As approved at the February 15, 2002, meeting of the Senate. Copies of Appendices not included herein are available from the University Secretariat, Room 290, Stevenson-Lawson Building.
The meeting was held at 1:30 p.m. in Room 1R40, Richard Ivey School of Business.
P. Ashmore, D. Baxter, R. Beaujot, A. Belcastro, F. Berruti, G. Blazak, R. Bohay, E. Cairns, T. Carmichael, M. Carroll, R. Corless, R. Darnell, P. Davenport, H. DeLasa, J. Doerksen, D. Dutrizac, A. Esterhammer, C. Farber, W. Flintoff, T. Fulton, A. Garcia, J. Garland, J. Garnett, S. Gibson, R. Graham, R. Harris, C. Hall, J. Hatch, J. Haywood-Farmer, I. Holloway, R. Howse, F. Irani, C. Iwasiw, A. Khan, W. Kennedy, G. Killan, A. Lee, F. Longstaffe, S. Majhanovich, A. Makim, L. Mansinha, R. Martin, L. McKechnie, J. McMullin, G. Moran, J. Morgan, S. Morgan, G. Nakhla, P. Neary, N. Nelson, K. Okruhlik, S. Osborn, R. Parks, A. Pearson, A. Percival-Smith, C. Piper, S. Radcliffe, J. Roth, S. Siegner, C. Smart, E. Stewart, J. Thomas, C. Thomson, B. Timney, M. Timney, T. Tutkaluk, S. Usprich, D. Vaillancourt, J. Van Fleet, J. Wallace, C. Watson, A. Weedon, B. Welling, P. Werstine, B. Wood, M. Workentin
Observers: L. Gribbon, D. Jameson, D. Jorgensen, M. Lawless
By Invitation: J. O'Brien, D. Riddell, J. Schroeder
The minutes of the meeting of December 7, 2001, were approved as circulated.
The President reported on the Federal Budget of December 10, 2001, a meeting with Minister Elizabeth Witmer, and a meeting with MPP Frank Mazzilli. Overheads used to highlight his presentation are attached as Appendix 1.
On behalf of the Operations/Agenda Committee, it was moved by A. Pearson, seconded by F. Irani,
That the Procedures for Casual Academic Appointments of Faculty at The University of Western Ontario (excluding physicians appointed in the Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry) document be revised as shown in Exhibit I, Appendix 1.
It was moved by A. Pearson, seconded by B. Timney,
That Senate approve and recommend to the Board of Governors, through the Vice-Chancellor:
That the Appointment Procedures for Senior Academic and Administrative Officers of the University be amended by the addition of a new section R. VICE-PROVOST (POLICY, PLANNING & FACULTY) as shown in Exhibit I.
Professor Haywood-Farmer expressed his disappointment that the composition of the selection committee does not include automatic representation from the faculty. Dean Pearson stated that the model used is similar to other selection committees for senior academic and administrative officers and that faculty can be elected to the selection committee by Senate.
Professor Jorgensen agreed with Professor Haywood-Farmer, particularly since the proposed new position will involve overseeing the Office of Faculty Relations. In his view, it would also be appropriate to have formal representation from the Faculty Association on this Selection Committee because the individual will be involved with the implementation of the collective agreement. The operations of the collective agreement, from time to time, give rise to procedures in which grievances are launched. Grievances that do occur within the limitation of the collective agreement have to do with decisions taken ultimately at the highest level by the Provost. He asked if this new position inserts a step between access to the Provost regarding these procedures or whether it involves day to day administration. Dr. Moran stated that this position is not intended to add a step between the Provost and the responsibilities assigned to the Provost within the collective agreement. The additional resources and support in the office will provide the Provost with the opportunity to better focus on those areas where it is appropriate that the Provost play a key and direct role.
Mr. Morgan asked for further information about the position. Dr. Moran stated the position would be a full-time secondment, most likely, from within the academy. The cost of the position depends on the salary of the individual involved and it could be in the range of approximately $100,000+. There might be some modest increase in demand for administrative support but not a full-time position.
