Those opposing ECO Canada’s accreditation effort of environmental studies degrees currently include 30 faculty from 12 environmental studies and sciences programs, calling into question the assertion that CEAC received a “positive response” to draft curriculum guidelines.
However, no data is given on how many programs requested accreditation or responded positively. None of our concerns are addressed in this response, indeed, no justification is made for programs requiring a “quality assurance process” outside of current practice, nor is there any proof of any of the assertions about quality or objectivity.
We who are opposed see this as very much a threat to academic freedom and integrity for the reasons described in our letter published previously in the Bulletin.
Annie L. Booth
Environmental Studies
Chair, Natural Resources
& Environmental Studies
Graduate Program
University of Northern
British Columbia
---------------------------------------------------------------
Letters to the Editor
Letters for publication are welcome. Letters should address a specific article, comment, or letter that recently appeared in the paper or be tied to recent events. Letters are limited to 300 words and may be edited for length and clarity. Include your name, address and phone number. Anonymous letters will not be accepted. Submissions that are considered potentially libellous will not be published. We read every letter we receive and every letter gets equal consideration. Publication is at the sole discretion of CAUT. If your letter is accepted for publication, you will be contacted by phone, electronic mail, fax or return mail. Letters should be sent to
duhaime@caut.ca.