Agenda CLOSED SESSION · Agenda . for the Senate Meeting . on Friday, October 28, 2011 at 2:00 p.m. in the Senate Room, 608 Robertson Hall . CLOSED SESSION . 1. Approval of Agenda

Agenda

for the Senate Meeting on Friday, October 28, 2011 at 2:00 p.m. in the Senate Room, 608 Robertson Hall

CLOSED SESSION 1. Approval of Agenda for Closed Session 2. Minutes of the Closed Session of September 30th 2011 3. Graduation:

a) Notification of Receipt of Graduation Lists (Clerk) b) Cases Requiring Special Consideration (Faculty Board Representatives) c) Special Features in the Graduation Classes (Deans) d) Motion to graduate all recommended students

4. Procedure on Candidates Presented Late for Graduation (Clerk to report) 5. Report of the Senate Committee on Medals and Prizes (to be distributed at

the meeting) 6. Report of the Honorary Degrees Committee (to be distributed at the

meeting) 7. Other Confidential Business

OPEN SESSION 1. Approval of the Agenda for the Open Session 2. Remarks from the Chair 3. Reports

a) Provost and Vice-President (Academic) b) Associate Vice-President (Students and Enrolment) and University Registrar c) Associate Provost and Dean of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs d) Vice-President (Research and International) e) Vice-President (Finance and Administration)

4. Question Period 5. Minutes: Senate, September 30, 2011 (for approval) 6. Business Arising from the Minutes

a) Educational Equity b) Senate Executive

7. Approval of Committee Memberships 8. Reports from Committees:

a) Senate Academic Program Committee i) Carleton Academic Plan – progress report ii) Report on International Recruitment

b) Senate Committee on Admissions and Studies Policy c) Senate Student Academic Integrity Appeal Committee

9. Reports for Information and Comment a) Report: Activities of the Board of Governors b) Academic Colleague’s Report

10. Other Business

SENATE

Excerpt from the Senate Meeting held on October 24, 2008: 7. Senate Executive Committee: Changes to the Composition and Terms of Reference Senate considered documentation on the above-noted matter, dated 16 October 2008 (Appendix C). It was MOVED (Hauch, de la Gorgendiere) that Senate approve the changes to the Composition and Terms of Reference of the Senate Executive, as outlined in the Report (Appendix C). As the document was silent on the matter of quorum, the President noted that quorum for the Executive would be the norm, viz., fifty percent plus one. The Clerk added that the Executive could consider this matter and report back to Senate. It was noted that Deans could run for the elected faculty seats on the Senate Executive. It was MOVED (Monkhouse, Delle Palme) as an AMENDMENT to change #5 and 6 of the Composition to read “two students, elected by and from Senate”. Mr. N. Hauch, President of GSA, spoke against the amendment as the Presidents of the two students associations are already elected by students, adding that the changes maintain both graduate and undergraduate student representation on the Committee. AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED. THE MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED.

Carleton University Ottawa Canada Senate October 16, 2008 To: Senate From: Brian Mortimer, Clerk Re: Senate Executive Membership and Mandate Senate Executive has grown over the years so that now more than 25% of the membership of Senate serves on the executive (See Appendix). This has converted Senate Executive almost into a mini-senate. In fact, the quorum for Senate is 17 hence less than the current size of the Executive. It is recommended that Senate Executive be greatly reduced in size and have its mandate restricted to preparing the agenda and business for Senate. The Executive will also continue to look after esceptional graduation matters and nominations. Senate Executive with input from the Academic Governance Committee asks Senate to approve the following new membership and mandate for Senate Executive. In addition certain tasks, now assigned to the Executive will be reassigned to other committees. If approved these changes will take effect immediately and the Clerk will undertake a transition plan. Recommendations 1. Membership.

1. President, Chair of Senate 2. Provost, Vice-Chair of Senate 3. Clerk of Senate

4. three faculty members elected from and by Senate

5. President, CUSA 6. President, GSA

2. The mandate will be

a. Arrange the agenda and plan the forthcoming business of Senate; b. Nominate members for Senate committees, Special appointments to Senate, the

Clerk of Senate and Senate representatives as required; c. Approve Honorary degree candidates in special circumstances; d. Approval of late, or early, graduates, rescission of degrees and post-graduation

changes to student’s records; e. Other tasks as assigned by Senate.

3. Recommendations on the membership and structure of committees and Senate will be

assigned to the Senate Academic Governance Committee. 4. Approval of minor curriculum changes, scholarships and the academic schedule will be

assigned to Senate Academic Planning Committee.

Appendix: Current Membership and Mandate Current Membership:

1. The President and Vice-Chancellor (as Chair); 2. The Provost and Vice-President (Academic); 3. The Clerk of Senate; 4. The six Deans of Faculties; 5. Six members from the elected membership of Senate and elected by the full Senate; 6. The President of the Graduate Students’ Association; 7. The President of the Carleton University Students’ Association. 8. Associate Vice-President (Student and Academic Support Services)

The current mandate of Senate Executive is as follows. The Executive's current duties are to: (a) Arrange the agenda and plan the forthcoming business of Senate; (b) Recommend to the Senate the number, size and terms of reference of standing

committees of the Senate and to co-ordinate the work of Senate committees; (c) Nominate the Clerk of Senate for appointment by the Senate; (d) Nominate the members of standing committees of Senate, Senate representatives and

members of joint committees unless otherwise determined by Senate; (e) Recommend Special Appointments to Senate; (f) Approve all minor curriculum changes; (g) Approve new and revised scholarships and bursaries; (h) To act, on behalf of Senate, in approving honorary degree recipients in special-case

situations. (i) Approve the Academic Schedules; (j) Make decisions on such matters as the Senate may delegate to it. The functions of Senate Executive can be broadly grouped as agenda preparation (a),operation management (b), nomination (c) - (e), specific tasks (f) – (i). At other universities these tasks are often assigned to smaller committees or are grouped in various ways. Note also that recent policy changes have removed the responsibility of Senate Executive to deal with substantive student appeals. Requests to rescind a degree are all that is left.

Carleton University Senate Ottawa, Canada

Senate and Advisory Committee Members and Representatives 2011 – 2012

As of October 26, 2011

Nominated members are in BOLD

1. Senate Executive President (ex officio) Provost and Vice-President (Academic) (ex officio) Clerk of Senate (ex officio) Stephen Godfrey (2010) Root Gorelick (2010) Sukeshi Kamra (2010) Kaisha Thompson (Undergraduate student) Nick Falvo (Graduate student)

2. Senate Academic Program Committee President (ex officio) Provost and Vice-President (Academic) (ex officio), Chair Associate VP (Academic), Vice-chair Associate Provost (QA) (ex officio) Clerk of Senate (ex officio) Anil Maheswari (Science) (2007) Richard Dansereau (FED) (2009) Chris Worswick (FPA) (2011) Uma Kumar (2009) (Business) Davia Stasiulis (FASS) (2011) Wallace Clement (FGRS) Holly Gilroy (Graduate Student) Jessica Woodman (Graduate Student) Heather Page (Undergraduate Student) Evan Hamilton (Undergraduate Student) Janice Scammel (CUASA Observer) Resource: Calendar Editor

3. Senate Committee on Admission and Studies Policy Donald Russell (Chair) (2006) University Registrar (ex officio) Associate VP (Academic), (ex officio) Sukeshi Kamra (FASS) (2011) Victor Aitken (FED) (2009) Chris Brown (FPA) (2010) Mike Hine (Business) (2010) Jeff Dawson (Science) (2011) Vincent Lee (undergraduate student) Stephanie Feldman (undergraduate student) *** Vacant (graduate student) *** Vacant (alternate Student) Resources: Director of Admissions, Calendar Editor

