Ewen Hardie shares his a personal account of the recent MSc Restructuring weekend in Falkland, Fife (19-20 April, 2008) where graduates, tutors, and members of the Department of Geography & Sociology worked together to develop a new vision for the MSc.

Ewen writes: It had been a year since the final workshop of my MSc, and I missed the atmosphere of exploring challenging topics freely and openly, the shared sense of calling and willingness to engage. Falkland had been the setting for one of the most challenging workshops of the course, and I looked forward revisiting this remarkable place.

Day 1: “The warrior thinks, Changes must be made that I do not feel like making.” –Paulo Coelho.

When we arrived, we shared our reasons for giving up a weekend to explore ways forward for the CHE and for the MSc. It struck me that each graduate spoke of having gained something precious through the course, something that we wanted to protect for future students. We all wanted to give something back. A couple of us are now engaged with the world in ways that we would not have imagined possible before the course – it is clear that an MSc in Human Ecology is far more than a qualification.

As the morning evolved, it became clear that the current way of delivering the course relies heavily on a small number of individuals who are not properly resourced for their time and energy. A number of key players have recognised the need to step back from this unsustainable situation, and it was frightening to realise that there may be no one capable of stepping into their roles. The issue of economic sustainability from the Department’s point of view also loomed large with the need to reduce the core Human Ecology modules and introduce some of the Department’s existing options.

To see beyond the problems we faced, the group engaged in some “blue sky” thinking, imagining the course afresh. Despite the high energy, I struggled. The problems seemed to block my own view of the blue sky, and I grappled with my own reluctance to embrace change – I was more than happy with the course the way it was. Still, I was comfortable in the knowledge that something positive would emerge from the process.

The afternoon session focused on “an abundance of opportunities.” We discussed how the explosion of consciousness around ecological and social issues has sparked a much greater demand for a human ecology approach. Students now come to the course informed about these issues and needing tools for action. Our work is now less about convincing people about the problems and more about equipping them with the confidence and skills to drive and facilitate change.

Subject or Process?

As we listed the many connections to be made, I saw each “opportunity” as more related to the practice of human ecology than the actual MSc course. It is true that change will require people dedicated to direct action, diplomacy, education, writing, art, business, politics, etc – but the MSc is not a course in any one of these subjects. For me, human ecology is not a subject – it is an approach, a “way of being” that can assist a person to engage with the world. During my MSc journey, I learned about how I relate to the world, and I began to find my own unique way of expressing that in service of the universe. If human ecology is not a subject, can it really be taught in a university or studied as an MSc?

To me, the subjects – the issues – provide the material that we explore together. The learning is about our own willingness to undertake a journey into turbulent waters and to accept the support of those who go along with us, as well as the certainty that they too will need support. When we each experience fear or pain and resist further engagement, we have the opportunity to deepen our understanding of personal and group dynamics – the same dynamics that operate on a wider scale and affect the rate of change in the world. If the time in that process is reduced or changed, do we not risk losing the experience of community that is so important to the journey?

With these questions in mind I reflected on whether I would have embarked on the journey if it had not been billed as an MSc. I would have been tempted, but if I had to announce that I was leaving my job to undertake a two year journey of self-discovery, would I have been brave enough? I could see that those letters were important even if I cared little for them, and I was becoming less resistant to the possibility of change. Perhaps it would be possible to restructure the MSc while maintaining the experience of community and mutual exploration? At the end of the first night I was still unclear as to how this might be achieved but was hopeful that it was possible.

Day 2: Moving Forward

After a restful sleep I awoke with the birds. Several of us had gone to sleep with ideas buzzing around our heads and there was a sense that today we could really move things forward. We began by running through the current structure of the course and highlighting what presently works well – celebrating its strengths, but not getting carried away.

This was the first time that the course outline was described in such detail for the Department’s representatives, and there was a really positive engagement from both of them. They reminded us that a small course like Human Ecology needs to become more embedded within the university to prevent it being “pruned” during the review process. One way to develop allies is to make other departments’ options available to Human Ecology students and vice-versa – and there were several courses that would be suitable.

It was starting to become clearer what a restructured MSc might look like. A combination of CHE courses, with their unique pedagogy, and more mainstream Strathclyde courses could very well come together for an engaging, stimulating, and useful MSc… In what? We discussed the possibility of a “re-branding,” trying to find the right words to describe the emerging new structure. But whatever we call it, there is clearly a future for an MSc delivered in real partnership with Strathclyde, and it has the potential to be a very positive development. Maintaining a regular times and spaces to gather will help nurture the sense of community, mutual exploration and shared responsibility of a human ecological approach, and ensuring that sense of will make possible the kinds of experiences I have found so important. It may even be possible to deepen these experiences without the constraints of a curriculum.

We ended the day by setting up working groups to take the many different elements forward: the MSc at Strathclyde, human ecology beyond academia, graduate mentors to build resilience into the community, rewriting job descriptions so that everything is not being carried by one or two people… We each left the weekend with something to be getting on with, but I was still feeling a mixture of emotions. We’d made a lot of progress and there was much to feel positive about – but there was also a considerable amount of work to be done by each of us. Is it always the case that something of immense value must rely on volunteered effort to keep it going?

Still, one thing I am resoundingly positive about is the dedication of the CHE community. When the Centre for Human Ecology put forth a call for assistance, there were people dispersed along the length and breadth of the country who were prepared to spend their time exploring ways that they could offer it. I am glad that I was one of them and I am certain that this is the thing most worth protecting.