Mr. Makim voiced concern that the administration is expanding their executive ranks while at the same time going to the provincial and federal government for additional funding. He asked what the creation of this position will allow the Provost to do that he can't currently do. Dr. Moran stated that Western's administration is extremely lean and that concern about adding to the administrative ranks is misplaced. The role of the Office of the Provost is to serve the community as a whole and the establishment of this new position will allow such to be done. This includes focussing on key issues such as development of the budget, policy issues and issues surrounding faculty recruitment and retention.
Professor Carroll asked why the Office of Faculty Relations is not expanded to meet the increasing needs of the Office of the Provost, rather than creating a new position. Dr. Moran stated that role of the new Vice-Provost is not strictly associated with faculty relations. The position encompasses policy, planning and faculty and is expected to compliment the activities of the Office of Faculty Relations. There are many issues involving faculty recruitment, retention and career development that do not involve the collective agreement whereas the role of the Office of Faculty Relations is largely restricted to activities that are associated with the collective agreement. The intent is that this new position will provide support to the Deans and Chairs and young members of faculty.
Dr. Davenport reminded Senate that prior to Dr. Moran's reappointment as Provost a review was conducted of the position. The review committee concluded that the functions of the Office of the Provost continue to grow such that he cannot focus on crucial issues. As an example, in addition to his daily duties, last winter the Provost dealt with issues involving joint programs between Fanshawe and Western in nursing and media studies, issues involving SuperBuild, issues involving the double cohort, issues involving the Strategic Plan and other critical issues including the expansion of the medical program and its funding. At every other university the Provost has two or three senior individuals working on these types of issues. Western does not. Western's current Vice-Provost also acts as the Registrar which in itself is an enormous job. The Provost will be able to delegate a particular issue to the Vice-Provost who can then update him as needed. That is the spirit in which the review committee saw the position of Vice-Provost (Policy, Planning & Faculty).
It was moved by C. Piper, seconded by M. Carroll,
That the composition of the selection committee be revised as follows:
c) 3 persons elected by Senate, one of whom shall be a Dean
d) 1 faculty member nominated by the University of Western Ontario Faculty Association
The amendment was called and CARRIED.
Mr. Makim suggested that the recommendation be referred back to the Operations/Agenda Committee until the Provost and the administration clearly define the new Vice-Provost's duties.
Dean Neary stated that in the last few years the burden on Western's administration, which is felt across the institution, is tremendous. This consideration must be taken into account. There are obvious sources for the increased administrative burden but it is important for the senior officers of the University to be able to rise above the constant burden and concentrate on key policy matters that affect the institution.
Asked if it would be possible to expand the membership of the selection committee to include a student, Dean Pearson explained that Western has a Vice-Provost who acts as the Registrar consequently issues with respect to student affairs fall under that position.
The main motion, as amended, was called:
That Senate approve and recommend to the Board of Governors, through the Vice-Chancellor:
That the Appointment Procedures for Senior Academic and Administrative Officers of the University be amended by the addition of a new section R. VICE-PROVOST (POLICY, PLANNING & FACULTY) as shown below:
R. VICE-PROVOST (Policy, Planning & Faculty)
Composition of Selection Committee
A committee to select a Vice-Provost (Policy, Planning & Faculty) shall consist of:
(a) The Provost & Vice-President (Academic), who shall be Chair
(b) The Vice-President (Research)
(c) 3 persons elected by Senate, one of whom shall be a Dean
1 faculty member nominated by the University of Western Ontario Faculty Association
1. The Chair shall convene the Committee.
2. The Chair shall undertake negotiations with prospective candidates.
3. The Chair shall report to Senate through the President & Vice-Chancellor.
The term of the Vice-Provost is five years and may be renewed.
It was moved by A. Pearson, seconded by F. Irani,
That, effective January 1, 2002, the Constitution of the Faculty of Engineering Science be amended, as shown in Exhibit I, Appendix 2, including the change of name of the "Faculty of Engineering Science" to the "Faculty of Engineering", as recommended by the Council of the Faculty, subject to Senate's approval of the name change (see S.02-019 below);
That references to the Faculty in University policies and procedures (e.g., committee terms of reference and other Faculty constitutions) be changed to reflect the new name.
