Senate Agenda - EXHIBIT IV - March 23, 2001
FOR APPROVAL
Recommended:
Implementation:
Given the experience of recent years and current application figures, there is a real possibility that minimum entrance requirements in most programs will be higher than 77% in 2001-2002.
The timing of the new application and offer process for OAC students (implemented in 1999-00) is such that early offers are made in March / April when less information is available about applicants than was the case prior to 1999-00.
The same framework will be applied to making early offers to OAC students in March / April, 2001, as was the case in the last year. Grade value (italics) will be set as a function of final information regarding applicant qualifications in each program.
Offer made if:
The details of this matrix may vary slightly from program to program (e.g. Music where auditions are an essential part of the admissions process).
Every effort will be made to maintain single minimum standard of admission in Arts, Social Science (including ACS), Science, Information and Media Studies, Kinesiology, and Health Sciences. A higher standard may be necessary in Nursing to meet enrolment targets. Our goal will be to set the same standard for Engineering Science as for Science, but given the special funding opportunities of the ATOP program, consideration will be given to maintaining the minimum entrance requirement at 77% even if other programs have a marginally higher entrance requirement in 2001-2002.
As indicated in the Senate resolutions of past years, consideration may be given in the admissions process to factors such as performance in program-relevant courses (e.g., mathematics and sciences in Science and Engineering Science), relevant extra curricular activities, and the academic record of the secondary school.
As was the case in 1999 and 2000, the period between the availability of initial application information (still not including final year, winter semester applicant grades) and the offer date does not permit an admissions proposal that includes detailed program-specific admissions criteria to be brought to Senate for consideration before initial offers were made.
An additional round of offers will be made in May 2001. Criteria used for those offers will be set as a function of additional information on applicant qualifications and program-specific patterns of acceptance of early offers, but will observe the general entrance requirements established in this recommendation.
Affiliated Colleges
Recommended: That the following entrance requirements and processes for the Affiliated Colleges be approved for 2001-2002:
Brescia College. Brescia College is targeting a first year class of approximately 250 students in 2001-2002. As is the case at the Constituent University, Brescia College will not set general entrance requirements until more complete information on applicant qualifications is available. On the basis of current information, however, the College tentatively is considering an entrance requirement of 74% for early offers in March / April, 2001, and 72% for offers made in May 2001. Irrespective of final applicant qualification information, however, Brescia will set no program entrance requirement lower than 70%. The College will consider individual students with lower grades on the basis of supplementary information forms. No student will be admitted with a final OAC average of less than 68%.
Huron University College. Huron is targeting a first year class of between 310 - 320 students in 2001-2002. As is the case at the Constituent University, Huron University College will not set general entrance requirements until more complete information on applicant qualifications is available. On the basis of currently available information, however, Huron is anticipating a minimum entrance requirement of 78% for early offers in March / April, 2001. No student will be admitted with a final OAC average of less than 75%.
King's College. King's College is targeting a first year class between 750 - 800 students in 2001-2002. No offers will be made until May 2001, when more complete applicant information is available. On the basis of currently available information, and depending on the quality of the applicant pool, King's anticipates a minimum entrance average of 74-76% for Arts and Social Science and 76-78% for Childhood and Family Relations. For limited enrolment programs shared with UWO, King's anticipates 78% for ACS, 80% for BHSc, 78-80% for MIT and 77% for Kinesiology (or no less than averages set by the Constituent University). No student will be admitted with a final OAC average of less than 70%.
All Affiliated Colleges will be bound to the entrance requirements established by the Constituent University for limited enrolment programs, including MIT, BHSc, and Kinesiology.
Recommended: That Senate approve and recommend to the Board of Governors, through the Vice-Chancellor, the establishment of the Royal Bank Financial Group Foundation Economic Policy Research Institute (to be commonly known as the Economic Policy Research Institute or EPRI) as a Type 3 research entity, as described in the attached Constitution (Appendix 2).
