This website stores cookies on your computer. These cookies are used to collect information about how you interact with our website and allow us to remember your browser. We use this information to improve and customize your browsing experience, for analytics and metrics about our visitors both on this website and other media, and for marketing purposes. By using this website, you accept and agree to be bound by UVic’s Terms of Use for web and social media privacy.  If you do not agree to the above, you can configure your browser’s setting to “do not track.”

Skip to main content
People Departments Maps Buildings Rooms A-Z
University
of Victoria
Apply Library
Sign in Online tools Sign out
Faculty of Engineering and Computer Science

Building what's next: Celina Berg on her new role as Associate Dean of Undergraduate Programs in the Faculty of Engineering and Computer Science

August 07, 2026

Portrait of Celina Berg

Celina Berg has spent her career asking the same question at progressively larger scales: how do we make learning better for students? First in the classroom, focused on understanding how computing is learned to better inform how it is taught. Then at the program level, chairing the committee that redesigned UVic's computer science degree from the ground up. Now, stepping into the role of Associate Dean of Undergraduate Programs for the Faculty of Engineering and Computer Science, the scale is bigger still. We asked Celina to talk about what she's bringing to the role, and where she hopes to take it. 

Your research focuses on how students learn: mastery-based learning, test anxiety, and evidence-based teaching. How does that background shape how you approach this role? 

I think there's a real opportunity to bring a research lens to the work of the AD role, not just policy and administration, by genuinely asking what the evidence tells us about how students learn and how we can structure their experience accordingly. Earlier in my career I spent time at an institution with a strong culture of evidence-based teaching and active learning. That raised the bar for me in terms of what's possible when you're intentional and structured about it, and I've tried to carry that mindset with me in everything I do. 

One example is PrairieLearn, an online assessment platform I've been working to introduce across the faculty. It supports randomized question banks, which give students more opportunities for practice, reinforcing a mastery-based learning approach while making assessments easier to manage and grade. Beyond that, it promotes accessible learning and a universal design for learning approach, where accommodations designed for some learners can improve the learning experience for everyone. That's a principle I care deeply about:  when you design for the students who need the most support, you make things better for everyone. 

You chaired the committee that redesigned UVic's computer science degree. What was the process like, and what came out of it? 

What changed the shape of that whole process was starting at the granularity of desired learning outcomes rather than existing courses. Instead of asking "what do we keep and what do we cut," we asked "what should a UVic computer science graduate actually be able to do?" That gave us a shared language and a basis for every decision. 

We agreed that the more critical a concept is, the earlier it should appear. We pushed the most important things closest to first year, and that way we could build in flexibility later years. The process started in 2023, well before Artificial Intelligence (AI) and LLMs were dominating every conversation, which I think was important. AI is woven throughout the new curriculum. In first year, students learn to use it as a thinking partner and tutor, not a shortcut, and by fourth year they're expected to use it fluently and critically.  

How do you think about AI in the classroom more broadly, particularly for students who are already using it? 

There's no single solution, and we do students a disservice if we don't talk about it honestly and help them understand both the strengths and limitations of AI as a tool. Our job is to prepare them for the world and the workforce, and they need to know how to use these tools critically. Students need to evaluate its responses, verify their accuracy, and understand when its suggestions are reliable and when they're not. 

The way I think about AI is the same way I think about a calculator. A calculator is only useful if you understand the math behind what you're trying to do. If you don't, it's easy to get the wrong answer without realizing it. But when you do understand the underlying concepts, it becomes an incredibly powerful tool that lets you work more efficiently. 

I think the same is true of AI. We should introduce it as a tool, not as a solution, especially in the early years, when students are building their foundational knowledge. Even in first year, we can teach students to use AI as a tutor rather than an answer machine: to ask questions, check their understanding, and clarify misconceptions while still taking responsibility for evaluating whether the answers the AI gives are correct. This is a skill that will serve them throughout their education and as lifelong learners. 

The faculty has key commitments around access and equity: transfer pathways, LaunchPad, 30 by 30. Where do you see your role in continuing that work? 

Our previous Associate Dean, LillAnne Jackson, did enormous work building the transfer pathway network with institutions across BC, and I want to continue and expand that. As someone who started at Camosun myself before coming to UVic, I understand firsthand what those pathways mean. They take the pressure off decisions that students are otherwise forced to make at 16 or 17, before they may be ready. Our team is now looking at opportunities beyond BC, into other provinces and Washington State, which is exciting. 

LaunchPad’s flexible admission requirements coupled with tutoring and mentorship has real potential to make engineering and computer science more accessible to a broader range of students who man not have previously considered these fields as an option.  This includes mature students looking to reskill, as well as Indigenous learners who may not have had the opportunity to complete the required mathematics and science courses in high school. By creating alternative pathways into engineering and computer science, LaunchPad can help broaden participation among groups that have been historically underrepresented in these disciplines. Expanding these pathways is a key priority for our faculty and supports both our commitments to Truth and Reconciliation and our 30 by 30 goal of increasing the representation of women and other underrepresented groups in engineering and computer science. I've seen a similar model work well at another institution I taught at, and the right supports can make an enormous difference for students who just need a different entry point into the program. It takes the finality away from early life decisions and opens the door to wider range of students. 

What does success look like at the end of your first term? 

A functional team that's making transparent decisions and communicating clearly about what we're trying to achieve and why. That is something I care about deeply. Students and faculty should understand how decisions get made and feel that those decisions are being made with their interests in mind. 

I also want to be very connected to our student community. ECS has an incredible range of student groups, from design and robotics teams to advocacy and community organizations, and there is great energy and potential in what they are doing. I'm looking forward to finding ways to support their work, build genuine connections across the faculty and make sure student perspectives help shape the decisions we make.