Senate Minutes - November 25, 1999

The University Senate met on 25 November 1999 at 3:05pm in Tweedie Hall, I. Newbould in the chair.
Present: I. Newbould, R. Summerby-Murray, B. Copp, C. Riggs, N. Grant, P. Baker, B.A. Miller, J.-G. Godin, K. Hamer, C. Hunter, M. McCullough, S. Lochhead, L. Owen, T. Craig, G. Tucker, R. Aiken, J. Bates, R. Beattie, M. Blagrave, R. Blake, P. Bogaard, P. Bryden, B. Campbell, A. Cannon, A. Fancy, C. Grant, N. Ralph, J. Read, B. Robertson, P. Varma, J. Stewart, L. Cameron, N.J. MacPhee, S. Melanson, S. Peel, A. Deb, C. Hayward.

Regrets: D. Cameron, J. Keith, J. Laidlaw, P. Ennals, I. Cohen, D. Mossman, E. Dawe, J. Houtsma, M. Tucker, J. Weiss, C. Cohoon.

99.11.2 Approval of Minutes
It was moved by T. Craig, seconded P. Baker, that the Minutes of the meeting of 27 October 1999 be approved as circulated. The following corrections were made: page 3, 99.10.7, paragraph 3, the words "on a rotating basis" to be deleted; J. Stewart's name to be added to the list of those present. On question called, the motion

99.11.3 Business arising from the Minutes
C. Hayward reported on the work of the Ad hoc Committee on Academic Disruptions, outlining the current composition of the committee. A draft policy has been circulated and comments are sought by December 3rd with the intention of bringing a comprehensive policy forward early in the next academic term. B. Copp noted that non-faculty members of Senate did not appear to have received the draft policy. C. Hayward replied that it will be circulated to off-campus senators also.

99.11.4 Questions
C. Hunter informed Senate of the recent work of the Environmental Issues Committee, noting that this committee is working on the implementation of appropriate policies to reduce energy and resource use on campus. He asked whether it would be possible to reduce the amount of paper produced on Senate's behalf by avoiding the duplication of distributing separate agenda sheets to senators who already receive this information with the circulated minutes. I. Newbould asked the Secretary of Senate to take this under advisement and to explore other distribution options.

99.11.5 Report from Review Board
The chair of the Review Board, R. Bruening, presented the case of Jorge Arthur Barrera, candidate for the Bachelor of Arts with Honours. Barrera was awarded the B.A. at the October 1999 meeting of Senate but had an overall average GPA of 2.95 and required a 3.0 for consideration for Honours. R. Bruening reported that Faculty Council had recommended the granting of the degree with Honours. It was moved by K. Hamer, seconded B.A. Miller, that Senate act on the recommendation of Faculty Council to award the Bachelor of Arts degree with Honours to Jorge Arthur Barrera.

99.11.6 Report from Faculty Council
B.A. Miller reported on the October 19th and November 17th meetings of Faculty Council. A summary of his report follows.

At the October meeting, Faculty Council received reports on registration and the bookstore. Major concerns centred on the need for improved registration procedures and the need to reduce the high incidence of course changes in the first weeks of term. There was discussion of the efficacy of a summer registration process. Concerns were voiced over the authorising of tests on evenings other than Mondays. At the November meeting, Faculty Council considered a report from the Review Board and then discussed two priority issues raised by the University's Strategic Planning process: the future size of student enrolments, and the merits of increasing the number of graduate programmes. Speakers noted that any change in size of enrolments would be contingent on other decisions involving infrastructure, faculty and support staff. Dramatic changes in enrolments were seen to be unlikely but it was suggested that even small increases would push the resources of some departments beyond sustainable limits. Creating balance and the perception of the advantages of a small size were seen to be important. Concerns were expressed that recent growth in student numbers had not been matched by growth in the numbers of faculty. Further, some members pointed to problems of students receiving instruction from a limited pool of instructors who are also struggling to balance research and administrative demands. These issues are exacerbated by the University's lack of control over patterns of student course selection. Some support was expressed for a limited number of graduate programmes, with speakers noting the value of such programmes for the maintenance of research programmes and improving the competitiveness of researchers in external funding applications. Other speakers expressed concern at the difficulties of providing suitable institutional support for graduate programmes, particularly in terms of library and laboratory resources. The President noted difficulties facing smaller universities in these areas, particularly if a two-tier system of funding was to emerge out of recent federal government initiatives. Some speakers confirmed the need to develop agreements with researchers in other institutions to support higher-profile research programmes that might otherwise be difficult for researchers in predominantly undergraduate universities to access.