4. Senate Curriculum Committee

Associate Vice-President (Academic), Chair

Chair, Programs and Planning Committee, FGSR

Chair, Academic Policy and Curriculum Committee (FASS)

Chair, Academic Policy and Curriculum Committee (FPA)

Chair, Academic Policy and Curriculum Committee (SSB)

Vice-Chair, APC, Eng Faculty Board Chair, Science Academic Planning

Committee Calendar Editor

5. Academic Governance Committee Clerk of Senate (ex officio) (Chair) Jennifer Henderson (FASS) Logan Atkinson (FPA) (2010) Alex Ramirez (Business) *** Vacant (FED) (2007) Root Gorelick (Science) (2007) Calum Carmichael (FGSR) (2009) James Splinter (graduate student) Sarah Cooper (undergraduate student)

6. Senate Committee on Student Awards Ram Achar (2007) Chris Dornan (2008) ***Vacant (faculty)) Perry Legakis, Director, Student Awards (Secretary) Delegate of the Vice-President, Finance & Administration Delegate of Chief Advancement Officer ***Vacant (student member) ***Vacant (student member)

7. Library Committee Stephen Fai (Chair) (2010) Margaret Haines (University Librarian) Janet Hampstead (Professional Librarian) *** Vacant (Library Staff) (2006) Jaffer Sheyholislami (FASS) (2009) Tom Darby (FPA) (2008) David Jackson (Business) (2006) Richard Yu (FED) (2011) *** Vacant (Science) André Loiselle (FGPA) Annie Kingston Miller (undergraduate student) Elizabeth Whyte (graduate student) *** Vacant (alternate student)

8. Honorary Degree Committee Kim Matheson– Chair President (ex-officio) Clerk of Senate (ex-officio) –

Secretary Flo Kellner (2011) Nicolas Papadopoulos (2009) Anna Hoefnagels (2009) Jim Wight (2007) Lenore Fahrig (2006) Eileen Saunders (2009) Gail Larose (2006) – Alumni Kyle Biggar – student Director, Communications (Resource)

9. Educational Equity Committee Associate Vice-president (Student Support Services) (Chair) Dan Irving (FASS) (2008) Vince Kazmierski (FPA) (2009) Troy Anderson (Business) (2008) Root Gorelick (Science) Ali Arya (FED) (2007) Ron Couchman (graduate student) Annie-Kingston Miller (undergraduate student)

10. Senate Undergraduate Studies Committee

John Logan (2011) (co-chair) Vacant (2011) (co-chair) Two representatives from the

FASS/FPA JCAS One representative of each other

CAS One representative from the

Undergraduate Petitions and Appeals Secretariat, non-voting

One representative from the Admissions Services, non-voting.

11. Student Academic Integrity Appeal Committee

Michael MacNeil (Chair) (2010) Donald Russell (Faculty) (2006) Dave Amundsen (Faculty) (2010) Zeba Crook (Faculty) (2011) Gordon Lamb (Undergraduate Student) Jeff Brennan (Undergraduate Student) Guy Massie (Graduate Student) Siobhan MacManus (Graduate Student)

12. Graduate Student Appeal Committee

Sunder Sundararajan (Science) (2008) Craig Bennell (2011) Ian Lee (Business) (2008) Chon-Lai Tan (FED) Patrick Coe (FPA) ***Vacant (Graduate Student)

13. Accommodations Appeal Committee

Diana Majury (2007) Roy Hanes (2006) Naomi Cappuccino (2006)

14. Tenure Appeal Committee

Graham Smart (FASS) (2009) Logan Atkinson (FPA) (2010) Uma Kumar (Business) (2010) ***Vacant (FED) (2010) David Miller (Science) (2010)

16. Representatives on the Board of Governors

Nick Rowe (2009) Chris Worswick (2011)

15. Senate Representatives on the University Promotion Committee

Fred Afagh (FED) (2009) Dorina Petriu (FED)(2010) Uma Kumar (Business)(2007) Dane Rowlands (FPA)(2009) André Loiselle (FASS)(2007) ***Vacant (Science)(2008) ***Vacant (FPA) (2009) Paul Keen (FASS) (2008)

17. Academic Colleague of the President Susan Whitney (2011)

18. Senate Nominee on the Tory Award Committee

Ali Arya (2009)

19. Marshal of Convocation

Katharine Kelly (Clerk)

20. Senate Electoral Officer Clerk of Senate

Advisory Committees: President 21. Ombudsperson Advisory Committee

James Deaville (2009) 22. Spring Conference Committee

Andy Adler (co-chair) Michelle DeVidi (co-chair) Joe Scanlon (retiree rep) James Cheetham (Science rep) Adrian Chan (FED rep) David Jackson (Business rep) Nandini Sarma (FASS rep) Melissa Haussman (FPA rep) Darlene Gilson (Research & International)

Advisory Committees: Vice-President (Academic)

23. Animal Care Committee

24. Athletics Board (Senate to appoint three members of

faculty) Fred Michel (Chair) Linda Duxbury Richard Nimijean

Advisory Committees: Vice-President (Finance & Administration) 25. Bookstore Advisory Committee Advisory Committee: Dean of Science 26. TSE Committee

John Buschek (Chair) (2008) Brian Burns Chris Dornan Paul Van Geel Scott Mitchell Jon Smith (student) Uma Kumar Pearl Jacobson (returns Jan 2012)

Office of the Provost and Vice-President (Academic) Carleton University 1125 Colonel By Drive Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6

The Carleton Academic Plan (CAP) Realizing Our Dreams As Canada’s Capital University Progress Report: 2010-2011 Academic Year Update: September 2011

CARLETON ACADEMIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION AGAINST THEMES AND OBJECTIVES

Prepared by the Office of the Provost and Vice-President (Academic), September 2011 2

A Message from the Provost and Vice-President (Academic)

I am very pleased to provide the first annual progress report on the implementation of the Carleton Academic Plan (CAP). This report covers the progress made over the first year of the CAP since its approval by Senate in June 2010. It addresses each of the Themes, Goals, and Objectives within the CAP, and outlines progress and initiatives as of September 2011. While there has been more activity in some areas than others, progress has been made in all areas of the CAP. Also, we have worked over the past year to put in place the CAP Indicators, which establish numerical measures, targets, and benchmarks to measure progress under the CAP and to establish targets for planning purposes. Together the Progress Report and Indicators provides an overview of many of the exciting developments that are occurring across Carleton under the auspices of the CAP. It is significant to

note that all aspects of the University are involved the realization of the CAP and I am grateful to everyone who is working on various aspects of the CAP to advance Carleton's academic development and reputation. I look forward to continue working with the Carleton community to implement the CAP during its second year of operation. Sincerely,

Peter Ricketts, BA (Hons), PhD Provost and Vice-President (Academic)



Theme A: Academic Development. Goal 1: Improve and Support Academic Quality and Development Objective 1.1: Enhance Excellence in Teaching and Learning Carleton will continue to support a rich learning environment for our faculty to become better teachers and researchers throughout their professorial careers. Initiative 1.1.1: More Effective Assessment of Teaching Quality Target: Within two years, Carleton will work closely with unions – CUASA and CUPE 4600- to develop a more efficient and effective student teaching evaluation tool and methodology for both faculty instructors and teaching assistants.