It was moved by A. Pearson, seconded by D. Vaillancourt,
That the Constitution of the Faculty of Arts be amended as detailed in Exhibit I, Appendix 3.
It was moved by A. Pearson, seconded by A. Makim,
That the composition of the Subcommittee on Information Security be amended:
FROM: Executive Assistant to the Vice-President (Administration) and General Counsel, appointed as legal counsel
TO: Associate General Counsel
Dean Pearson confirmed that the position Associate General Counsel is new and is filled by a new person. The position Executive Assistant to the Vice-President (Administration) and General Counsel no longer exists.
The question was called and CARRIED.
On behalf of the Senate (S.96-124), the Provost approved the following amendments to the lists of Candidates for degrees and diplomas awarded at the respective convocations, as recommended by the Registrar.
Friday, October 26, 2001 Huron University College
Bachelor of Arts Honors
ADD TYLER CHRISTOPHER NELSON CAVELL
Bachelor of Arts
ADD CRAIG HOWARD HANNA
Friday, May 31, 1972 Faculty of Social Science
Bachelor of Arts
ADD BRIEN HOLMES
Monday, June 7, 1976 Faculty of Social Science
Bachelor of Arts
ADD ALAN ALBRIGHT
On behalf of the Senate Committee on Academic Policy and Awards, it was moved by B. Timney, seconded by G. Killan,
That a Bachelor of Arts in Honors Childhood and Family Relations be introduced at King's College, effective September 1, 2002, as detailed in Exhibit II.
Professor Carroll asked if the format of this honors program conforms to the matrix for undergraduate programs outlined in the document "Reform of the Undergraduate Program". Professor Timney advised that the program in its present form does not meet the guidelines of the Reform document. Any new program introduced over the next year or so must continue to comply with the current undergraduate degree program model, given that the implementation date of the Reform is September 2004. Professor Dutrizac confirmed that King's College is aware of this issue.
The question was called and CARRIED.
Before considering the motion, Senate accepted the following emendations [shown in italics] to the documentation detailing Progression Requirements:
Page 3: Last sentence in the paragraph Average Calculation should read: ...grades from 40% to 49% will be included as the actual grade reported.
Page 4: On Probation: A student will be urged to seek the advice of the Academic Counsellor(s) in his/her faculty;
Page 5: Course Residency Requirements: 1. Transfer students admitted with transfer credit must complete a minimum of five full or equivalent senior courses in the 15-course degree programs ...
With those changes, it was moved by B. Timney, seconded by W. Kennedy,
(a) That for 3-year, 4-year general, 4-year honors and other specialized programs in the faculties of Arts, Health Sciences ( Kinesiology, Health Sciences), Music, Science, Social Science, and the affiliated colleges, existing progression requirements based on grade points be replaced with a simplified set of progression requirements* that are based on average marks used to satisfy degree requirements.
(b) That the new requirements be implemented for any term starting September 1st, 2002, or later, for all students but with continuing students having the right of appeal to complete their program under grade point progression requirements if that is to their benefit.
An open-ended transition period is recommended to allow for appropriate assessment, fairness and equity in bridging the two systems of progression requirements. A phase-in approach, based on admit term, with new students only converting to average progression requirements and previously registered students operating under the grade points progression requirements, is not recommended. Such an approach will require special systems development/customization and will be difficult to administer, especially in situations where students change programs.
* NOTE: averages required for graduation may differ. Averages required on an overall program and Area of Concentration will not be less than 60%, and will be higher for some general programs and all honors programs.
Professor Haywood-Farmer asked if a mark of 54.6% would be rounded up to 55%. Mr. Morgan referred to the note on page 7 of Exhibit II: Averages will be calculated to two decimal places and rounded to the nearest whole number with .45 rounded up.
