Final Assessment Report and Implementation Plan
In accordance with the Royal Military College of Canada (RMC) Institutional Quality Assurance Process (IQAP), this Final Assessment Report (FAR) provides a synthesis of the external evaluation and internal response and assessments of the master’s program in Public Administration (MPA). This report identifies the significant strengths of the programs, together with opportunities for improvement and enhancement, and sets out and prioritizes the recommendations that have been selected for implementation.
This report includes an Implementation Plan that identifies who will be responsible for implementing the recommendations set out in the Final Assessment Report; who will be responsible for providing any resources entailed by those recommendations; any changes in organization, policy or governance that will be necessary to meet the recommendations as well as the timelines for acting on and monitoring the implementation of those recommendations.
Overview of Program Review Process
The Program Self-Study Report was completed on 6 Aug 2024. For the program under review (MPA) it contained the degree level expectations for the program, an analytical assessment of the program, course outlines, program-related data, survey data from the Office of Quality Assurance and appendices with sample examinations and CVs of faculty members. Two arm’s-length external reviewers (Dr. Justin Longo, University of Regina, and Dr. Stéphane Roussel, École Nationale d'Administration Publique) were selected from a list of possible reviewers and approved by the Dean of Graduate Studies. An internal reviewer, Dr. Jennifer Shore, Department of Physics and Space Science, was also selected for participation on the ERC. They reviewed the self-study documentation and conducted a virtual site visit to RMC from 17-18 Feb 2025, with a follow up session on 5 Mar 2025. During the site visit, the ERC met with the VP Academic, the Director of Quality Assurance, the Dean of Graduate Studies, the Program Chair, faculty members, alumni, students registered in the programs under study, the Head of the Writing Centre and the Librarian-in-chief. The reviewers submitted their report on 20 Mar 2025. In their report, the ERC expresses the opinion that the MPA program at RMC aligns very well with the RMC mission and provides a structured curriculum that ensures graduate develop a comprehensive expertise in public administration.
Significant Strengths and Areas of Concern of the Program
The ERC identified a number of strengths of the MPA program:
Mission Alignment: The program effectively supports RMC's mission by offering distance education for Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) and Department of National Defense (DND) members while sharing defense knowledge with civilians.
- Flexible Program Structure: The three completion pathways (course-based, project-based, thesis-based) accommodate diverse student needs and circumstances, particularly beneficial for working professionals.
- Online Delivery Model: The asynchronous, distance-learning format is highly valued by students, allowing them to balance full-time work with academic studies.
- Specialized Focus: The program occupies a distinctive niche within Canadian public administration education through its security and defense orientation.
- Student Experience: Students consistently rated faculty instructional quality, availability, and fairness positively.
- Student Diversity: The program attracts a diverse cohort of students with valuable professional experience in defense and security sectors, enriching classroom discussions.
- Competency Framework: The curriculum is structured around seven core competencies derived from the Atlas of Public Administration Management, ensuring graduates develop comprehensive expertise.
The ERC identified a number of areas of concern for MPA program:
- Faculty Resources: The program faces significant challenges with limited dedicated faculty and heavy reliance on contract instructors, affecting program continuity and quality.
- Administrative Support: Insufficient administrative staff creates operational burdens for program leadership.
- Course Scheduling and Planning: Students reported difficulties in forecasting course selections beyond 2-3 years and discrepancies between scheduled and available courses.
- Research Pathway Barriers: Distance learning students face operational and informational obstacles in pursuing research-based completion options (i.e., project or thesis options).
- Public Administration Focus: The curriculum emphasizes policy analysis competencies at the expense of broader public administration competencies essential for leadership in public sector settings.
- Defense-Specific Content: Students noted that some courses labeled as defense-focused could better integrate defense-specific content and connect business administration concepts to military contexts.
- Health Specialization Stream: The Health stream appears under resourced and lacks clear articulation, raising concerns about its viability.
- Student Community Building: Limited opportunities for networking and peer-to-peer interaction were identified as weaknesses in the online format.
The Program Chair, after consultation with faculty and staff in the programs, submitted a response to the ERC Report 16 May 2025. The Dean of Graduate Studies prepared this Final Assessment Report on 8 July 2025. Specific recommendations are discussed, and follow-up actions and timelines provided.
Summary of the Reviewers’ Recommendations with Dean’s Responses
The ERC identified several areas of concern or issues that require attention. These issues are discussed in the order that they appear in the ERC Report:
Recommendation 1
Review the course offerings and the relevance of the three “streams” every three years.
Program Response
This recommendation seems appropriate and actionable. It will allow the programme to periodically reassess the interest and usefulness of the created courses for each of the streams, and to ensure the courses we do offer are answering the students’ needs and interests. This review could be conducted by the standing advisory committee (at recommendation 2).