Progress: • Focusing on an efficient and effective

student teaching evaluation tool, a joint CUASA-Carleton subcommittee has agreed upon the terms of reference for an online pilot for the fall 2011 and winter 2012 terms. Ongoing discussions continue on potential changes to the evaluation tool and methodology.

Initiative 1.1.2: Support for Programs and Workshops to Improve Teaching and Research Target: Carleton will continue to expand and develop programs within the Educational Development Centre to assist faculty, contract instructors, and teaching assistants in achieving teaching excellence. Target: Carleton will continue to support excellence in faculty research through the Office of the Vice-President (Research and International).

Progress: • New initiatives to support teaching

excellence from the Education Development Centre (EDC) include: teaching certificate program for contract instructors, Provost’s Teaching Awards, the Academic Leaders Supporting Teaching program, and a new winter Teaching Assistant Orientation.

• To support teaching excellence in faculty research, the Office of the Vice-President (Research and International) has restructured and developed the new positions of Associate Vice-President (Research, Planning, and Operations) and five Faculty Research Facilitators. It has initiated a Research Mentor program with each academic unit.

Initiative 1.1.3: Embrace New and Innovative Technologies to Improve Teaching Quality and Student Learning Target: Carleton University will continue to support the innovative use of IT in teaching and learning, and will embark upon a strategy to integrate technology into our pedagogy in order to increase access to courses and programs.

Progress: • Increasing access to course and programs

through technology, Carleton University Online (CUOL) was launched in January 2011.

• CUOL has reported substantially increased revenues (31%) due to greater selection of courses and rising popularity of its fee based Video on Demand services.

• Classroom technology improvements were undertaken, including, server upgrades, expanded lecture capacity, and replacement of 112 e-classroom computers.

• The EDC involved faculty members in evaluation of a new learning management system (LMS) to replace WebCT and implementation is pending.

• The EDC is working with faculty members



and CCS to incorporate students’ mobile technology (smartphones, tablets, and laptops) into the classroom-learning environment.

• BigBlueButton, a synchronous online teaching tool has been adopted as the preferred tool to teach online tutorials and hold online office hours. In its first year of deployment more than 20 faculty members have used it (as compared to the previous tool, Elluminate, which 2 faculty members used).

• In collaboration with the Interactive Media Group (iMG), a research team at the Carleton School of Information Technology and the EDC implemented a number of 3D avatar virtual learning environments (archeological dig and language learning) for Carleton classes.

Objective 1.2: Improve the Quality of Academic Programs and Support Our graduates receive their degrees and diplomas for successful completion of a prescribed program of study. It is vital that these programs are described and implemented to a high standard. Initiative 1.2.1: Academic Quality Assurance Initiative Target: Commencing in 2010 and completed by 2015, Carleton University will design and implement a quality assurance process for academic programs that ensures that all our students – graduate and undergraduate – have an outstanding learning experience.

Progress: • Under the auspices of the new provincially-

mandated quality assurance regime, Carleton’s new IQAP, CUCQA, and the schedule of program reviews for 2010-2015 have been approved and discussions have been initiated for the review of all 13 joint programs with the University of Ottawa. The Office of Quality Assurance website has been launched and a new documentation prepared.

• Beginning in the Fall 2011, cyclical reviews (graduate and undergraduate), the development of new programs and major curricular changes will go through the new quality assessment process.

Initiative 1.2.2: Learning Outcomes Initiative Target: With a goal for completion within two years, this project is underway at the undergraduate level and will begin soon at the graduate level.

Progress: • The Learning Objectives Initiative focusing

on student learning expectations including: depth and breadth of knowledge; conceptual and methodological awareness; application of knowledge; communication skills; awareness of limits of knowledge; and autonomy and professional capacity is 90% complete at the undergraduate level and work is in the early stages at the graduate



level. Goal 2: Development of Strategic Interdisciplinary Themes Objective 2.1: Support the Development of Strategic Interdisciplinary Initiatives Carleton will provide support to interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary initiatives that cut across the traditional boundaries of the academy and create clusters of research and teaching expertise that will build distinctive programs, research, and external partnerships, and will distinguish Carleton as a progressive and innovative university of the twenty-first century. Initiative 2.1.1: Environment and Sustainability Initiative Target: Over the next five years, Carleton University will: • Promote research in the area of environment

and sustainability; • Bring coherence to and exploit synergy

among the academic programs, graduate and undergraduate, in the area of environment and sustainability;

• Attract more students to these programs and to our many courses in this area;

• Ensure that, whenever possible, environment and sustainability are part of our dialogue with our students; and

• Provide the academic contribution to the university’s sustainability initiative.

Progress: • To promote and develop Carleton’s

initiatives in the area of environment and sustainability, a Carleton Innovation Forum (CIF) project has been approved for $19,000. The final report is anticipated for March 31, 2012.

Initiative 2.1.2: Globalization and Global Identities Initiative Target: Over the next five years, Carleton University will: • Promote research in the area of globalization

and global identities; • Bring coherence to and exploit synergy

among the academic programs, graduate and undergraduate, in the area of globalization and global identities;

• Attract more students to these programs and to our many courses in this area; and

• Ensure that, whenever possible, globalization and global identities are part of our dialogue with our students.


initiatives in the area of Globalization and Global Identities, a Carleton Innovation Forum (CIF) has been approved for $25,000 for the development of a Global Studies Institute. The final report is anticipated for March 31, 2012.

• With the launch of CUOL in January 2011, international distance learning capabilities have been expanded.

• The Computer Assisted Language Centre to support language acquisition will receive new space.

• The Canada-India Centre for Excellence in Science, Technology, Trade and Policy and the Confucius Institute have been established at Carleton University.



Initiative 2.1.3: Health Initiative Target: Over the next five years, Carleton University will: • Promote research in the area of health; • Bring coherence to and exploit synergy

among the academic programs, graduate and undergraduate, in the area of health;


• Ensure that, whenever possible, health is part of our dialogue with our students.


initiatives in Health, a new Master’s program in Collaborative Health is in development. A Carleton Innovation Forum (CIF) has been approved for $11,000 for Clinical Engineering: “Engineering Health in Hospitals”. The final report is anticipated for March 31, 2013.

Initiative 2.1.4: Digital Media Initiative Target: Over the next five years, Carleton University will: • Promote research in the area of digital media; • Bring coherence to and exploit synergy

among the academic programs, graduate and undergraduate, in the area of digital media;


• Ensure that, whenever possible, digital media is part of our dialogue with our students.


initiatives in Digital Media, a Carleton Innovation Forum (CIF) has been approved for $20,000 for DH@WORKS: Digital History at Carleton Workshop. The final report is anticipated for March 31, 2014.

• To support teaching in large classes, new tools have been jointly developed by the Faculty of Engineering and Design and the Faculty of Public Affairs.

Objective 2.2: Establish Carleton Innovation Forums CIFs will help build Carleton’s interdisciplinary capacity through the development of: new undergraduate and graduate programs; conferences and workshops; research projects; community projects; international collaborations; and other activities. Initiative 2.2.1: CIF Development and Approval Process Target: It is planned to implement the CIF concept over the next two years. In the first instance, CIFs will be created as part of the development of the interdisciplinary themes of Carleton’s Strategic Plan. However, through the annual academic planning process we will seek to identify other interdisciplinary themes that would provide strategic development of Carleton University.

Progress: • To support the development and

advancement of the interdisciplinary themes of Carleton’s Strategic Plan, the Carleton Innovation Forum (CIF) program was launched in the fall 2010 and five key projects were approved in the amount of $100,000 have been approved. New proposals for this program will be accepted in the 2011-2012 academic year.



