Educational Needs of The Canadian Solid Wood Products Industry
Keywords:Education, teaching, wood processing, training
AbstractTo address problems in wood science educational programs, the Department of Wood Science at the University of British Columbia initiated a needs analysis of the Canadian wood industry. This analysis was conducted using a national mail survey as well as more qualitative focus groups. Results indicate that the current content of a university-based wood products educational program requires a shift in emphasis. A need for analytical and managerial skills was indicated as well as additional emphasis on mechanical processing. While basic wood science should remain strong, a deemphasis was needed to provide the time required for program content expansion. The length of an undergraduate program should be expanded to incorporate an additional year of industry placement as part of the educational process. In addition, a professional master's program should be available to train graduates with non-wood science degrees to bridge into wood product careers. By starting with a blank piece of paper and addressing one (out of many) key groups who hire our graduates, a recognition of the changing needs of the wood products sector is emerging. This is the first step in a process to address many of the previously expressed critical concerns regarding declining enrollments and interest in wood science educational programs.
Adams, J. S. 1986. An experiment on question and response bias. Public Opinion Quarterly 20:593-598.nBarnes, H. M. 1979. Education in wood science and technology: A status report. Wood Fiber 10(4):243-258.nBowyer, J. L. 1991. Undergraduate education for the forest products industry. Wood Fiber Sci. 23(4):607-617.nBruvold, N. T., and J. M. Comer. 1988. A model for estimating response rate to a mailed survey. J. Bus. Res. 16(2):101-116.nDuncan, D. P., R. A. Skok, and D. P. Richards. 1989. Forestry education and the profession's future. J. Forestry, September: 31-37.nEllis, E. L. 1964. Education in wood science and technology. Society of Wood Science and Technology, Madison, WI. 187 pp.nHoltham, M. 1994. The day the rubber hit the road. Wood Working 8(5):3-4.nKanuk, L., and C. Berenson. 1975. Mail surveys and response rates: A literature review. J. Marketing Res. 12:440-453.nKennedy, R. W. 1990. Toward excellence in forestry education. Forestry Chron., December: 623-626.nLyon, D. E., F. C. Beall, and W. Galligan. 1992. Serious concern for the technical infrastructure of wood products development. Presented at Conference Pruning Conifers in Northwestern North America: Opportunities Techniques, Impacts. March 24, 1992, Olympia, WA.nSmulski, S., J. Bowyer, R. Thomas, and A. Moslemi. 1991. Forest products research at U.S. universities in 1988-1989. Wood Fiber Sci. 23(4):597-606.n
The copyright of an article published in Wood and Fiber Science is transferred to the Society of Wood Science and Technology (for U. S. Government employees: to the extent transferable), effective if and when the article is accepted for publication. This transfer grants the Society of Wood Science and Technology permission to republish all or any part of the article in any form, e.g., reprints for sale, microfiche, proceedings, etc. However, the authors reserve the following as set forth in the Copyright Law:
1. All proprietary rights other than copyright, such as patent rights.
2. The right to grant or refuse permission to third parties to republish all or part of the article or translations thereof. In the case of whole articles, such third parties must obtain Society of Wood Science and Technology written permission as well. However, the Society may grant rights with respect to Journal issues as a whole.
3. The right to use all or part of this article in future works of their own, such as lectures, press releases, reviews, text books, or reprint books.