Dean’s Response
I support this recommendation and commend the program for its thoughtful approach. Periodic reassessment of the course offerings within each stream is not only appropriate it is essential to maintaining the relevance and academic integrity of the program. Aligning this review with the standing advisory committee—as suggested under Recommendation 2—ensures a consistent and structured process that can effectively respond to evolving student needs and interests. This will also support strategic planning and resource allocation across the graduate program. I look forward to seeing how this process contributes to the continuous improvement of our offerings.
Recommendation 2
Strike a Standing Advisory Committee (e.g., DND, alumni, academics) that can be convened periodically to provide feedback as to the value of the program especially with respect to its major external stakeholders.
Program Response
This recommendation seems appropriate and actionable. The overall goals of the MPA could be further reoriented towards defense-related topics in order to strengthen the program and RMC’s particular mission. However, we would need 1) to delineate the committee’s role(s) more clearly and 2) to find the right external representatives to sit on this committee to ensure useful input and continuity. For example, specific tasks such as the periodic review of course offerings within the three streams could be assigned to this committee to ensure the streams, course offerings, and course contents are meeting stakeholders’ needs and expectations. There could also be an expectation that regular faculty who teach in the MPA program on an ongoing basis, must take part in this committee.
Dean’s Response
I fully support the proposal to reorient aspects of the MPA program to increase the alignment more directly with defence-related topics, which would further strengthen the program’s relevance and reinforce RMC’s unique mission.
I agree that greater clarity around the roles and responsibilities of the advisory committee is essential to ensure its effectiveness. Assigning the committee specific tasks—such as the periodic review of course offerings across the three streams—is a sound approach that will allow for meaningful oversight and ensure that course content remains relevant and responsive to stakeholder needs.
Additionally, including regular faculty who teach in the MPA program on an ongoing basis will provide consistency, institutional memory, and greater accountability. Identifying appropriate external representatives with experience and insight into defence and public administration will also be key to ensuring the committee provides useful and sustained input.
This recommendation reflects a strong commitment to program quality and continuous improvement, and I am pleased to support its implementation.
Recommendation 3
Formalize the relationship between Departments and the program chair.
Program Response
This recommendation stands alone in the ERC report with no further context or explanation. We are going on the assumption that it pertains to the issue of the program not having its own dedicated staff and thus needing approval from the related department chairs to make its own staffing recommendations to DGS. Because staffing decisions are made year to year and are subject to changes based on budget, retirements, parental leaves, sabbaticals and other imponderables, it seems difficult to imagine a formalized, multi-year agreement between the program and the departments from which it pulls faculty members to teach courses. However, if such a thing were possible, it would definitely help ensuring stability, continuity, and institutional memory within the program, from which it would greatly benefit.
Dean’s Response
I agree with the program’s interpretation that the concern likely stems from the program’s lack of dedicated faculty, which currently necessitates coordination with multiple departments to secure teaching resources.
You raise an important and realistic point about the challenges of establishing formal, multi-year staffing agreements in an environment where faculty availability can shift due to factors such as budget constraints, retirements, leaves, and sabbaticals. These variables do indeed make it difficult to formalize such agreements in a binding way.
That said I support the idea of exploring more structured and predictable staffing arrangements, even if only informal or indicative in nature. A framework that outlines expected contributions from participating departments—developed in consultation with department chairs—could go a long way in improving planning, promoting continuity, and preserving institutional memory in the program. This would ultimately strengthen both the student experience and the program’s long-term viability.
I am happy to work with the program and departments to explore feasible mechanisms to bring more stability to staffing discussions.
Recommendation 4
Explore accreditation by CAPPA and increasing RMC participation in CAPPA activities.
Program Response
This recommendation seems potentially appropriate and actionable. The MPA at RMC has been a member of CAPPA for several years, but our program has never gone through the supplementary step of attempting to become accredited, which would help us ensure the quality of our program through a supplementary external review process and raise the credibility of our program to prospective employers. It would also encourage our students to partake in more CAPPA activities, from which they would certainly benefit.
That being said, there are two potential caveats, the first of which is the particular mandate of the MPA program at RMC and the specific clientele it aims to recruit (CAF and DND-adjacent), which sets our program apart from others in its learning objectives. The second caveat is the supplementary workload this accreditation process would create for an already administratively overburdened chair and administrator.
Dean’s Response
I agree that accreditation presents a valuable opportunity to enhance the program’s credibility and visibility, particularly in the eyes of prospective students and employers. External validation through an accreditation process would also support continued quality assurance and alignment with broader standards in the field of public administration.
Your observations about the unique nature of the MPA at RMC are well taken. The program having a specialized focus on the needs of the Canadian Armed Forces and Department of National Defence sets it apart in important ways from more conventional public administration programs. Any approach to accreditation would need to be sensitive to this distinction and flexible enough to account for the program’s specific mandate and learning outcomes.