Theme B: Research Development. Goal 3: Enhance Carleton’s Status as a Modern Research-Intensive University. Objective 3.1: Define and Develop Carleton’s Distinctive Identity as a Research Institution. Over the next five years, Carleton will advance a nationally and internationally recognized community of scholars committed to discovery, knowledge transfer, student engagement, and community service. Initiatives and Target: The CAP will support both Carleton’s Strategic plan and the research plan in order to: • Define areas of strategic relevance

importance for Carleton’s competitive positioning and establishment of a leadership role in addressing critical issues.

• Diminish disciplinary silos and expand opportunities for intellectual exchange.

• Commit to an international agenda that supports and build international collaborations, and promotes the exchange and sharing of graduate students and postdoctoral fellows.

Progress: • To support Carleton’s research initiatives,

the Office of the Vice-President (Research and International) has instituted a research mentors group, including a member from each unit on campus that has a research mandate and established a Research Advisory Group within each Faculty.

• There are 27 Carleton University Research Centers (CURCs) on campus, whose membership acts as portal externally for community, industrial, and government partners.

• In the fall of 2010, the Office of the Vice-President (Research and International) instituted a successful Research Excellence Funds (REF) competition resulting in the approval of four key projects.

Objective 3.2: Strengthen the Integration of Research and Teaching Tomorrow’s graduate students are today’s undergraduates and the importance of training undergraduates in research is increasingly being recognized as a critical strategy for meeting Canada’s need for Highly Qualified Personnel (HQP) and we need to seek ways in which research experiences can be more extensively incorporated in the undergraduate experience as well as expanding the opportunities for graduate education. Initiatives and Target: At the undergraduate level, Carleton University will: • By 2015, provide a research opportunity for

all honours students, and, through the Critical and Creative Inquiry Initiative, seek to widen the research experience for students through an Undergraduate Research Program and an annual Carleton Undergraduate Research Conference/Day with the proceedings published in an online journal format.

• Working with CUASA and the Carleton faculty, establish new policies, standards, and procedures for tenure and promotion that will highlight the importance of the pursuit of excellence in both teaching and research as the core mission of all faculty at Carleton.

• Enhance current training and professional

Progress: • In the area of Critical and Creative Inquiry,

Carleton has established a working group to focus on short, medium, and longer terms plans to increase research opportunities for undergraduate students, providing recognition and fostering new practices at Carleton, and implementing new strategies.

• Under the direction of the Vice-President (Research and International), Carleton University Research Experience for Undergraduate Students (CUREUS) was launched in 2010-2011 and undergraduate internships (iCUREUS) were expanded.

• Research Works and web celebration of undergraduate research has continued in the Vice-President (Research and International)’s office and a new focus on



development for faculty, graduate students, and teaching assistants on effective pedagogies to integrate research and teaching.

undergraduate research was instigated supported by undergraduate students in the journalism and communications program.

Initiatives and Target: At the graduate level, Carleton University will: • Give priority to increasing graduate

enrolments in order to meet the master’s and doctoral targets established by the provincial government.

• Give greater clarity to the status and role of post-doctoral fellows (PDF) under the newly renamed Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs (FGPA).

• Explore opportunities for expanding access to graduate studies for Carleton faculty of professorial rank.

• Promote Carleton’s role as a research-intensive university with the provincial government to support an expansion of funded doctoral spaces.

• Identify new sources of funding to support scholarships, bursaries, and TA-ships for graduate students.

• Include space requirements for graduate students in space planning and renovations

Progress: • Supporting the graduate agenda at Carleton,

the Office of the Dean of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs has: announced 16 new programs;

• Focusing on graduate student space, Carleton has established a new PhD defence videoconferencing room thereby broadening the pool of external examiners and other efforts continue for improved graduate space.

• Award programs for graduate students launched include the Faculty Graduate Mentoring Award and results from external award competitions have improved.

• Supporting Teaching Assistants, the TA management systems has been implemented and TA training and mentoring has consolidated as well as improved monitoring of times to completion.

• The Office of the Dean of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs has also participate in several University-wide projects including: Calendar and Quality Assurance Charter project (with University Registrar); Document Management Charter project (FGPA first point of implementation); and E-theses Charter project (with Library)

• The Office has developed the new co-tutelle policy approved by the Academic and Research Committee in the 2010-2011 academic year.

Objective 3.3: Expand and Enhance Graduate Studies and Postdoctoral Affairs Graduate Studies are central to the academic mission of Carleton University, and as our research profile grows there is an increased role for post-doctoral fellows to support the research enterprise. Initiative and Target: As Carleton builds its reputation as a research-intensive university, more attention must be paid to the role and status of post-doctoral fellows in the training and research enterprise of the university.

Progress: • Of the 16 new graduate programs

announced in 2010-2011, 14 were launched. They reflect the strategic and academic priorities of the university and, in many cases, have a shared interdisciplinary character. The interdisciplinary programs in particular are professional oriented and will provide a new breed of badly needed



graduates in the social, political and economic areas.

• The university policy on Postdoctoral Fellows has been reviewed and revised.

• In the Office of the Dean of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs, several initiatives has been launched focussing on postdoctoral fellows including: a new PDF Handbook; an enhanced webpage and RSS newsfeed; membership on Graduate Faculty Boards; as well as opportunities to take advantage of Athletics, Campus Card, Parking, Human Resources voluntary benefit programs, Health Centre, CCS, GSA, Career Services.

• As a result of the efforts above, since 2009, the number of postdoctoral fellows at Carleton has doubled.

Objective 3.4: Improve Scholarly Communication and Information Carleton should be a leader in the development of effective, extensible, sustainable, and economically viable models and practices of scholarly communication that provide barrier-free access to knowledge generated by research and teaching. Initiatives and Target: Carleton will: • Under the auspices of the university’s

Information Management Strategy, link our virtual research and learning environments with our administrative and intellectual databases to create an integrated information infrastructure.

• Promote our scholarly achievements via our open access repository, but also by encouraging and supporting our authors to publish in open access journals and support those faculty and learning societies who wish to pursue open access business models for their journals.

• Create a Scholarly Communication Advisory Committee that will lead developments in open access and improving the impact of our research.

Progress: • As part of the University’s overall

Information Management Strategy, Open Access Week was held in October 2010 with presentations on scholarly communication and new award for graduate students announced for Open Access publishing.

• The Scholarly Communications Committee was established in January 2011 and performance indicators have been developed and funds have been approved for enhancements to the institutional repository. The committee will focus next on developing an open access policy.

• Carleton University Research Virtual Environment (CURVE) will be launched during Open Access week in October 2011, eventually enabling the Carleton community to deposit OA intellectual output and electronic thesis submission projected for 2013.

• To support copyright clearance, ARES e-reserves software implemented and the copyright clearance unit was established in the spring 2011.

• Focusing on students, new archives practica are providing experiential learning



opportunities with Cardinal and other collections. The Cardinal archives project has launched a video series on YouTube.

Theme C: Student Engagement and Development Goal 4: Enrich the Student Learning Experience. Objective 4.1: Promote Active Learning through Engagement and Discovery Students learn most effectively when they are engaged with the issues they are studying and are given opportunities to construct their own knowledge through personal experience. Initiative 4.1.1: Critical & Creative Inquiry Initiative (CCII) Target: The long-term aim of the Critical and Creative Inquiry Initiative is that every Carleton undergraduate will have taken part in one or more of the four pathways. Carleton will pursue the development of a certificate process by which student achievement in critical and creative inquiry will be assessed and formally recognized where it is not completed for credit.

