California State University, Fullerton
College of Humanities and Social Sciences
Program Performance Review for the
Environmental Studies Program
M.S. in Environmental Studies
Dean’s Summary Report and Recommendations
January 21, 2008
During 2007, the Environmental Studies Program engaged in a Program Performance Review
led by its Program Coordinator, Dr. Robert Voeks (Geography). Members of the Program
Council participated in carrying out a self study summarized in a report prepared by Dr. Voeks.
In May of 2007, a team of external reviewers conducted an on-site visit. The reviewers were
Dr. Darwin Hall, Director, Environmental Science and Policy, CSU Long Beach; Dr. Rachel
O’Malley, Chair, Department of Environmental Studies, San Jose State University, and Dr.
Richard Laton, Associate Professor, Department of Geological Sciences, CSU Fullerton.
Following the site visit, the external reviewers submitted a joint report.
The Environmental Studies Program was inaugurated in 1972. From its inception through
Spring 2007, 482 students have received Master of Science degrees in Environmental Studies.
It is a free-standing Master’s degree program, not attached to any one department, but housed
in the College of Humanities and Social Sciences. Without tenured or tenure-track faculty of
its own, it relies for its governance on a dedicated interdisciplinary Program Council with
membership drawn from departments in five colleges:
 Business and Economics (Economics)
 Engineering and Computer Science (Civil and Environmental Engineering)
 Health and Human Development (Health Science)
 Humanities and Social Sciences (American Studies; Anthropology, Geography;
History; Politics, Administration, and Justice; Philosophy; and Sociology)
 Natural Sciences and Mathematics (Biological Science; Chemistry and
Biochemistry; Geological Sciences).
Despite fluctuations from year to year, the data displayed in the table below point to clear
trends. The number of students enrolled in the M.S. in Environmental Studies declined from
102.5 to 72.5 (annualized head count) over a ten-year period, a drop of 29.3% during a time
when H&SS graduate enrollment rose 24.3% and University graduate enrollment rose 24.9%.
Looking at just the past six years, enrollments seem to have stabilized at about 70 students
enrolled. Similarly, the number of degrees granted each year was 42.9% less in 2006-07 than it
was in 1997-98, but in the past three years, that number seems to have settled at around 20
degrees per year. FTES has declined during the ten-year period as well (21.3%), though not as
much as the reduction in the number of students enrolled, probably indicating that students
currently enrolled are taking more units each semester than those who were enrolled in the
program at the start of the period. FTES has also stabilized during the past several years at
about 24.0. The question posed by these trends, it seems to me, is whether the number of
students enrolled in the degree program now is the “right” number, and whether the students
Environmental Studies Program
Program Performance Review
Dean’s Summary Report and Recommendations
Page 2
now enrolled are making satisfactory progress toward their degrees so that they graduate in a
reasonable amount of time.
