June 21, 2011
Dr. Lawrence Martz
Dean, CGSR
Dear Lawrence;
As Acting Director of the Toxicology Centre, I am providing this response letter to the final GPR
report for the interdisciplinary Toxicology Graduate Program. Let me begin by saying that we
were fortunate to have an excellent review team who took this task seriously and provided
valuable input in their final report. They clearly felt we have a top-notch program and seemed
very impressed with many facets of it, including outstanding research facilities and strong
commitments to graduate teaching and mentorship among our faculty. However, there were a
variety of recommendations made in the final report that the reviewers believed would
strengthen the program further. There were certainly no surprises to us in their
recommendations; indeed these are issues we have discussed at length at our monthly meeting
of the core Toxicology faculty council. In light of the GPR final report, we held a full-day retreat
on June 1 focused on making a variety of graduate program policy decisions arising from the
final report and our own discussions at previous faculty meetings. I have appended the Minutes
of the retreat to this letter for your information. In the sections below, I will address each of the
major recommendations brought forth in the GPR final report.
1.0 Curriculum
1.3.a. At our retreat, we approved a list of core toxicology graduate courses (Item 4.0 in retreat
Minutes) and decided that a two-year future schedule of courses be maintained (Item 8.0). We
are currently developing the schedule, which will be available to students, supervisors and
graduate chairs prior to the start of the September 2011 term.
1.3.b. This recommendation is related to 1.3.a. We think that the development of a two-year
schedule of graduate courses will help facilitate the teaching schedules of participating faculty.
We agree that the Director should play a larger role in assuring that courses are offered, but the
majority of core courses already have set schedules within the department/school that they are
offered.
1.3.c. Most of our graduate course syllabi already have clearly stated SLOs, but we approved
policies at the retreat (Items 9.1 and 9.2) to ensure that all syllabi include SLOs, and that syllabi
be provided to the graduate secretary so that they are available to all students and supervisors
in the program.
1.3.d. This is a topic we have discussed for several years at our faculty meetings, and we agree
that official policies need to be developed. We made these decisions at the retreat (Items 5.0,
6.0 and especially 7.0) and now have a firm policy in place regarding course requirements for
MSc and PhD students entering the program with varying levels of background knowledge in
toxicology. We have always felt strongly that if we are to train graduate students in toxicology
and send them out into the workforce with our program on their vitae, that these alumni must
have a strong background in the science of toxicology.
1.3.e. We agree with this recommendation and discussed it at length at our retreat (Item 19.0).
Historically the program offered two 5-credit graduate courses that all students were required
to enroll in. With a reduction in the credit unit requirements for MSc and PhD programs
instituted several years ago, this is no longer feasible. We approved in principle the
development of a team-taught course (TOX 870.3 Perspectives in Toxicology) that would be
taught by core faculty, and will be discussing this further during our faculty meetings in the
upcoming academic year. Another option we discussed was making an existing new course
(TOX 844.3 Toxicology Techniques) required for all students.
2.0 Learning Environment
2.3.a. This issue arose during the meeting of the reviewers with graduate students. The main
conflicts arise with students supervised by Adjuncts, although occasionally also with UofS
faculty supervisors. We approved a decision at the retreat (Item 15.0) that graduate students
conducting their research project with an Adjunct must be co-supervised by an in-scope faculty
member at the UofS. We also approved a policy (Item 17.1) defining the line of responsibility
for hearing student complaints. We will discuss whether students and supervisors are required
to mutually sign a contract of funding and expectations at a faculty meeting this fall (Item 17.2).
2.3.b. Please refer to section 4.3.b for our response to this recommendation.
3.0 Faculty Profile and Mentorship
3.3.a. This is an issue we have discussed at length at our faculty meetings, and realize that we
need to engage in more “outreach” to colleges and schools in order to attract potential
supervisors to mentor students in our program. In many cases it is the student that decides
they want to receive an MSc or PhD in toxicology. We feel that the various policy decisions we
have made at the retreat, and the transparency of such documentation, will help address this
recommendation.