Progress: • To advance the long-term objectives of the

Critical and Creative Inquiry Initiative, the CCI Working Group was established and work is currently underway, including CSL benchmarking studies, and focus groups on community engaged pedagogy, and the development of community engaged pedagogy toolkits.

• A community engaged pedagogy toolkit for Faculty is now available on the EDC website.

• Plans for further immersive learning initiatives are in development.

• A Creative and Critical Inquiry website is in development.

Initiative 4.1.2: Carleton Discovery Centre Target: Active student learning, engagement and discovery will also be developed by the establishment of a Discovery Centre to provide a flexible and attractive space for faculty and students to engage in innovative approaches to learning and research through the discovery of new knowledge that addresses important challenges in society.

Progress: • To promote active student learning and

engagement, potential space for the Carleton Discovery Centre has been included in the Library expansion plans as part of the expanded Learning Commons.

Objective 4.2: Enhance the Learning Environment through Effective Use of Technology and Outreach Carleton will reach out to a greater range of students through a number of initiatives that are designed to build on existing activities Initiative 4.2.1: Distance and Flexible Learning Strategy Target: Through the evolution of CUTV into CUOL (Carleton University Online), Carleton will expand the number of courses available and identify options to deliver entire programs (degrees, diplomas, and certificates) through distance and flexible learning pedagogies. It will also expand

Progress: • In response to the level of advancement in

distance and flexible education pedagogy and technology, Carleton’s new distance learning platform, CUOL, was launched in January 2011 and online course offerings have expanded from 59 (2009-10) to 78 (2010-11).

• CUOL joined the Canadian Virtual University



professional development programs to address the educational and training needs of professional and adult learners.

in 2011.

Objective 4.3: Enrich the Graduate Student Experience Carleton will enhance and enrich the graduate student experience. Initiatives and Target: Carleton will ensure excellence in academic and non-academic graduate student experience through: • Superior program delivery; • Enhancing dedicated research and study

space across campus; • Developing more opportunities for co-

operative education and experiential learning;

• Enhancing support for international graduate students;

• Enhancing support for graduate students with regard to issues such as family housing and childcare;

• Continue the priority of improving TA training and mentoring; and

• Offering academic and career support specifically for graduate students in areas of academic, research and professional skills and practice.

Progress: • Reported throughout this report, the Office

of the Dean, Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs has launched several major initiatives in 2010-2011 focussing on enhancing the overall role of the Office, opportunities at Carleton University, and the graduate student experience, including collaborating with various academic units and the EDC to provide training to Teaching Assistants, including professional skills training, such as project management and ethics.

• Sixteen major academic program initiatives have been undertaken over the 2010-2011 academic year.

Objective 4.4: Expand and Enhance the Library and Student Learning Space Carleton’s library has served and continues to serve the university well, and we must ensure that its capacity to support the academic mission of the university is enhanced. Initiatives and Target: Carleton will: • Give priority to investing in the library both

for capital expansion and the enhancement of collections;

• Expand and improve the Learning and Information Commons;

• Through the Campus Master Plan and using opportunities for new space and retrofitting of existing space, improve the amount and quality of student study and learning space across the campus.

Progress: • Library renovations funded to date have

been completed and new capital funding to expand the existing building was announced to begin October 2011.

• Library services have been expanded to allow students to book study space in the library via Carleton Central, resulting in a 228% increase of study space bookings.

• Learning Support Services provided 38 in-class workshops in the winter 2010 and offered 149 workshops in the library. Appointments with writing tutors increased 34%, compared to 2009.



Objective 4.5: Increase Student Literacy and Numeracy One consistent concern across the academic is the level of communication skills of our students, including the levels of literacy and numeracy that are necessary to ensure student success at university level. Initiatives and Target: The CAP will seek to undertake the following strategies: • Support student success and literacy across

the disciplines, involving measures to identify how we improve writing and numeracy across curricula;

• Support the creation of a literate and numerate community of scholars and learners;

• Support the expansion of initiatives to identify problems early on and provide appropriate support to help those students overcome their problems in literacy and/or numeracy.

Progress: • Focusing on student literacy and numeracy

challenges, the Office the Associate Vice-President (Student Support Services) is analyzing the results of a survey administered to the undergraduate student body.

• A review of the “Math Matters” program is currently underway to identify areas of improvement.

• The Associate Vice-President (Students and Enrolment) and the University Librarian are jointly supporting an initiative to improve student writing skills.

Goal 5: Ensure Sustainable Growth Objective 5.1: Sustainable Enrolment Management Through an integrated approach to enrolment management, academic planning for strategic new programs, and student support services, the CAP will work to ensure that enrolment targets and goals are realized in a manner that delivers a high quality of education both for students who attend the campus and those who learn at a distance. Initiative 5.1.1: Sustainable Enrolment Management Target: The CAP will work within the enrolment targets that have been developed by the university for academic and budgeting purposes, and for submitting growth targets to the Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities (MTCU).

Progress: • Carleton met its enrolment targets for 2011-

2012.

Initiative 5.1.2: Expansion of Summer Programs and Enrolments Target: Carleton will increase and promote more effectively its academic activity on campus during the spring and summer terms and will expand access to those courses through the use of distance and flexible learning strategies, including expanded use of online delivery.

Progress: • The number of courses offered in the

summer, including CUOL courses, was increased in 2011 and Deans are continuing to work on ideas for summer study institutes to engage new and existing students.

Initiative 5.1.3: Carleton Complete Target: Carleton will continue to support the implementation and development of Carleton Complete as a comprehensive support system to help students complete their program of studies and prepare for real-world challenges and opportunities.

Progress: • A comprehensive support system, Carleton

Complete engaged 1,250 students for the 2010-2011 year and these students are invited to participate in co-curricular activities that can be designated for their co-curricular record.

• Communication strategies have been



enhanced using online avenues, newsletters, and Twitter to advise student about what to expect during the course of the academic year, key dates and deadlines, and ways to get involved and enhance their university experience. Faculty and staff are also reminded about the student experience and potential issues via Today@ Carleton, Carleton Now, and email.

• A new student mobile app has been launched.

Objective 5.2: Increase Carleton’s Capacity to Attract and Support Aboriginal and Nontraditional Students Throughout its history, Carleton has reached out to non-traditional learners. We plan to continue and enhance this aspect of our mission. Initiative 5.2.1: Aboriginal Academic Initiative Target: Over the next five years we plan to make special efforts to improve access and student experience for Aboriginal students. Carleton will take a leadership role in Aboriginal teaching and research. This includes reaching out to Aboriginal communities, welcoming Aboriginal students to campus, promoting research on Aboriginal affairs and opening our curriculum to the inclusion of Aboriginal knowledge.

Progress: • With the focus of recognizing and including

Aboriginal cultures and worldviews at Carleton, the Task Force on Aboriginal Affairs continues to implement the recommendations from the Aboriginal Vision document.

• The Aboriginal Coordinated Strategy was adopted by Senate in June, 2011.

• The Library has acquired the archives of Aboriginal architect, Douglas Cardinal.

• Carleton continues to explore symbiotic partnership opportunities with the Kitigan Zibi First Nation and several meetings and workshops have been held both in the community and on campus.

• Carleton participated in the first co-ordinated university/college recruitment strategy for Aboriginal students. This initiative will be repeated.

Initiative 5.2.2: Students with Disabilities Initiative Target: Over the next five years, we plan to make special efforts to improve access and student experience for students with disabilities.

