RYERSON POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC POLICIES AND PROCEDURES Policy Name: Liberal Studies in the Ryerson Curriculum Ref. No.: 44 Academic Council Approval Date: May 6, 1986 (Academic Standards Committee Report #67) Status: REVISED - SEE CURRENT POLICY A copy of Report #67 follows. The first paragraph on page 5 of Report #67 was amended to read as follows: Those programs that may thereby be required to increase their liberal studies component should understand that changes in program balance should be achieved through a careful assessment of all courses from all categories. Programs should be prepared to offer an academic rationale in support of such changes. The Academic Standards Committee will investigate unresolved disputes in this area and recommend appropriate resolutions. Note: This policy has been revised. The new policy is Ref. No. 107 "Revision of Liberal Studies Policy". Other related policies include Ref. No. 14 "Liberal Studies in Polytechnic Education: Development of a Tripartite Curriculum Structure", Ref. No. 33 "Program Balance", Ref. No. 64 "Change to the Composition of the Liberal Studies Committee", Ref. No. 68 "Temporary Exemption in Application of Liberal Studies Policy to Engineering Programs", Ref. No. 74 "New Structure for Administration of Liberal Studies at Ryerson", Ref. No. 109 "Implementation of Liberal Studies Policy", and Ref. No. 124 "Professionally- Related Studies in Ryerson's Tripartite Curriculum". REPORT #67 OF THE ACADEMIC STANDARDS COMMITTEE TO ACADEMIC COUNCIL APRIL, 1986 LIBERAL STUDIES IN THE RYERSON CURRICULUM 1. Introduction Over the past year a recurring issue on the agenda of the Academic Standards Committee (ASC) has been the role of liberal studies in the Ryerson curriculum. In the Spring of 1985 a sub-committee of the ASC was established to investigate various aspects of this category of courses, including its structure, the number of such courses contained within program curricula and several related administrative questions. More generally, it examined ways in which liberal studies can be integrated more fully into Ryerson's educational framework. The sub-committee consisted of A. Oatridge, Chairman (Mechanical), E. Aspevig (Philosophy), C. Eckhardt (Business), R. Goldsmith (Applied Geography), D. McKay (Early Childhood Education) and D. Snyder (Film and Photography). Their report, submitted in January, 1986, has been discussed intensively by the ASC since that time.
The final report now before Council contains recommendations which flow logically from the policy on Ryerson curricula that was established when Council adopted Reports 23 (February, 1977) and 41 (January, 1982) of the ASC. Report 23 set out the policy that all Ryerson programs contain an appropriate balance among the following broad categories of study, defined according to their objectives: Professional Studies: Studies that induce functional competence by presenting the knowledge and developing the skills characteristic of current practice in the career field. Professionally-Related Studies: Studies that develop an understanding of the theoretical disciplines upon which the career field is based, or which synthesize the diverse elements of professional study. Liberal Studies: Studies that develop the capacity to understand and appraise the social and cultural context in which the graduate will work as a professional and live as an educated citizen. Adoption of Report 41 established a bench mark that for purposes of diploma and degree program design and evaluation the following programs balance ranges (shall) be regarded as guidelines: Professional Studies 50-75% Professionally-related Studies 10-40% Liberal Studies 8-20% Reports "3 and 41 both recognized the contribution that liberal studies make towards the enhancement of the professional competence of graduates and the development of analytical and critical abilities and such personal attributes such; as leadership, and adaptability. Neither report, however, dealt to any extent with the type of curriculum structure that would most effectively accomplish these goals. They touched only lightly on questions of course content, distribution of courses among disciplines, and packaging of courses in such a way that truly integrated programs would be generated. These areas have been the focus of ASC's current work. The ASC examined the existing distribution of liberal studies in Ryerson programs, and also the curricula of several other Canadian and American postsecondary institutions. This led to certain conclusions: (a) with only a few exceptions, the percentage of liberal studies within Ryerson programs falls within the 8% -- 20% range suggested by Report No. 41. In terms of actual hours of these courses, however, there is a rather wide variation among programs; (b) the trend at many post-secondary institutions, particularly in the United States, has been towards an increase in the quantity of liberal studies (or its equivalent) and/or towards a more formal structuring and articulation of this segment of the curriculum;