Professor Piper asked if a student taking four full course equivalents receives a 50% average, and is put on probation, that in level two, the student must have 70% on the other four courses in order to be removed from probation. Professor Timney confirmed this point. In order for a student to graduate, he/she must have an average of 60%. Currently "F's" are not calculated into the average, but with the revision to progression requirements, an "F" will be counted as 40% in the average. It will, therefore, be incumbent upon the student to do better. This revision acknowledges that the student can't ignore the "F". Dr. Harris explained that current practice is that students are required to withdraw but the revision introduces a "medium position" of the probationary period.
The question was called and CARRIED.
Dr. Harris thanked Ms. W. Kennedy and Prof. M. Owen for their time and efforts in making bringing this project to completion.
It was moved by B. Timney, seconded by M. Workentin,
That the admission category names and descriptions included in the Admissions Policy of the Faculty of Law be revised as outlined in Exhibit II.
Professor Welling asked if SCAPA consulted the University's Race Relations Policy concerning the revisions to the admission requirements for the Faculty of Law. Professor Timney said that SCAPA did not consult the policy because, in reviewing the proposal, the revisions are housekeeping items and minor word changes. Professor Welling stated that the Race Relations Policy specifically condemns and forbids any differential treatment of individuals on the basis of race . Professor Timney stated that his understanding of the Race Relations Policy interprets discrimination as discrimination in a negative sense. He stated that the intent of the discretionary categories is the provision of benefits for those groups or individuals who wish to enter the University. What is evident in the discretionary categories, not just for aboriginal applicants, but for mature applicants, applicants who have disabilities or applicants who have other problems that have perhaps reduced their grades below the level for a typical applicant, provides some benefit. He observed that if one follows Professor Welling's reasoning, the implication is that each of the discretionary categories should be abolished
Professor Welling disagreed with Professor Timney in that the Race Relations Policy does not distinguish between discrimination against and or discrimination in favor. The Policy clearly defines discrimination as differential treatment of an individual that is not based on individual performance, but arises only from racial group membership.
It was moved by B. Welling, seconded by A. Makim,
That the section Aboriginal in Discretionary Categories of the Admissions Requirements for the Faculty of Law be referred back to SCAPA.
Professor Timney reiterated that the same logic could be used relative to the other discretionary categories. Professor Welling contended that those categories are not being discriminated in favor of on the basis of race. Referral of the section is intended to cause the University to refrain from telling the public two completely different inconsistent messages, one in the Race Relations Policy and one in the Admissions category.
Dean Neary observed that there are two key words in the discretionary clause "welcomes" and "may" which are very conditional -- somebody may be admitted on the basis of certain qualifications.
Dean Holloway stated that the University's Race Relations Policy, notwithstanding some possible lack of clarification in wording, clearly contemplates admissions category; the constitution of Canada expressly permits what is described as positive discrimination as does the Ontario Human Rights Code. Policies written by branches of government are by law required to be interpreted in such a way that they do not conflict with law. Dean Holloway stated that his legal interpretation of the University's Race Relations Policy is that it permits the Law School to make admissions decisions taking into account discrimination suffered by aboriginal peoples over centuries. Dean Holloway accepted Professor Welling's point about the apparent inconsistency in policies and suggested that the University revisit its anti-discrimination policies to ensure that they clearly reflect the University's actions.
The question on the Motion to Refer was DEFEATED.
The main motion was called and CARRIED.
S.02-12a Diploma in Art Therapy
It was moved by B. Timney, seconded by S. Osborn,
That, effective September 1, 2002, the time limit for completion of the Diploma in Art Therapy, offered through The Western Centre for Continuing Studies in partnership with the Faculty of Arts, be reduced from 5 years to 3 years.
S.02-012b Diploma in Accounting
It was moved by B. Timney, seconded by S. Osborn,
That effective May 1, 2002, a three year time limit be established for completion of the Diploma in Accounting, offered through The Western Centre for Continuing Studies in partnership with the Faculty of Social Science. CARRIED
It was moved by T. Timney, seconded by S. Osborn,
That the policy on Supplemental Examinations be revised as highlighted in Exhibit II
It was moved by B. Timney, seconded by T. Tutkaluk,
That the policy on the structure of the academic year be amended to read:
"The final examination period will be at least 12 days in the first term and at least 17 days in the second term."