I also fully acknowledge the concern regarding the administrative burden associated with accreditation. The process does require time and resources, and we must be mindful of the current workload already shouldered by program leadership and administrative staff.
In light of this, I would support an initial exploratory phase—a feasibility study of sorts—during which the program could engage with CAPPA to better understand the requirements, benefits, and potential accommodations for programs with specialized mandates. This would allow for a more informed decision on whether to proceed, while also giving the Dean’s Office time to explore ways of supporting the process, should the decision be to move forward.
Recommendation 5
Integrate a more explicit emphasis on public administration competencies—as articulated by bodies such as CAPPA and NASPAA—through the re-orientation of one or more of the core courses and a re-balancing of the “public policy” emphasis of the program.
Program Response
This recommendation stems from the observation from the ERC that our curriculum emphasizes policy analysis competencies at the expense of broader public administration competencies essential for leadership in public sector settings. It seems appropriate and actionable. It could be one of the roles of the standing advisory committee (or a few members thereof) to oversee this review and re-orientation process of one or more of our core courses in order to suggest changes to our curriculum.
Dean’s Response
The Dean supports the program’s assessment that this recommendation is both appropriate and actionable.
A re-evaluation of the core curriculum to ensure that it reflects a broader range of public administration competencies—alongside the existing emphasis on policy analysis—would strengthen the program’s ability to prepare students for diverse leadership roles within the public sector. This effort aligns well with RMC’s mission to provide rigorous, relevant, and applied graduate education, especially in a context where the public service increasingly demands adaptable leaders equipped with a comprehensive skill set.
I agree that the standing advisory committee would be well positioned to guide this review. Entrusting the committee—or a designated sub-group—with oversight of this process would allow for informed and focused discussion, and ensure that any proposed revisions are grounded in both academic standards and professional expectations.
Recommendation 6
Encourage faculty to share their syllabus with the library prior to the start of the semester to make sure that all the material is available through the library and help student in their semester planning.
Program Response
This recommendation, while noble in its intent, is only partly actionable. The lack of advance notice provided to contract faculty in the hiring process each term as well as the start of their respective contracts being only two weeks before the official start date of each semester means it can’t be expected of them to provide their syllabus very far in advance, or at least far enough for the library to be able to act on the material requested on time for it to be available for the students.
An alternative solution would be to encourage faculty to use resources that are available in open-source format to mitigate the issues with lack of access.
Dean’s Response
I appreciate the program’s recognition of both the intent behind the recommendation and the structural limitations that currently exist in the hiring and onboarding of contract faculty.
I agree that while the goal of ensuring timely access to course materials for students is important, the short lead times inherent in contract appointments do present a real and ongoing challenge. Under these circumstances, it is indeed difficult to require contract instructors to submit their syllabi with sufficient notice for the library to acquire materials in time for the start of term.
The suggestion to promote the use of open-source and freely available academic resources is a reasonable and constructive alternative. This approach could not only alleviate access delays but also support broader institutional goals around accessibility and affordability for students.
Perhaps the program, in collaboration with the library, could develop a short guide or session during orientation to raise awareness among the instructors about open educational resources (OERs) to assist the instructors.
Recommendation 7
Undertake a periodic review and refresh of the core courses to ensure alignment with the defence and military aspects of the RMC mission.
Program Response
This recommendation could be accomplished concomitantly with the review of the competencies suggested in Recommendation 5. The Standing advisory committee would be a good outlet for this role as having the opinion of stakeholders within the CAF and Defense community would be quite helpful in this process.
Dean’s Response
I agree that this recommendation aligns naturally with the work suggested under Recommendation 5 and could be effectively addressed as part of a broader curriculum and competency review.
The proposed involvement of the Standing Advisory Committee is both appropriate and valuable. The insight of stakeholders within the CAF and the broader Defence community would undoubtedly enhance the relevance and responsiveness of the program to the evolving needs of its primary audience. Their input can help ensure that our graduates are well equipped with the skills and knowledge needed to lead and serve effectively in defence and public sector environments.
I fully support the integration of this recommendation into the work of the committee, and I appreciate the program’s proactive and collaborative approach to continuous improvement.
Recommendation 8
Convene a comprehensive orientation session for new students at the start of their program, including a clear articulation of the project and thesis options for degree completion.
Program Response
A comprehensive orientation session already exists for new students. It is available on Moodle and comprises details about the contents of the program as well as fact-sheets. Students were e-mailed about this at the beginning of the year, but they need to self-register to access its contents.
Faculty members may need to be reminded of its existence so they can impress on new students the importance of registering and consulting the contents of this orientation module.