Progress • To enhance Carleton’s support for students

with disabilities, a Carleton Innovation Forum (CIF) has been approved for $25,000 for an Interdisciplinary Institute for Research, Education, Accessibility, and Design (READ) Institute. The final report is anticipated for March 31, 2012. One outcome will be a minor in Accessibility Studies.

Initiative 5.2.3: First-in-Family Students Initiative

Progress • The First in Family Program at Carleton



Target: Over the next five years, we plan to make special efforts to improve access and student experience for first-in-family students

University has been expanded and developed over the past two years through the Student Experience Office and includes: the first in family mentor program; the orientation mentorship program, the Science student success mentor program; as well as various events and activities throughout the academic year.

• Carleton academic units and Athletics are strengthening their engagement with Pathways to Education – a well recognized community education and life skills program engaging primarily first generation students.

Initiative 5.2.4: Mature and Mid-Career Students Initiative Target: Over the next five years we plan to make special efforts to improve access and student experience for mature and mid-career students. Carleton will seek to expand and develop new program opportunities to meet the needs of mid-career students who are seeking professional development and education to improve their career opportunities and performance. This will require different approaches to the ones we have taken in meeting the needs of the traditional 18-25 year old student body. In addition to developing new programs, this will involve looking at new ways of delivering existing programs, including program structures, schedules, delivery mechanisms, and credentials.

Progress • Building on Carleton’s existing initiatives,

including Sprott Professional Programs, the Bill Ellis Centre for Mature and Part-Time Students, and the expansion of CUOL courses reported earlier in this document, work is underway to identify new opportunities in this area.

Initiative 5.2.5: Learning in Retirement Target: Carleton will seek out new opportunities to address the educational and learning needs of the ever-growing retirement community. This will build upon existing activities at Carleton.

Progress: • Carleton has focused on learning in

retirement through the learning in Almonte program and the Centre for Initiatives in Education (CIE). CIE will be hiring a staff member to initiate further expansion of opportunities in this area.

Theme D: International and Global Outreach Goal 6: Strengthen Internationalization and Globalization of Carleton University Objective 6.1: Utilize the Carleton Capital Advantage for International and Global Outreach Carleton will utilize its capital location to become a truly global and international university and a hub for global discourse, dialogue, and understanding, and a centre for graduating students who are prepared to be global citizens and leaders. Initiatives and Target: As Canada’s Capital University, Carleton will develop an international research, education, and training collaborative initiative to establish

Progress: • An International Strategic Plan is in the final

stages of development. • Through its regional, national, and



Carleton and Ottawa as a global centre for internationalization.

international partnerships, Carleton continues to investigate and discover new areas of knowledge. The new Canada-India Centre for Excellence in Science, Technology, Trade and Policy was established in collaboration with the India High Commission to build on mutual goals of using technology to advance economic development.

• A Confucius Institute for Chinese language and cultural studies has been established at Carleton.

• The CIF funded project on globalization and global studies will form new opportunities for international education and research for Carleton students and faculty.

• Added eight new high quality international agreements for faculty and students.

Objective 6.2: Increase the Presence of International Students on Campus Over the next five years, Carleton will increase the number of international students attending Carleton, both at undergraduate and graduate levels. Initiatives and Targets: Under the CAP, Carleton will increase international enrolments a manner that can be sustained by the necessary services and support for international students.

Progress: • Focusing on international recruitment

foundation program, the Working Group on International Recruitment (WGIR) delivered its final report in the fall 2011

• Internationally, Carleton’s International Student Services Office has visited 33 countries and hosted 251 school visits/events.

• Carleton has sought to expand outreach in key markets of India, Turkey and Kuwait and added new visits to Korea, Brunei, Lebanon, Norway, Uganda and Morocco.

• Carleton experienced a 6% increase in new Visa students in first year; more than doubling Visa students from international high schools since fall 2006 with an 18% increase in new Visa students in master’s programs and an 83% increase in new Visa students in doctoral programs for fall 2010 over fall 2009.

• Over 2010-2011, new joint-funding or full-funding agreements have been established with 6 organizations, including: China Scholarship Council (China); Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research (Iraq); CONACyT (Mexico); Saudi Arabian



Cultural Bureau (Saudi Arabia); Organization of American States (The Americas); and Ministry of Education and Training (Vietnam).

• Carleton has taken advantage of Vanier and Trillium initiatives for enhanced top quality international enrolment.

Objective 6.3: Increase the Number of International Student Exchange Agreements Carleton will seek to increase the number and diversity of international students on campus and also provide international experience opportunities for our Canadian students. Target: Carleton will expand the number of agreements and opportunities for international student exchanges.

Progress: • Over 2010-2011, Carleton has established 6

new agreements/opportunities for international student exchanges, including: LUISS Guido Carli University (Rome, Italy); University of Trento (Trento, Italy); Flinders University (Adelaide, Australia); Universidad Europea de Madrid (Madrid, Spain); University of the West Indies - Cave Hill Campus (Barbados); and Universitat fur Musik und darstellende Kunst Graz (Graz, Austria).

• In 2010-2011, 234 international students came to Carleton and 257 Carleton student studied abroad.

• Overall international undergraduate students (students on Visa) have the same or better retention and graduation rates as domestic students.

Objective 6.4: Establish Global Partnerships to Support International Research, Development, and Innovation Internationalization and globalization are manifested in research interests, research collaborations, program topics, course contents, student and faculty exchanges with other universities, and formal institutional linkages. Initiatives and target: Carleton will encourage research and faculty exchanges to increase opportunities for international collaboration and investigations and seek to develop strategic global partnerships to extend our international influence and stature in research, academic programs, and professional development.

Progress: • Focusing initially on the Library, Carleton is

working with the Embassy of Ecuador on partnerships with government and academic libraries in Ecuador and also looking at sharing academic resources with the Hyderabad University Library (India).

• Through the Institute of African Studies, Carleton is participating in an AUCC partnership with African universities (University of Dar es Salaam and University of Botswana) to develop their capacity for university-community partnerships and



entrepreneurship.

Theme E: Regional and National Outreach Goal 7: Promote Regional and Community Partnerships and Collaboration Objective 7.1: Expand University-College Academic Collaboration The path forward for the universities of Ontario will include closer connections with the Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology. Initiatives and Target: In conjunction with our post-secondary partners, over the next five years, we will develop: • combined programs that build on the

strengths of each partner; • effective transfer of credit protocols; • stronger articulation of key courses

between institutions; and • expansion of summer and other programs

to promote the successful transfer of students from college to university and from university to college.

Progress: • To facilitate students transitioning from College

to University, Carleton created a new website for Pathways between Ontario Colleges and Carleton, including specific pathways for 33 College programs from 15 Ontario Colleges.

• The MDes program will consider accepting students from the George Brown College program ‘Institute without Borders’ (which offers a graduate certificate in Interdisciplinary Design Strategy) with advance standing.

• Carleton is actively consulting with a number of communities in the Ottawa region to explore the options of off-campus course delivery.

Objective 7.2: Explore a Regional Post-secondary Partnership The Academic Vice-Presidents at each institution have initiated regular meetings to explore opportunities for collaboration and cooperation in a number of areas: student access and mobility; student recruitment; internationalization; and, applied research. Initiatives and targets: Carleton will seek to establish a more effective regional partnership of post-secondary education institutions to create new opportunities for student access, mobility, and success.

Progress: • To create new opportunities for student

access, mobility, and success, the Vice-Presidents (Academic) of post-secondary institutions in the region continue ongoing discussions.

• In addition, Carleton will partner with the University of Ottawa to host the October 2011 meetings of the Ontario Council of Academic Vice-Presidents and the National Council of Vice-Presidents Academic.