Year
FTES
Target
1997-98
28
1998-99
27
1999-00
27
2000-01
28
2001-02
24
2002-03
24
2003-04
28
2004-05
28
2005-06
24
2006-07
24
% change -14.3%
Source: IRAS, CSUF
FTES
Actual
31.0
26.5
25.3
19.7
20.2
19.6
22.1
26.8
24.0
24.4
-21.3%
FTEF
SFR
1.8
2.0
2.4
2.4
2.2
2.0
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.9
5.5%
15.6
13.5
11.3
11.7
10.9
12.0
12.7
12.7
10.9
12.6
-19.2%
Students Degrees
Enrolled* Granted
102.5
35
102.0
19
85.5
30
80.0
20
70.5
29
64.5
36
67.0
28
70.0
19
76.0
22
72.5
20
-29.3%
-42.9%
*Annualized Headcount
SWOT Analysis
Most of the members of the Environmental Studies Program Council participated in an analysis
of the program’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT). The items that
received the highest ratings in each category are the following, starting in each case with the
highest rated item:
Strengths
 Dedicated interdisciplinary faculty (25)
 Curricular flexibility (23)
 Program relevant to a wide variety of career paths (21)
Weaknesses
 No full-time faculty dedicated to the program; dependence on volunteers (38)
 Lack of appreciation from home departments of participating faculty; inadequate RTP
credit for participation in Environmental Studies (19)
 Lack of systematic approach to strengthening and developing student skills for final
project (14)
 Lack of dedicated space and resources (13)
 Students weak in writing skills and research design knowledge (12)
Opportunities
 Discovery (by the public and by students) of environmental problems; “Green Governor”;
continuous media attention (33)
 University’s active tenure-track hiring program (21)
 Plentiful career opportunities for graduates (20)
 Creation of a department with an undergraduate degree (13)
Environmental Studies Program
Program Performance Review
Dean’s Summary Report and Recommendations
Page 3
Threats
 Lack of a constituency among faculty; no strong advocates (28)
 Weak ability of an interdisciplinary program to generate FTES and funding (19)
 Dependence on departmental willingness to allow faculty to teach in program (17)
 Perceptions of program staffed primarily by part-time lecturers / professional
practitioners (16)
 Perception of program as “soft” in sciences; credibility (15)
 Vulnerability to funding cuts (13)
Missing from the list of opportunities enjoyed by the program is the new Center for Remote
Sensing of the Environment, which, with federal funding, is in the process of being fully
implemented as a joint project of the Environmental Studies Program and the Geography
Department.
Self Study
The self study elaborates on several of the factors identified in the SWOT analysis in its
discussion of actions undertaken in response to the program review conducted in 2000-01. At
that time, several key recommendations emerged and were implemented during the years
following, but with mixed results.
Faculty Involvement. The self study identifies several tenure-track faculty hires made in
the College of Humanities and Social Sciences as an outcome of the earlier PPR.
Unfortunately, each of the assistant professors hired, one each in Anthropology,
Geography, and Political Science, left after a few years. During 2007-08, hiring tenuretrack environmental specialists is again a high priority in the College of Humanities and
Social Sciences. At the time of this writing, new assistant professors had been hired in
Sociology (Environmental Sociology) and Politics, Administration, and Justice
(Environmental Policy and Politics), and a search was in progress in Geography (Remote
Sensing and Environmental Analysis).
However, during the period being reviewed, participation by full-time faculty has been an
increasing problem. The Coordinator reports that 83% of the graduate classes offered in
Environmental Studies were taught by faculty whose highest degree is at the Master’s level
(contrary to University policy about the staffing of graduate-level classes). The program
has also been forced to rely on increasing numbers of lecturers to supervise the Graduate
Projects that conclude the program.
Advising. In response to the 2000-01 program review, the College of Humanities and
Social Sciences increased funding for program administration, advising, and clerical
support for the program.
 Support for the Coordinator, a tenured professor, was increased to half-time (from .20 to
.40 FTEF per semester).
 A full-time lecturer was hired as an Associate Coordinator, teaching one class in the
program each semester and spending the remainder of his or her time (.75 FTEF)
recruiting, orienting, and advising students in the program.
Environmental Studies Program
Program Performance Review
Dean’s Summary Report and Recommendations
Page 4
 In order to recognize, if modestly, the work of faculty in various departments who
supervise Environmental Studies Graduate Projects, the College provides a $400
stipend to the faculty supervisor upon the student’s successful completion of the
project.
 The College hired a second full-time staff member in the clerical office serving the
Environmental Studies Program (together with the Geography Department and the
Latin American Studies Program) and, in addition, provided funding to the program for
a Graduate Assistant to work with the Coordinator and Associate Coordinator
Curriculum. To address several of the curricular issues that were identified in the prior
program review, the Coordinator created a consistent schedule of the Program’s core
courses, several of which were thoroughly revised and updated with specific attention given
to the writing and research methods that students must draw on in the program and in
completing their final projects. Students are now required to create a study plan and
become “classified” graduate students in their first semester in the program. The
Coordinator works with participating departments to ensure the regular offering of a diverse
mix of elective courses for students in the program. Finally, Environmental Studies courses
are now offered at both 4:00 pm and 7:00 pm so that students can take two three-unit
classes per semester with only one evening per week on campus.