Dean’s Response
A comprehensive orientation session for new students already exists on Moodle and includes key information about the program and fact-sheets. The existing structure provides a solid foundation for supporting student success from the outset of their academic journey.
I agree that faculty play a key role in reinforcing the importance of this resource. A reminder to faculty about the orientation module—and a request that they encourage students to self-register and consult its contents—would be an effective way to maximize engagement with the material.
We could also consider small improvements to further enhance accessibility and uptake, such as including the registration link in multiple student communications or integrating brief references to the module within early course materials.
Recommendation 9
Develop and implement an enhanced system for student progress monitoring.
Program Response
This recommendation is pertinent and actionable. At this time, we use a spreadsheet that gets updated periodically, but more thorough and systematic monitoring would be helpful in keeping track of student advancement. A discussion with our program representative will be initiated in order to determine understand what the present process is and how it could be optimized to monitor more closely student progress.
Dean’s Response
I agree that while your current spreadsheet provides a basic overview, implementing a more thorough and systematic approach to monitoring student progress would greatly enhance our ability to support their advancement effectively. I appreciate your initiative to engage with the program representative to gain a clearer understanding of the existing process.
Any improvements made to the student monitoring system could potentially benefit other graduate programs as well, so I encourage you to share your insights and findings that emerge from these discussions with them.
Do not hesitate to suggest any resources or support you may need to optimize the monitoring system.
Recommendation 10
Establish a permanent part-time faculty position (equivalent to one three-credit course release) in the MPA Program to coordinate and support content development across electives while maintaining delivery by contract faculty.
Program Response
Considering the budgetary restrictions ongoing at RMC, this recommendation seems highly unlikely to be achieved, although we do see how the proposed path of action would be beneficial to ensure quality and continuity in our course content while maintaining delivery by contract faculty. The chair will discuss it with the relevant authorities.
Dean’s Response
The Dean fully recognizes the value of the recommendation in ensuring quality and continuity in the program’s course content, especially while maintaining delivery by contract faculty. The commitment to enhancing our program is appreciated. However, given the current budgetary restrictions at RMC, we do not presently have the resources available to implement this recommendation. Nonetheless, I encourage the chair to discuss the proposal with the relevant authorities, as it may inform future planning when resources permit.
Implementation Plan
| Recommendation |
Proposed Follow-up |
Responsibility for Leading Follow-up | Timeline for Addressing Recommendation* |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Review course offerings and relevance of the three “streams” every three years. |
|
|
|
| 2. Strike a Standing Advisory Committee that can be convened periodically to provide feedback as to the value of the program. |
|
|
Starting in Summer 2026 |
| 3. Formalize the relationship between Departments and the program chair. |
Initiate a discussion with the Dean of SSH, Dean of Graduate Studies, and relevant heads of department on possibility of an agreement |
|
Winter 2025 |
| 4. Explore accreditation by CAPPA, participation in CAPPA activities. | Initiate a discussion with CAPPA on the steps required in the accreditation process |
|
Fall 2026 |
| 5. Integrate a more explicit emphasis on public administration competencies through the re-orientation of one or more of the core courses. |
|
|
|
| 6. Encourage faculty to share their syllabus with the library prior to the start of the semester | Remind instructors to share their syllabi with the library at the start of each semester |
Chair |
Starting August 2025 |
| 7. Undertake a periodic review of the core courses to ensure alignment with the RMC mission. | To be addressed concomitantly with Recommendation 5 |
|
Starting Winter 2027 |
| 8.Convene a comprehensive orientation session for new students at the start of their program, including a clear articulation of the project and thesis options for degree completion. |
Advertise the existing orientation session more widely among our faculty at the beginning of the year so the information gets to our students. |
|
Starting August 2025 |
|
9. Develop and implement an enhanced system for student progress monitoring. |
|
|
Winter 2026 |
| 10. Establish a permanent part-time faculty position to coordinate and support content development across electives while maintaining delivery by contract faculty. | Discuss with the VPA to see what is possible considering RMC’s budgetary constraints. |
|
Summer 2026 |
*In consideration of the program chair forthcoming maternity/parental leave commencing in July 2025, the timelines for various initiatives have been prudently extended to alleviate the administrative demands on the interim chair, especially with respect to responsibilities necessitating sustained, multi-year oversight.
Conclusion
The ERC Report provided positive feedback on the outcomes of the MPA degree and confirmed that the MPA program aligns well with RMC's mission and academic plans, providing a robust educational experience that supports the goals of the institution. However, the ERC did identify areas that had room for improvement, and RMC is, or has already taken, taking steps to address the issues raised. RMC will continue to work toward program enhancement and improve student success in the MPA program.
The Dean of Graduate Studies, in consultation with the Dean of Social Sciences and Humanities and the Program Chair for MPA, is responsible for monitoring the Implementation Plan.