Objective 7.3: Foster Regional Innovation and Economic Development Carleton will take a leading role as a partner in ensuring the region rises to the challenges of economic recovery and contribute solutions to the problems that are emerging. Initiatives and Target: Working with the various levels of government, the Ottawa Centre for Research and Innovation

Progress: • Carleton has contributed to an Ontario

Council of Excellence proposal on



(OCRI), our regional postsecondary partners, and other organizations and agencies, Carleton will seek to develop a coherent approach to support regional innovation and socioeconomic development.

Experiential Learning Program for supporting regional economic development.

• Carleton’s innovative work in the Batawa project continues and further expansion is being considered.

Objective 7.4: Engage in National Partnerships and Collaboration to Support Regional Goals In the traditional spirit of Carleton entrepreneurship and community outreach, Carleton will encourage the expansion of regional partnerships and innovation strategies that will link our academic and research activities with the surrounding community. Initiatives and Target: Carleton will seek to develop collaborations and partnerships with other Canadian universities, colleges, and research institutions where appropriate. In particular, these national collaborations will align with strategic regional needs in which Carleton can play a national role and where federal priorities align with Carleton’s academic and research strengths.

Progress: • National collaborations and partnerships

with Canadian partners include ongoing projects with the Canada-India Centre for Science, Technology, Trade, and Policy which was established and supported by private fundraising across Canada. Summits on Education and Innovation were held at Carleton in June 2011.

DRAFT – October 5, 2011 (revised) 1

Introduction to the Carleton University Academic Plan Indicators

The Carleton Academic Plan (CAP) was approved by the Senate on June 25, 2010. Subsequently, the attached indicators were identified in order to monitor progress made on the themes and high level goals identified in the CAP.

Please note that indicators throughout this document have a variety of cited dates. This reflects the varying availability of the data, which depending on the data source, may be measured each term, annually, or in some cases only every few years, such as survey data like NSSE or CGPSS. To maintain a level of reporting precision in future progress reports, each starting value, and subsequent updated values, will clearly state the term and/or year for which it was calculated.

In addition, while some targets were set based on the CAP, others were based on related Carleton University planning documents, such as Defining Dreams. As a result, the date associated with a target may not always be 2014, the final year of the Academic Plan.


Carleton University Academic Plan Indicators

Goal Indicator Most recent value Target

Benchmark (Ontario average, unless otherwise

noted)

Enrolment (CAP Goals 1 thru 5)

Fall, Full-time Undergraduate Enrolment (excluding exchange students) * Defining Dreams target; target will be adjusted according to budgetary need

18,077 (2010)

18,284* (Fall 2013)

Fall Master’s/DPA Enrolment (FTEs) (2010) (2011) Eligible 1809 1,787** Ineligible 383

Fall PhD Enrolment (FTEs) Eligible

(2010) 573

(2011) 617**

Ineligible 260 ** MTCU graduate targets for fall 2011; targets subject to changes in funding caps

Registration in CUOL 5,533 credits (2010-11)

Increase by 10% per year

Characteristics of Students

(CAP Goals 4,5,6)

Fall Entry Average (students direct from Ontario High Schools)

(2009) 80.9%

Maintain and Increase

ONT average 83.0%

International Students (Fall count) (includes domestic fee payers)

(2010)

(Fall 2013)

Incr. determined based on number needed to offset projected fall in domestic market

Full-time Bachelor’s 1,717 (9.6%) 2,161 Full-time Graduate 393 (14.1%) Increase

Transfers from college (Fall) (2010) 392

Increase

ONT average

Aboriginal (NSSE) (2011) ONT average

First-Year 2.4%*** Increase Final-Year *** estimate based on self-identification in sample survey

2.8%***

Increase

New first-year students from: (Fall 2010) Ottawa 1813 Maintain GTA 937 Increase Canada excluding Ontario 274 Increase International (international fee payers only)

572 Increase

Undergraduate Student Success (CAP Goal 4)

2-year retention rate (source: CSRDE)

80.2%

(2008 cohort)

81.3%

(2011 cohort)

ONT average

(81.8% for 2008 cohort)

7-year graduation rate (MTCU definition)

~70.0%

(2003 cohort)

Increase

79%





noted)

2 –year employment rates of graduates Total By discipline (based on average of 3 past years):

(2010†

95.4% )

97.0% 94.6% 94.8% 95.9%

Provincial average by discipline

ONT average 93.8%

Business & Commerce 95.9% Engineering 95.1% Humanities 92.5% Journalism 95.6% Science 94.9% 93.0% Social Sciences 95.0% 93.9%

Undergraduate Student Experience

(CAP Goals 4,5)

NSSE Benchmarks for First-Year (1st) and Final-Year (F):

(2011) (1st) (F)

Increase (2014)

ONT average (1st) (F)

Level of Academic Challenge (LAC) 51.4 57.2* 52.0 56.3 Supportive Campus Environment(SCE) 59.1* 54.6*

Maintain or

Increase

Increase

57.2 52.5 Active and Collaborative Learning (ACL) 35.3 43.8 35.7 44.8* Enriching Educational Experiences (EEE) 25.1 34.7 24.7 34.4 Student Faculty Interaction (SFI) * statistically significantly better (CU vs Ont.)

22.8 33.1

23.3 32.6

Overall Satisfaction - NSSE (Excellent + Good)

(2011)

ONT average

First-Year 85% 81% Final-Year

82%

77%

Students enrolled in co-op (Fall)

(2010) 4,086

Satisfaction with Library (CUSC final year undergrad)

(2009)

(Satisfied or very satisfied) 93% Increase % very satisfied (Very satisfied) 37%

Graduate Student Success and Experience

(CAP Goals 1,3,4)

Overall Experience (CGPSS) (Good + Very Good + Excellent): (2010) Increase ONT average Master’s 86% 86% PhD 81% 85% Overall Academic Experience (CGPSS) (Good + Very Good + Excellent): (2010) Increase ONT average Master’s 88% 88% PhD 84% 89% Rating of library facilities (CGPSS Master’s) (2010) Increase %

very good or excellent

(Good, very good or excellent) 82% (Very good or excellent) 65% Ratings of library facilities (CGPSS Doctoral) (2010) Increase %

very good or excellent

(Good, very good or excellent) 82% (Very good or excellent) 52%

† Based on 2008 graduation cohort





noted)

Research (CAP Goal 3)

Research Revenue

(2010-11) $60m

(2014-15) $100 M

Comparable Cdn. universities

Ratio of Research to Operating Revenues 20%

Comparable Cdn. Universities

(2009-10) Guelph: 55%

Waterloo: 36% York:11%

% of eligible faculty members who have received:

(2009-10)

(2014-15)

External funding 57% 75% Comparable Cdn. universities Tri-Council funding 46% 65%

Student research support through faculty research grants/internal funding source

(2009-10)

Undergraduate $0.8m Increase Graduate $6.8m Increase Post-doctoral $1.8m Increase Impact/Scholarly publication ranking (Info$ource)

21st (All U’s) Increase 7th (Compr.