The "Report on the OCGS Appraisal of Graduate Programs at The University of Western Ontario During the Third Cycle (1996/97 - 2002/03)", detailed in Exhibit II, Appendix 1, was received for information.
Senate received for information the Terms of Reference for the following new scholarships, awards and bursaries for recommendation to the Board of Governors through the Vice-Chancellor:
Minor revisions will be made to the academic calendar and the Academic Handbook in the Collaborative Program in Nursing offered by Western and Fanshawe College. In the regulations for admission to the Basic Nursing Program, all references to the word "stream", e.g., Fanshawe Stream and Western Stream, will be revised to read "site". The word "stream" suggests different standards or levels and that was not the intent.
Senate received for information the Faculty of Education Sessional Dates for 2002-03, detailed in Exhibit II. These dates are in addition to those approved by Senate in December 2001.
On behalf of the Senate Committee on University Planning, it was moved by G. Moran, seconded by F. Berruti,
That the name of the Faculty of Engineering Science be changed to the Faculty of Engineering, effective January 1, 2002, as recommended by the Council of the Faculty of Engineering Science.
It was moved by G. Moran, seconded by S. Siegner,
That Senate provide advice to the Board of Governors, through the Vice-Chancellor, recommending the approval of the revised Employment Equity Policy, detailed in Exhibit III, Appendix 1.
Senate received information about the Spring and Fall 2001 Small Grants competitions for funding from the Academic Development Fund New Research and Scholarly Initiative Award, detailed in Exhibit III, Appendices 2 and 3.
Senate was advised that SCUP discussed traffic and safety issues related to the construction of the North Campus Building, as follow-up to concerns expressed at Senate's meeting of December 7, 2001. The following three options will be considered to resolve potential problems for students crossing Perth Drive to access the new classroom building.
The behavior of pedestrians and vehicles will be monitored once construction is completed.
Professor Percival-Smith presented two alternate proposals to address the potential problem of a collision between students crossing Perth Drive and vehicular traffic: a) removal of the road which eliminates the through traffic and b) converting Perth Drive to a single lane road for use by buses, ambulances, and fire trucks. He advocated that the best solution be adopted at the outset and in his view the solutions considered by SCUP are inadequate. Commenting on the possibility of closing Perth Drive, Mr. Riddell stated that pedestrians have the right of way over vehicular traffic and that he anticipates that the proposals considered by SCUP will eliminate the need to close the road to vehicular traffic.
Asked what it would cost to construct a pedestrian overpass to the North Campus Building, Mr. Riddell said that the cost would be approximately $2,000 - $3,000 per lineal foot. He pointed out, however, that constructing an elevated walkway would not preclude pedestrians from using other means of access to the North Campus Building.
Senate was informed that a 3,500 sq. ft. addition to the Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel will be constructed for graduate students, sited as detailed in Exhibit III, Appendix 4. The project cost is estimated at $600,000. Funds will be provided from the approved allocation of $27,900,000 for the Advanced Technology Centre SuperBuild project.
Announcements and Communications detailed in Exhibit IV, were received for information. Dr. Davenport announced that Mr. Gary Blazak, currently the President of the Alumni Association, has accepted the position of Director of Alumni Relations, effective February 18, 2002.
Professor Carroll remarked that last year's published list of Western employees who earned over $100,000 in 2000 combined salaries with retroactive payments, thus making it impossible to calculate actual salary increases for administrators as compared to others. He asked if the listing this year will separate these two components.
Dr. Davenport stated that Western will comply with Ontario's legislation vis-à-vis publishing a list of public sector employees whose taxable income exceeds $100,000, as defined by Revenue Canada. Privacy issues are a consideration and Western has no authority to go beyond the government's legislation. Professor Carroll asked how one can find out the salary increases for senior administrators this past year. Dr. Davenport agreed to take the question under advisement and to provide a response at the next Senate meeting.