4.0 Administration
4.3.a. The issue of a permanent Director is ongoing, and resolution will occur by July 1, 2012.
4.3.b. We agree wholeheartedly with this recommendation and approved a policy (Item 16.0)
to transition to a Graduate Studies Committee by January 1, 2012. The committee will have 3
members initially. We will also be involving the graduate secretary to a greater extent in
administration (e.g., admissions) and ask that supervisors become more involved in initial
administration of graduate student programming (e.g., program of study).
4.3.c. We agree with this recommendation and will be implementing it immediately.
4.3.d. We do not agree unanimously with this recommendation, but will be discussing it further
at our faculty meetings in the next academic year.
4.3.e. We consider MSc and PhD stipend increases each year, and in fact have increased
stipends in 2009. Our current stipends ($17,400 for MSc, $20,400 for PhD) are comparable to
NSERC PGS stipends. We will likely be increasing the stipends in the upcoming year.
4.3.f. We approved a policy (Item 13.2), consistent with that of the CGSR, that students wishing
to transfer from a MSc to PhD program must complete all requirements within 2 years of
commencing their MSc program.
4.3.g. In the next academic year we will be developing an intranet site on our webpage that will
contain all pertinent documentation (i.e., policies and handbooks) regarding the graduate
program. We will update this site as needed.
4.3.h. We agree with this recommendation and will be enhancing our recruitment efforts in the
near future. In fact we have produced a new brochure for the graduate program this spring and
are currently distributing them widely.
5.0 Student Viability and Program Performance
5.3.a. The issue of student funding by Adjuncts has recently become an important topic of
discussion. We have partially resolved this by requiring co-supervision in all cases by an inscope faculty member (retreat Item 15.0 and 2.3.a above). In the future we will pay particular
attention to student stipend and research funding when they are co-supervised by Adjuncts in
our program. A discussion of funding will occur at each meeting of the student and their
advisory committee.
5.3.b. We have long realized that the time to completion, particularly for MSc students, is often
more than 3 years. Some reasons for this were provided by the reviewers in section 5.1. We
agree that we must strive to reduce completion times for both MSc and PhD students. The
supervisor and advisory committee must play an important role in this regard. We will be
discussing the recommendation to have a “contract of funding and expectations” signed by
both student and supervisor at our faculty meetings during the upcoming academic year.
5.3.c. We have a limited number of GTFs in our program and it is very difficult for the majority
of our PhD students to obtain teaching experience.
6.0 Student Outcomes
6.3.a. We strongly feel that the low number of responses to the survey was not truly reflective
of the program success in terms of student outcomes. Our graduates are highly employable in
all sectors, and many begin jobs before completion of their thesis. We agree that better
tracking of student career moves is essential, and we will be focusing on this much more in the
future.
6.3.b. We agree with this comment and acknowledge that in certain cases time to completion
has been extended due to supervisor availability, especially with regard to timely return of
theses and manuscripts. We agree with the recommendation to have this item recorded and
assessed by the advisory committee and brought forth during meetings of the Graduate Studies
Committee.
I hope I have adequately addressed the recommendations of the review team in this letter. If
you require any further information, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
David Janz, PhD
Professor and Acting Director
Toxicology Graduate Program Retreat
June 1, 2011, Faculty Club
Minutes
Present:
Dr. David Janz, Dr. Michael Pietrock, Dr. Paul Jones, Dr. Karsten Liber, Dr. Markus
Hecker, Dr. Mark Wickstrom, Dr. Steven Siciliano, Dr. John Giesy, Dr. Barry
Blakley, Ms. Shanda Rolleston
1.0 Approval of agenda
2.0 Chair’s remarks
Dr. Janz welcomed everyone and thanked them for attending the full-day retreat. The main
purpose of the retreat is to finalize decisions and officially confirm several policies associated
with the graduate program, particularly those brought out in the Graduate Program Review
final report. Another goal is to discuss implementation of a Graduate Studies Committee,
another recommendation made in the GPR. Finally, if time permits, there are a few items to
discuss that are more long-term initiatives.
