest Science Department, the College of
Forestry, and in collaboration with the Colleges associated with the courses to be offered as part
of this program,
• Establish agreements for a formalized budget model designed to provide funding for reoccurring
costs necessary to support the Program and academic advising needs of the program;
• Summarize these agreements as part of the ‘Plans for Program Sustainability’ within the End-ofProject Report described below.
End-of-Project Report: 15% of funding
Please submit a final report after completion of the project to include:
• Description of the development process,
• Two-year schedule for continued course and program delivery,
• Student feedback on the experience taking the courses,
• Data on course evaluation,
• Faculty response to the development activity,
• Final expense report,
• Plans for program sustainability.
After submission and acceptance of the final report, the Ecampus review team will verify that all program
components are in place upon which time the remaining funds will be released.
Supplemental Funding
In addition to the funding defined in this MOU, Ecampus will commit to additional supplemental funding
to help defray overhead costs during the initial years of program offering, until the program achieves
financial self-sufficiency based on enrollment-generated revenue. The supplemental funding will be
provided to the Department of Forest Sciences to help defray costs associated with program staffing
comprised of a Program Director and a Program Coordinator. The terms of this supplemental funding,
including the amount of funding and its duration, will be delineated in an addendum to the overarching
program MOU. The addendum will be drafted upon receipt by Ecampus information on projected
enrollments for the initial years of the program offering, and once the program proposers have obtained
formal agreements/disagreements regarding revenue sharing from the various academic departments to be
associated with the program.
123
124
Development Plan: Master of Natural Resources
Spring
2008
Proposal
Submission
Winter
2010
Spring
2010
Summer
2010
Fall
2010
Winter
2011
Lead
Content
Expert
(Course
Developer
Jaeger
Design
Develop
Develop
Offer
Offer
GEO 518
3 credits
Nielsen
Design
Develop
Develop
Offer
Offer
COMM 524 or 522
3 credits
Walker
Design
Develop
Develop
Offer
Offer
FS 523
4 credits
Ganio
Design
Develop
Develop
Offer
Offer
New course:
Underground Ecological
Processes
3 credits
FS 545 or RNG 521 or
RNG 643
Cazares
Develop
Develop
Offer
Offer
Design
Develop
Develop
Offer
FS 548
3 credits
Radosevich
Develop
Develop
Offer
Offer
CAT I Process
Course Development
AREC 534
3 credits
Fall
2009
Proposal
Approval
(projected)
Design
TBD
Design
Offer
125