B.A. Miller reported to Senate that discussion of further topics arising from the Strategic Planning process would take place at the next meeting of Faculty Council. I. Newbould commented that the Executive Committee of Faculty Council has been trying to enhance the role of that body and that this type of discussion is proving to be an effective way of doing so. B. Campbell expressed the hope that more such discussion would take place.

99.11.6 Changes to Calendar Regulations on registration for overload credits, scheduling of term tests and final examinations, evaluation prior to course withdrawal date, and course outlines
K. Hamer introduced the following motions by noting that they were a direct response to situations encountered in the Deans' Office. All motions were intended to streamline approval processes by introducing a GPA-based criterion for course overloads, ensuring the availability of information on course assessment before withdrawal dates, and revising regulations on scheduling of terms test and final examinations.

It was moved by K. Hamer, seconded by P. Baker, that Calendar Regulation 6.5 be amended to read as follows:

6.5 (1) Full-time students are expected to register for the equivalent of 30 credits in the September-May academic year, normally 15 credits per term. Students in years 2, 3, and 4 may register for up to 18 credits per term, provided that they have attained a G. P. A. of at least 3.0 in the previous term. Students who do not meet this requirement must have permission from the appropriate academic Dean in order to register for overload credits. Students in first year will not normally be permitted to register for more than 15 credits per term. For overloads in excess of 6 credits for the September-May academic year, additional fees will be charged.

6.5 (2) For students with fourth-year standing, no minimum G. P. A. is required to register for up to 6 credits overload. The permission of the appropriate academic Dean is required for registration above a 6-credit overload. Third and fourth-year B. F. A. students may register for up to 18 credits per term. Students in any programme may add ensemble credits in Music to a normal course load.

R. Beattie asked what proportion of students requesting overloads have their requests denied. K. Hamer indicated that exact statistics were not kept but that the large majority of requests were from able students with good GPAs. A. Fancy sought clarification of the motivations for requesting overloads and, after explanation from K. Hamer and J-G. Godin, agreed that the motion seemed to address difficulties students might face in catching up courses, gaining pre-requisites, or broadening horizons. The motion

CARRIED.
It was moved by P. Baker, seconded by K. Hamer, that Calendar Regulation 6.47 be amended as follows (proposed changes in italics):

6.47 (1) No in-class or take-home tests worth more than 10% of the final grade, and no final tests or examinations may be scheduled during the last five days of either term, or between the last day of classes for the term and the first day of the examination schedule. All final tests and examinations (except laboratory examinations) will be scheduled in the final examination period. Requests for exemption from this regulation must be directed to the Vice-President (Academic) for authorization.

6.47 (2) No term test worth more than 25% of the final grade may be scheduled in the week prior to the last five days of classes in either term. No term test may exceed the value of the final examination in the course.

I. Newbould noted that the intent of the motion was to clarify the existing regulation. C. Hayward asked if this regulation was intended to apply to final term papers. K. Hamer responded that there has never been a regulation on term papers but the question is raised annually. S. Peel sought clarification on the effect of the regulation on the scheduling of 'take home' exams. P. Baker and K. Hamer responded that it seemed reasonable to expect that these would be scheduled within the usual examination period and that the intent of the motion was to decrease the stress on students in the final weeks of term. J. Stewart suggested that there are really two substantive issues in the motion: timing and the nature of assessment within the course. B. Campbell similarly argued against the motion, noting that the final sentence of the motion placed limits on potentially-sound pedagogical practice. With a number of speakers confirming this point, the mover and seconder of the motion agreed to split the motion into two parts, by sentence, and discussion returned to the issue of timing. C. Hunter noted that the term 'week' remained ambiguous. J. Read opposed the motion on the grounds that information on test scheduling should be made available to students at the beginning of the course. A. Fancy argued that the proposed regulation was necessary to limit the disruptive effects of major tests on the last part of the teaching term. On question called, the first part of the motion as divided