3.0 Establishment of the Toxicology Group Faculty Council
Motion for approval: Karsten Liber/Paul Jones
The decision was made that a Faculty Council for the Toxicology Group be officially established,
and include the following 13 members as listed below:
Karsten Liber (Executive Oversight)
Paul Jones (NETI)
David Janz (Acting Director)
TBD (NETI)
Michael Pietrock (Assistant Director and Graduate Chair)
Tox Group Members (3):
Barry Blakley (Graduate Chair)
Lynn Weber
Mark Wickstrom (Undergraduate Program)
Markus Hecker
Steven Siciliano (NETI)
Pat Thomas
Som Niyogi (NETI)
John Giesy (Chair of ATRF Management Committee or Delegate)
This item was essentially confirmation of the “core” or “executive” group of Toxicology Group
members that meets monthly during the academic year. Quorum would be 7 members, and
voting would be by majority. Replacement of members can occur at any time. The three
Toxicology Group members would be on the Toxicology Group Faculty Council for a one year
term with the option of renewal.
4.0 Toxicology core courses
Motion for approval: Paul Jones/Barry Blakley
The decision was made that the graduate courses listed (see end of Minutes) form the current
core Toxicology Graduate Program courses, effective June 1, 2011.
1
5.0 Credit unit requirements for the MSc degree
Motion for approval: Mark Wickstrom/Barry Blakley
The decision was made that students enrolled in the MSc thesis program must take a minimum
of 9 credit units (cu) of 800 level core toxicology courses. Deviations from this formula will
occur only under rare and exceptional circumstances and must be approved by the Graduate
Studies Committee. If required, the Toxicology Faculty Council may also be asked for approval.
6.0 Credit unit requirements for the PhD degree
Motion for approval: Karsten Liber/Markus Hecker
The decision was made that students enrolled in the Toxicology PhD program must take 9 cu of
Toxicology Graduate Program core courses, or courses from their MSc degree that are
equivalent to courses listed in the core courses list, plus 6 cu of additional 800-level courses as
approved by the Graduate Studies Committee.
7.0 Course requirements for MSc students entering program with no toxicology coursework
in their background
Motion for approval: Paul Jones/ Markus Hecker
The decision was made that MSc students entering the Toxicology Graduate Program with less
than 6 cu of undergraduate toxicology courses must take 6 cu of Toxicology Undergraduate
courses. 3 cu of those required must be equivalent to TOX 300 and the remaining 3 cu must be
equivalent to TOX 301 or TOX 402 or TOX 412.
Students must obtain a final grade of ≥70% in these courses to remain in the program.
8.0 Scheduling of core courses
Motion for approval: Paul Jones/Barry Blakley
The decision was made that a two-year future schedule of core graduate courses will be
continuously maintained to better allow students and advisory committees to plan the program
of study. This schedule will be updated by the Faculty Council in May of each year.
9.0 Course syllabi and examinations
Motion for approval: Karsten Liber/Paul Jones
9.1 Electronic copies of all current course syllabi will be provided to the Graduate
Secretary prior to the start of each term.
9.2 The syllabus for every core toxicology course will contain clearly stated Specific
Learning Objectives (SLO’s).
9.3 Electronic copies of all course examinations will be provided to the Graduate
Secretary within one month after the completed term.
10.0
Course evaluations
2
Motion for approval: Mark Wickstrom/Markus Hecker
The decision was made that all core graduate courses will be evaluated with the current course
evaluation form by the Graduate Secretary. An updated student signature line will be added to
the existing form. The Graduate Secretary will also request evaluation forms from “out of
house” (i.e., non-core toxicology) courses so they may be made available to the Director.
A peer review process for all toxicology graduate courses needs to be implemented at the
beginning of each term. Those who are tenured may wish to decline.