(c) Ryerson fits within, but frequently towards the lower end of, the range of comparable academic subjects in other institutions. Within this framework of Ryerson policy on curriculum and the data on curricula at Ryerson and elsewhere the ASC considered a number of specific policy issues. These included educational breadth and depth in liberal studies courses within programs of study, liberal studies formats which might facilitate the accomplishment of both breadth and depth, timetabling and resource constraint on access to liberal studies electives, measurement of liberal studies, liberal studies courses as prerequisites for courses in other curriculum categories, evaluation of proposed liberal studies offerings, and the possible inclusion of courses from outside the Faculty of Art". 2. The Minimum Requirement As noted earlier, Report No. 41 recommended that the presence of liberal studies in Ryerson programs be measured as a percentage of overall program hours. While this approach has enabled ASC and Council to get a broad fix, there are anomalies caused by the wide variation overall hours in our programs. Thus students vary in their liberal studies requirements depending on the program they are enrolled in. It is difficult to justify this variance in educational terms. It makes no sense to say that some types of students need less exposure to liberal studies than others. Inasmuch as the educational objectives are an Institute requirement, all students should have the same minimum exposure to this field of studies. Liberal Studies should be measured in semester hours rather than percentages. The minimum number of hours to provide this exposure should be 18 and 24 semester hours of elective courses for three year and four year programs respectively, with these hours normally being distributed evenly over the total program. The introduction of such an overall standard will enhance the commonality of programs at Ryerson. It will also be conducive to a clearer focussing of the role of liberal studies enabling them to be seen as contributors to both the depth and breadth of a student's total educational experience. It may be noted that the establishment of a minimum liberal studies requirement is in keeping with the prevalent trend in undergraduate education and that the number of hours proposed moves Ryerson somewhat closer to a comfortable middle position in the global range. Those programs that may thereby be required to increase their liberal studies component must not do so by simply deleting Humanities and Social Science courses from where they may already exist in the professional or professionally-related categories. Their presence there must be assumed to be already justified on independent grounds. Changes in program balance should be achieved through a careful assessment of all courses from the various categories, and programs should be prepared to offer a academic rationale in support of such changes. The ASC will investigate unresolved disputed in this area and recommend appropriate resolutions. The ASC has serious reservations about the current method of incorporating liberal studies into program curricula, as they are frequently seen as appendages to other curricular categories rather than as an integral educational component. While the current system may achieve some of the goals associated
with educational breadth, it does so at the sacrifice of depth within the liberal studies subject areas. A more explicitly structured program of liberal studies offerings would, in combination with a minimum requirement of one liberal studies course per semester, create more potential to contribute to both breadth and depth in a variety of ways. 3. A Basic Model The following outline or "model" for liberal studies offerings illustrates how a variety of academic objectives might be achieved. It seems to have become a "given" that both breadth and depth are essential in a true educational experience. It is less clear, however, what is actually meant by the terms. At Ryerson, a lack of precision about "breadth" has encouraged the assumption that as long as students take some number of courses in the Humanities and Social Sciences, they will be effectively and appropriately "broadened" almost regardless of the content and level of the courses, and their relationship to the curriculum as a whole. Similarly, it has often been assumed that "depth" is provided mainly by the program department, and is thus equated with "specialization". There is a large and growing literature which suggests that both assumptions are untenable. Breadth In recent years the belief has grown that the educated person is one who has been exposed to, and has participated in, a wide range of types of learning in addition to those related to direct career-preparedness. This is usually equated with the enhancement of long-term personal and professional development, adaptability, leadership qualities and personal satisfaction. "Breadth" in this sense refers not only to taking courses outside one's field of study; neither does it refer only to the ability to "understand and appraise the social and cultural context (Report 23); it refers also to the integration of courses which collectively expose the student to varied perspectives, intellectual challenges, types and methods of reasoning and analysis, and modes of communication. Depth In current literature dealing with undergraduate education, "depth" is usually assumed to overlap, but not to be synonymous, with "specialization". In addition to specialization in a particular field, depth entails a curricular pattern in which students are challenged by increasingly complex reasoning and analytical demands and increasing requirements to develop and demonstrate intellectual independence and creativity. These goals are inherently compatible with those of liberal studies, although the manner in which liberal studies contribute to their attainment would differ from that of explicitly professional courses. A well-formulated program of liberal studies will, in its own way, contribute to both the personal and professional goals of a student. The Format In diploma programs and four year degree programs, years 1 and 2 are devoted primarily to the enhancement of educational breadth. Students should be exposed to four semesters of introductory level courses. The balance between humanities and social sciences may be adjusted in those programs where one or other of these disciplines is already significantly present in the professional or professionally-related categories.