Professor Jorgensen referred to a commitment in the recently approved Strategic Plan recently that academic plans will be used as a foundation for differential resource allocation within Departments, Faculties and across the University. He asked if the academic plans will be brought to Senate for debate and discussion. Dr. Davenport stated that the academic plans will be integrated into the budget planning process in that they are prepared by the relevant units, discussed with the appropriate Vice-President, and considered during the determination of annual budgets. Senate considers the overall budget forecast, which incorporates academic plans, in the Spring.
It was moved by J. Thomas, seconded by D. Vaillancourt,
Whereas the Senate acknowledges that the University community has a unique responsibility to protect and preserve accessible, quality post-secondary education
And Whereas the Society of Graduate Students, in concert with other concerned citizens across the country, have taken on this responsibility by planning activities for February 6, 2002, to convince governments to reinvest into the University and maintain its relevance and vitality
Be it resolved that the Senate stand in solidarity with the students and encourage their participation in these activities by declaring February 6, 2002, to be a penalty free day where no student shall receive an academic penalty for not attending classes.
Be it further resolved that the Senate endorse lawful and respectful activities that raise awareness of the need for more substantial federal and provincial commitments to post-secondary education.
Speaking in support of the motion, Mr. Thomas stated that the root of the financial problems associated with post-secondary education is inadequate federal and provincial funding. The Day of Action involves calling for a fully funded tuition freeze but not at the expense of other on-campus groups. It is in this spirit that the Society of Graduate Students seeks Senate's approval of the motion which would demonstrate Senate's commitment to the event, gains legitimacy for the Day of Action and sends a message to the Ontario government that when faced with a common threat, the University stands together. He reported that several other Ontario universities approved a similar motion concerning the Day of Action. Activities planned for the Day of Action include use of the "concrete beach" for afternoon rallies, music, arts, and speakers. A march to MPP Cunninghams' London office will begin at 2:25 p.m. Additional speeches will be given at this location. Dean Holloway asked what steps will be taken to ensure the protest is lawful and respectful, noting that an exterior door of the Law Building has been defaced with stickers supporting the event. Mr. Thomas stated that the intentions of the organizers are purely lawful and respectful, but as with any type of gathering, the possibility exists for the presence of a bad or unwanted element.
Before considering the motion, Dr. Davenport spoke about bringing matters to Senate. He urged Senators to submit their recommendations to the University Secretary in a timely fashion thereby allowing the Senate Operations/Agenda Committee (OAC) the opportunity to consider same, provide advice on the matters, and place them on the agenda, where appropriate. This process also provides Senators time to consider a motion before a meeting. He recalled that two years ago SOGS submitted a similar motion concerning ACCESS 2000 in time for OAC's consideration. OAC considered the issues and given the implications declined to place the item on Senate's agenda. The Graduate Student Senators were advised to raise the matter during Enquiries and New Business and did so.
Dr. Moran spoke in support of the cause and the day's events, but contended that Senate, as in the past, should not endorse the motion. Senate respects and encourages individuals to follow their principles to support events and causes of their own interest. Senate also respects the right of an individual instructor to make decisions regarding matters such as absenteeism, missing exams, tests, labs, etc. and it would be inappropriate for Senate to break that tradition and constrain the right of instructors. Dr. Harris concurred with the Provost's view. Endorsing a blanket statement that absolves students of responsibility for being present in class is something that cannot be assessed in terms of its implications because Western is a large and complicated institution.
Senate accepted the following friendly amendment (shown in italics) to the wording to the third part of the motion:
Be it resolved that the Senate stand in solidarity with the students and support their participation in these activities by encouraging members of the academic staff to be lenient with students who cannot attend classes on February 6, 2002.
Mr. Morgan suggested that students should approach their instructor prior to the event. The new wording encourages the instructor to be lenient on the students who attend the day of protest.
Following further discussion of the merits of the motion, the question was called and was DEFEATED.
The meeting adjourned at 3:35 p.m.
P. Davenport, Chair
J.K. Van Fleet, Secretary