The self study concludes by exploring three options: taking no action, hiring joint-appointments
for the program, and developing an undergraduate major in Environmental Studies, for which
CSU Long Beach and San Jose State University offer models.
Assessment Report
The faculty of the Environmental Studies Program have stated the desired outcomes of the
program in a set of clear learning goals that describe the skills and knowledge students should
have acquired by completing the program. Currently, student progress in accomplishing the
program’s learning goals is assessed primarily through the research project that culminates the
program. In the projects, students are to demonstrate the understanding of environmental
problems and the skills in research, analysis, and writing that are the central outcomes of the
program. For the project to function more fully in this way, the program faculty need to create
a systematic way of gathering and correlating data about student performance on the project, so
that they can use that data as the basis for making program improvements. In addition, the
program review self study identifies two other assessment strategies under consideration: an
alumni survey that would combine student assessments of the program with reports on how
they have used their degrees professionally and in further graduate study, and an exit survey of
students completing the program.
External Reviewers’ Report
The external reviewers underscore the self study’s analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of
the Environmental Studies Program. Problems intrinsic to the nature of the free-standing
graduate program have, in their view, worsened over time, specifically, the retirement and
departure of key faculty members and the over-reliance on part-time and full-time faculty from
a wide variety of departments without sufficient oversight. As a result, they find “uneven
quality” characteristic of student work for the degree. Underlying this weakness, they write,
Environmental Studies Program
Program Performance Review
Dean’s Summary Report and Recommendations
Page 5
are the wide variability of student backgrounds upon entering the program, “exacerbated by
inconsistent or insufficient mentoring across associated departments, variability in the core
curriculum and ENST degree advising, and the need for a clearer set of expectations for
learning outcomes for all students who obtain the degree.” The remedy they recommend for
some, if not all, of the program’s weaknesses is its conversion to a full academic department,
with the addition of undergraduate BA and BS degrees and minors. To achieve this goal, the
reviewers recommend the initial recruitment of one senior faculty member and two
interdisciplinary faculty with specialties in the natural and social sciences, respectively.
Dean’s Summary and Recommendations
I commend Dr. Bob Voeks (former Coordinator of the Environmental Studies Program and
author of the self study) for leading an effective and thought-provoking review process. With
the inauguration of a new Coordinator, Dr. John Bock (Anthropology), in Spring 2008, we will
engage the Program Council in considering the recommendations of the self study and of the
external reviewers. To these, I add my own recommendations as follows:
1. Curriculum and Advising. The self study includes a description of promising
initiatives to improve class scheduling for the Environmental Studies program, maintain
and enhance the improvements in student advising and mentoring that have begun, and
expand communication, career advising, and field activities that engage Environmental
Studies students outside the classroom. I support these initiatives.
2. Center for Remote Sensing of the Environment. This new instructional and research
facility represents a great opportunity for the program. Top priority should be given to
integrating remote sensing into Environmental Studies recruitment efforts, curriculum,
and career information so that preparation for careers using remote sensing becomes an
important element within the graduate degree. High priority should be given to
leveraging the potential for grant-supported research in the Center under the auspices of
the Environmental Studies Program to engage tenure-track and tenured faculty from a
variety of departments more directly in the program.
3. Integration of New Tenure-track Faculty. Three new tenure-track environmental
studies specialists will join Geography, Sociology, and Political Science in Fall 2008.
These new faculty expect to play a role in Environmental Studies, and their expectations
should be met so that they view Environmental Studies as their “other academic home.”
4. Undergraduate Degree and Departmental Status. The self study and the external
reviewers’ report make an interesting case for adding an undergraduate degree in
Environmental Studies, recruiting tenure-track faculty, and expanding the program to a
full department. These are complex proposals, and they deserve thorough study. I
recommend that the Coordinator consult with the Deans of Humanities and Social
Sciences and Natural Sciences and Mathematics regarding the appointment of an
interdisciplinary committee to undertake this investigation.