Background:
In March of 1987, Senate approved a policy for the establishment and designation of collaborative research groups at Western (S.4256). This policy divided such groups into four types, based upon scope, reporting structures and sources of funding. The policy (Guidelines for Collaborative Research, Policy 7.9) defines the various "Types" of research entities. Relevant to the proposal to establish the EPRI are the following:
Type 3: A collaborative research venture with formal recognition of Senate and Board of Governors. There is an administrative structure, a budget and possibly some assignment of space. The Director is appointed according to procedures approved by Senate. Such collaborative research ventures should be designated as Centres.
Type 4: A research organization having a formal agreement with the University and funded from external sources, including capital costs, salaries of the Director and staff, and operating costs. Only Type 4 units can be called Institutes.
Approval of the recommendation effectively grants an exception to the nomenclature prescribed in the Guidelines by allowing a Type 3 entity to be called an "Institute".
The policy established in 1987 has served the University well over the years, but requires close review to see if it is meeting current needs. This review will be undertaken shortly by the Office of the Vice-President (Research) and the result may be major amendments. For example, the various "Types" may be redefined or superseded by some other classification concept, and the current constraints on "Centre" and "Institute" nomenclature could cease to be an issue.
Recommended: That Senate approve and recommend to the Board of Governors through the Vice-Chancellor, the establishment of the Royal Bank Financial Group Foundation Fellow & Executive Director of the Economic Policy Research Institute (EPRI), as detailed in Appendix 3.
Recommended: That Senate approve and recommend to the Board of Governors through the Vice-Chancellor, the establishment of the Royal Bank Financial Group Foundation Post-Doctoral Fellow in Political Economy, as detailed in Appendix 4.
FOR INFORMATION
Academic Development Fund
The total budget for the Academic Development Fund in 2001-2002 is $1 million. Of this, $12,700 is required to fund the second year of projects given multi-year funding in the 2000-2001 competition. The sum available for allocation in 2001 is $986,958, taking into account $79,658 reverted to the ADF budget from unused portions of previous awards, the previous years' commitment of $12,700 and the allocation of $80,000 to support the Small Grants Competition for 2001.
This year SUPAD reviewed 29 applications for funding under the ADF, a decrease over the previous year when 54 applications were received. Of the 29 applications, 23 were recommended for funding. The total amount requested by these 29 applicants was $1,670,288; of this, $1,518,288 was requested for 2001-2002.
As in previous years, SUPAD divided into three subgroups in order to facilitate the detailed review and preliminary ranking of the applications. The subgroups and the number of applications within each are noted below.
|
Applications |
Funding | ||
|
Received |
Recommended |
Recommended | |
| Biosciences |
13 |
11 |
$470,330 |
| Physical and Mathematical Sciences and Engineering |
12 |
9 |
$407,697 |
| Social Sciencs, Arts and Humanities |
4 |
3 |
$ 98,019 |
|
29 |
23 |
||
|
$976,046 | |||
Reports from a total of 39 arm's-length external referees contributed to the assessment of the projects this year.
Applications involving computers were referred to the Senate Committee on Information Technology and Services (SCITS) for technical assessment.
SUPAD met twice as a whole to evaluate the applications and related materials. Separate meetings of subgroups did preliminary evaluations.
The total amount of the awards recommended for 2001-2002 is $976,046, excluding recommendations for multi- year projects in the Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities disciplines amounting to $61,246 for 2002-2003 and $63,854 for 2003-2004. Details are provided on the attached table (Appendix 5).
In a departure from previous years' practice, SCUP accepted a proposal from SUPAD that up to $50,000 of funds expected to revert to the ADF budget be allocated at the Spring 2001 Small Grants Competition. This is a one-time request in response to a greater demand and lower success rate in the Small Grants Competition. SUPAD does not expect that the allocation of an additional $50,000 will distort the success rate for the Spring 2001 Small Grants competition.