11.0 Graduate Student Handbook, MSc Checklist, PhD Checklist
Motion for approval: Mark Wickstrom/Markus Hecker
The Graduate Student Handbook, MSc Checklist and PhD Checklist were approved with
modifications.
Guidelines for transferring from a MSc to PhD will be re-written, to include only exceptional
students outlined by the following criteria:
Submitted or accepted publications
Ability of the student to receive their own funding
Awarded a major scholarship (e.g. NSERC)
Recipient of an award from conference presentation
GPA of at least 85%
Completion of 9 cu of 800 level courses
Language proficiency scores were updated to current standards.
12.0 MSc proposal
Motion for approval: John Giesy/Steven Siciliano
The decision was made that all students registered as MSc students must defend their research
proposal in a seminar presented to the Advisory Committee within 8 months of commencing
their program.
13.0 Qualifying examinations
Motion for approval: Karsten Liber/Mark Wickstrom
13.1 All students registered as PhD students will present their research proposal in an
open seminar, followed by a closed oral defence of the proposal with the Advisory
Committee, within 12 months of commencing their program.
13.2 All students registered as MSc students and wishing to transfer to a PhD program
must present their PhD proposal in an open seminar, followed by a closed oral
defence of the proposal with the Advisory Committee, within 2 years of
commencing their MSc program.
14.0 PhD comprehensive examination
Motion for approval: Steven Siciliano/ Karsten Liber
3
The decision was made that the current format for the PhD comprehensive examination, as
outlined in the PhD Checklist, be formally implemented, with modifications.
The following modifications will be made:
Time to complete the examination will be reduced from 14 days to 7, with no extensions.
Failure to hand the examination in on time will result in the student applying for an extension
through the Dean of the College of Graduate Studies and Research.
15.0 Supervision of students by Adjuncts
Motion for approval: John Giesy/Paul Jones
No adjunct member of the Toxicology Group is able to solely supervise any Toxicology Graduate
Student. The student must be co-supervised by the adjunct and a University of Saskatchewan
in-scope faculty member or administrator.
16.0 New Graduate Chair Committee model
Motion for approval: Paul Jones/Karsten Liber
Dr. Blakley will be stepping down as Graduate Chair after many years of service. Following
recommendations in the GPR final report, it is proposed that a committee model for chairing
graduate student advisory committees be implemented. Such a Graduate Studies Committee
(GSC) model is common in many units at the U of S, and at other North American universities, in
programs with a large number of graduate students such as the Toxicology Graduate Program.
The motion was passed to implement a Graduate Studies Committee model for chairing MSc
and PhD thesis advisory committees, commencing January 1, 2012.
The committee will be made up of 3 members of the Toxicology Faculty Council who will make
decisions regarding student admissions, awards and coordination of various graduate
committees.
The committee will initially be comprised of the following three members:
Graduate Chair:
Dr. Steven Siciliano (3 year term)
Faculty Council Member:
Dr. Paul Jones (2 year term)
Faculty Council Member:
Dr. Michael Pietrock (1 year term)
As recommended in the GPR final report, (a) the Graduate Secretary will become more involved
in certain aspects of the admissions process to reduce the faculty workload, and (b) supervisors
will become more involved in developing the Program of Study and other administrivia
associated with commencement of a student’s program.
17.0 Conflict resolution policy
Motion for approval: Mark Wickstrom/Steven Siciliano
4
17.1 Student-supervisor complaints and issues be heard first at the level of the
Graduate Studies Committee, followed by the Toxicology Director, and if needed
the Dean of CGSR.
17.2 The decision of having students and supervisors, through the GSC, sign a
“contract of funding and expectations” at the start of the program will be discussed
at the fall council meeting. Michael Pietrock will look at the CGSR form and add it to
the faculty agenda.