In three year degree programs, only the first year should be devoted to the breadth requirement. In certain instances, it may be appropriate for courses in disciplines from outside the Arts Division to be offered within the breadth requirement. In such cases, it is expected that the content and objectives of such courses will fall comfortably within the definition of liberal studies. The upper years of Ryerson programs (years 3 and 4 in four year programs, years 2 and 3 in three year degree programs) are to be dedicated primarily to the development of depth in liberal studies. There should be a distinct difference in the level of content and/or rigour of upper level liberal studies courses. All programs should contain an upper level elective package consisting of at least four semesters (two or more semesters for diploma exit students) which will provide students with the opportunity to pursue this component of their Ryerson education more intensively. Following on the earlier breadth requirement, these upper year studies will add a dimension of depth, either in a single discipline or in a broader field of study depending on the student's choice. The potential of these upper years studies may well be enhanced if the departments concerned were able to use small seminar style classes. 4. Timetabling and Resource Constraints on Access to Liberal Studies Electives Timetabling and resource constraints sometimes force liberal studies packages to be too restrictive in nature, and lead in some instances to "mandatory electives". The proposed new structure helps to address this by introducing a distribution requirement, involving different categories of courses in the first four semesters of study, followed by a choice of upper level elective courses. This structure requires students to choose introductory courses in different disciplines on the one hand and provides a choice of more advanced electives on the other. Ideally, the liberal studies electives packages will provide students in all Ryerson programs with a range of choices in both the breadth and depth categories. This is not to say, however, that student demand for elective courses will always be perfectly satisfied, and that students will never have to accept second or even third choice electives. The reasons for this include the Institute's responsibility to maintain an appropriate balance of disciplines within the humanities and social sciences, the year-to-year fluctuation in student demand (compared with the relative stability of teaching complements within each discipline), and the exigencies of timetabling. But insofar as the restrictiveness issue can be addressed through curricular design, the proposed structure offers significant benefits. 5. Liberal Studies Courses as Prerequisites for Other Courses As a general rule, liberal studies should not be used as prerequisites to mandatory or other professional or professionally-related subjects. The practice in effect makes specific liberal studies courses compulsory for some programs, thereby creating restrictive situations in some options, and possibly allowing some liberal studies packages to be too closely related to the professional content of these options (in other words, making them de facto professionally-related).
On the other hand, it could be argued that making a liberal studies course a prerequisite for another course with a different designation supports the idea that liberal studies have relevance beyond the confines of one particular subject or academic field. Thus seen liberal studies as prerequisites can be acceptable in an integrated polytechnical program, regardless of the specific areas for which they serve as prerequisites. At present, the practice does not appear to be widespread, and where it does exist it seems justified by sound academic logic rather than any arbitrary attempt to restrict student options. Inasmuch as it is not overly restrictive or being misused, we should not forbid it. The case should be considered on its merits where it arises. 6. Evaluation of Liberal Studies Offerings Within Ryerson there is a lack of comprehensive awareness of liberal studies offerings may contribute to the difficulty experienced in fully integrating the studies into program curricula. To redress this situation, the Dean of Arts should, at certain intervals, present liberal studies "packages" for the consideration of the ASC, in much the same manner as is currently practiced by program departments. This will enable the Institute, through the Academic Standards Committee, to have the opportunity to comment on the appropriateness of courses for inclusion in the liberal studies category. The Dean and Chairmen of Arts, with a representative from each of the other Faculties, will comprise a committee with academic responsibility for the selection of courses and the composition of elective packages to be recommended to Academic Council. Administrative authority should continue to rest with the Dean of Arts. Implementation There are two aspects to the implementation of the revised liberal studies model recommended in this report. First, programs whose curricula do not already meet minimum course requirements should undertake revisions to bring them into conformity. This should be done as promptly as possible. Any program which is currently undertaking curricular review should meet the liberal studies requirements at the same time. In any event, all programs should have completed this process and received Academic Council approval no later than Fall 1988. Second, the Dean of Arts should bring forward to ASC and Council revised electives packages which meet the requirements set out. It will be necessary for the Dean of Arts to schedule this development work in consultation with the Deans of other Faculties to ensure that the Fall 1988 deadline is met.