FAILED.
It was moved by J.-G. Godin, seconded by P. Baker, that Calendar Regulation 6.8 (p. 16, Calendar) be amended as follows (proposed changes in italics):

6.8 (1) Registration changes are allowed for 3 credit courses during the first week of classes of either term or for 6 credit courses during the first two weeks of first term. Application must be made to the Student Administration Services Office.

6.8 (2) In all courses, work worth at least 20% of the final grade will normally be evaluated and returned to students before the withdrawal date for the course. Exemptions from this policy must be authorized by the appropriate academic Dean.

CARRIED.
It was moved by K. Hamer, seconded by J.-G. Godin, that Calendar Regulation 6.30 (p. 17, Calendar) be amended as follows (proposed changes in italics):

6.30 In the first week of classes at the beginning of each academic term instructors shall provide each student in their courses with written information indicating the policy concerning assignments, tests, final examination, practical and laboratory work, class attendance and supplemental examinations. The same information shall also be provided to the Department Head and the appropriate academic Dean.

R. Aiken expressed concern that the motion proposed an increase in paperwork for instructors and department heads. K. Hamer responded that the intent was to ensure that the appropriate information was available so as to protect faculty members as well as students. Discussion centred on the appropriate medium for the required information, whether in paper form or on the Web. P. Varma urged caution with the Web, noting that information on it is easily changed. On question called, the motion

N.J. MacPhee urged the Deans to consider the issue of the timing of final term papers also.

99.11.7 Correspondence re appeal of Senate regulations on GPA calculation
A letter from A. Marcantonio, dated 18 October 1999, was circulated to members of Senate. A. Marcantonio requested Senate to consider an appeal of Calendar regulation 6.32 regarding the calculation of cumulative GPA, arguing that the inclusion of a failed course grade (which was passed subsequently) affected the GPA calculation negatively. B.A. Miller asked whether our regulation differs from those of other universities. L. Owen replied that he was unaware of any universities which deleted failures from the academic records of students but was uncertain of other policies when it came to including grades for repeated courses. I. Newbould suggested that there was a wide range of practices and that Mount Allison's is not unusual. S. Melanson asked what effect the proposed appeal would have on the Marcantonio case. L. Owen replied that the effect was minimal, only 0.08 increase in GPA. Discussion of the individual case turned to general principles, including connections to course withdrawal dates, the fairness of including past failures in the overall record, and the need for a more thorough discussion. It was moved by R. Aiken, seconded A. Fancy, that the issue be referred to the Senate Committee on Academic Matters. The motion

99.11.8 Strategic Planning update
I. Newbould provided a brief update, noting that the Steering Committee has been meeting regularly.

99.11.10 Announcements
I. Newbould announced that the faculty representative to the Board of Regents will be P. Edwards.

I. Newbould noted that the Capital Campaign total now stood at about $17.5million with every indication that the campaign goal would be reached by spring of 2000. The campaign was poised to add significantly to the support of programmes, teaching and research.

J Read requested that the effects of Calendar regulation 6.30 as amended be considered further. I. Newbould and B.A. Miller noted that informing students about the final examination timetable at the beginning of each term might be considered also. T. Craig recommended that this be investigated and I. Newbould suggested that the matter be turned over to the Deans so that they might consult with J. Hollett.

J. Stewart reminded all teaching faculty of the regulation on the scheduling of evening tests: only Monday evening tests can be approved by the appropriate Dean; tests on other evenings require the approval of the Vice-President (Academic and Research).