18.0 MTOX: Non-thesis Masters in Toxicology
Motion for approval: Mark Wickstrom/Markus Hecker
Dr. Pietrock developed a proposal to modify and resurrect the Post-Graduate Diploma (PGD)
program as a 1-year non-thesis MSc (MTOX). The primary issues with implementing the MTOX
are (a) uncertainty regarding course offerings at the current time, (b) integration with the
CREATE HERA program, and (c) the long-term benefit to the graduate program.
The decision was made to postpone the MTOX until 2012 pending further discussion among the
Toxicology Faculty Council.
19.0 Common graduate course (discussion item only)
The GPR final report recommended a common toxicology course required for all graduate
students in the program; the benefits of such a course to students and the program are
obvious. Historically the program offered 10 cu of courses that all students were required to
pass (TOX 836.5 and TOX 837.5). Although these courses remain “on the books”, it is not a
feasible option at present time. It was proposed that a common graduate course be developed
and taught by several members of the faculty council. One consideration for discussion was a
“Perspectives in Toxicology” course (TOX 870.3) that would be team taught among all members
of the faculty council, where each faculty member offers 1 week of a lecture/lit
review/discussion/ debate/whatever they choose in a topical area.
The decision was made to postpone this discussion item until the next academic year.
20.0 TOX 990 seminar series (discussion item only)
Significant discussion was required on possible modifications to the graduate seminar series.
Attendance by members of the Toxicology Group has been extremely poor. Students are
required to attend, and their attendance is recorded, but when only 3-4 faculty members in the
room are present, it is unacceptable. Another problem is the lack of questions and dialogue
following seminars, with the usual 2-3 questions from faculty and not a word from the students.
Some ideas brought forth:
• Incorporate more invited speakers from inside and outside the university, including
toxicology faculty members.
• For graduate student seminars, perhaps include two 15-20 minute (conference style)
seminars in a given day.
• Develop ways for faculty questions to become more like discussion items, where the
audience is asked their opinions.
5
•
•
•
•
Consider changing from WCVM 2105 to a different room.
Award students for most engaged student at the end of the class.
Have MSc and PhD (1st seminar) student speakers deliver a teaching seminar where they
would pose 2-3 questions to the audience at the end of their talk.
PhD’s 2nd seminar would be a more traditional scientific conference type seminar.
21.0 Toxicology Centre website (discussion item only)
Fiona Price provided a memo to all members indicating update requests had been filtering
through very slowly. To ensure the website holds up to date information, all faculty members
are responsible for their own profile page. Any changes to profile pages may be emailed to
Fiona when required. A proactive effort is required from all Faculty Council to ensure the
website remains current.
It was also proposed that we incorporate a local network (intranet) system on our website that
contains all policy documents and related materials. Only Toxicology Group members, students
and staff would be able to login to this site.
22.0 Graduate student recruitment efforts (discussion item only)
Historically the Toxicology Graduate Program actively sent information to numerous academic
units worldwide to enhance recruitment of graduate students. Recruitment efforts will be
handled through the Graduate Studies Committee.
Fiona Price and Shanda Rolleston have recently updated the Toxicology Graduate Program
presentation board that is taken to conferences and recruitment events locally and
internationally. In addition, new pamphlets to accompany the display board have also been
created.
There was discussion on recruitment efforts through Facebook and other online sources.
Steven Siciliano encouraged the CREATE graduate secretary to invite Danish students to the
CREATE course given in September, 2012.
23.0 Long-term objectives of the program (discussion item only)
Historically the program had a large biomedical (human and veterinary) toxicology focus. In the
past 6-8 years this focus has shifted more to ecological toxicology, particularly aquatic
toxicology. To maintain the interdisciplinary nature of our program, strategies are needed to
bolster the biomedical focus. One way is to provide mechanisms to encourage biomedical
faculty to have graduate students in our program. This will then provide positive feedback to
course offerings, as the students doing biomedical research will want to take courses oriented
in that direction.
It was discussed that an allocation of devolved money to those in the biomedical fields may
help to attract those individuals.
24.0
Meeting adjourned at 3:55 p.m.
6