U’s)

# of research articles and conference proceedings published by Carleton authors (source: Web of Science)

(2010) 893

Increase

Teaching and Program

Excellence (CAP Goals 1,4)

Satisfied with quality of teaching (CUSC) (Agree + Strongly Agree) - Graduating undergraduates

(2009) 92%

Monitor/ Increase

Graduate student satisfaction with the overall quality of graduate level teaching by faculty

(2010)

(% Excellent + Very Good + Good) CGPSS ONT average Master’s 89% 88% PhD 87% 86% Quality Assurance (2010/11)

% of graduate programs that have received a good quality rating

100%

(Note: indicator is subject to review once IQAP fully implemented)

Partnerships (CAP Goals 6,7)

Number of formal international research partnerships

30

Increase

Number of transfer-credit protocols with other institutions:

Increase

• College articulations 4 • College pathways 23

REPORT ON INTERNATIONAL RECRUITMENT

Office of the Provost and Vice-President (Academic)

September 7, 2011

Navitas Recommendation

I. It is recommended that the university not enter

into a contract with Navitas Group. While

Navitas does a good job of delivering a good

quality educational experience within its

business model, this model is not a good

option for Carleton.

Other Recommendations

II. Continue to grow the international student population on a measured track.

Grow steadily while maintaining quality, trying to keep a wide horizon of

sources and developing support services incrementally.

III. Support the current international recruitment effort, be creative in approach

and never rest. Base-budget investment in the recruitment units would be

wise. Development and effective monitoring of an enhanced system of high-

quality agents is recommended.

IV. Continue development of an in-house enhanced

foundation year that will be attractive to students by

helping them with transition. We have the expertise on

campus to do this. Try to make these programs

adaptable to address different issues for

undergraduates and graduates and also for students

from a variety of cultures. The fees charged should be

set high enough to more than meet expenses.

V. Continue discussion of the impact of large numbers

of international students on program delivery.

Decide locally on any limits to international

participation. Endeavour to spread the international

students more broadly over the programs of the

university.

VI. Establish a continuing Academic Advisory Group on

International Recruitment to formally connect the work

in this important area with our academic core and

strategic planning.

VII. In a real sense, international students should be

Carleton students from day one, even if they do not

ultimately earn a degree here.

VIII. VIII. In difficult times keep as much as you can under

your own control.

Page | 1

Professor Michael Mac Neil Department of Law

1125 Colonel By Drive Ottawa, Canada K1S 5B6

Voice: 613 520 2600 x 3684 Fax: 613 520-4467

Email: [email protected]

June 16, 2011

The Senate of Carleton University Attn: Professor Brian Mortimer, Clerk Re: Senate Student Academic Integrity Appeal Committee Report for 2010/11 Dear Senators, The Senate’s Academic Integrity Policy (the Policy) sets out the University’s commitment to integrity in scholarship, and provides the framework within which students are guided and held accountable for academic integrity. Deans and Associate Deans make decisions about whether the Policy has been violated, and with the Provost in some cases, impose appropriate sanctions. Students can appeal those decisions to the Student Academic Integrity Appeals Committee (SAIAC). This report summarizes data collated by the Office of Student Affairs on violations of the Policy from May 1, 2010 to April 30, 2011. It also reports on appeals made to SAIAC. SAIAC is composed of faculty members and students from across the university. The Committee was chaired by Michael Mac Neil (Public Affairs) with Carmen Leblanc from FASS, Donald Russell from Engineering and Dave Amundsen from Science serving as the three other faculty representatives. The two graduate student representatives were Glenn Brauen and Andrea Balon, and the two undergraduate student representatives were Emile Scheffel and Guy Massie. All the committee members put a great deal of effort and thoughtfulness into ensuring that students receive a fair hearing and that the Policy is interpreted and applied in a consistent and equitable fashion. Ryan Flannagan, Director of Student Affairs, together with Nancy Leslie and Natalie Pinto, provided superb administrative and logistical support, acting as the repository for data on violations of the Policy, and serving as the Secretariat for the Committee. They deserve special thanks.

Violations of the Policy Table 1 below shows the distribution of cases where it has been determined that students have violated the Policy. The cases are categorized by type and by Faculty for 2010/11 with comparative data for 2009/10. Please note that data is not collected on those allegations where no violation of the Policy has been determined.

Page | 2

The overwhelming majority of cases involve plagiarism, with test and examination-related violations and unauthorized collaboration coming a distant second and third respectively. Overall, the number of cases reported increased slightly by 3.7 percent between 2009/10 and 2010/11, with the number of plagiarism cases increasing by 8 percent. There was also a decrease in the number of cases reported for unauthorized collaboration, tests and examinations, and misrepresentation. The slight increase in the number of cases in the past year suggests that there is no significant change in the pattern of student conduct. The current Academic Integrity Policy has been in effect for several years. Continuing vigilance by instructors and ongoing efforts to educate students are key to making the Policy effective. Unfortunately, there is no means of knowing how many cases are undetected or unreported. It is interesting to note that the number of test and examination-related offenses decreased by 13.7 percent. Whether this is due to improvements in examination proctoring procedures, a lower rate of detection arising from fewer proctoring resources, or some other factor, is difficult to know. Academic Integrity Appeals About 5 percent of students found to have violated the Policy appealed to the Committee. As of April 30, 2011 the Committee had completed 23 appeal cases, all involving undergraduate students. Of these, the Committee upheld the original decision in 19 cases, reversed the decision in 3 and returned one to the Dean for reconsideration. This compares with 2009/10, when 18 of 25 appeals were rejected. The smaller percentage of successful appeals in 2010/11 is similar to the rates in 2007/08 and 2008/2009. In 2 of the cases that were overturned, the Committee determined that procedural irregularities made it inappropriate to make a finding that the Policy had been violated. In the third, the Committee concluded that the student should not be held responsible for a violation of the Policy in light of the student’s medical situation at the time of the incident. One decision was returned to the Associate Dean for reconsideration in light of new evidence not available at the time of the original decision. Compared to 2009/10, a larger percentage of the appeals coming before the Committee were cases relating to plagiarism and comparatively fewer were collaboration or test and examination-related offenses. The number of cases heard in each of 2009/10 and 2010/11 is almost the same as the total number of cases heard in 2007/8 and 2008/9 combined. Michael Mac Neil Chair, SSAIAC

Page | 3

Table 1: ACADEMIC INTEGRITY VIOLATIONS, 2010/11

Arts and

Social

Sciences

Engineering

and Design

Public

Affairs Science

Sprott

School of

Business

2010-

11

Total

2009-

10

Total

% Change

Assisting in

Violations of AI

Standards 1 1 5 -80.0%

Impersonation

2 2 1 100.0%

Misrepresentation 3 5 3 1 12 13 -7.7%

Plagiarism 100 68 54 83 7 312 289 8.0%

Tests and

Examinations 5 13 7 8 11 44 51 -13.7%

Unauthorized

Cooperation or

Collaboration 17 7 11 5 40 44 -9.1%

Other

2 4 1 1 8 1 700.0%

Total 128 81 77 106 27 419 404 3.7%

Board of Governors

Committee: Senate Originator: Board of Governors Item: Report on the activities of the Board of Governors The last meeting of the Board of Governors was held on Tuesday, September 27th, 2011 (569th meeting) at which time it received reports and took action on the following items: • Received a report on the results of the 2011 Board Self-Assessment • Approved the Audited Financial Statements and the Financial Report for the

year ended April 30, 2011 • Appointed the University Secretary and General Counsel for a six year term,

effective October 1st, 2011 • Appointed Dr. Thomas Sherwood as Alumni Representative on Senate for a

one-year term • Received the President’s goals for 2011-2012 • Approved a Policy on Perquisites • Received a report on the Internal Audit of Research Contracts and Grants

As well, the Board received the following Minutes: • Minutes of the 568th meeting of the Board of Governors held on June 21st,

2011 • Minutes of the 6th meeting of the Audit and Finance Committee • Minutes of the 637th and 638th meetings of the Executive Committee

Report of the President’s Academic Colleague to the University Senate on the meeting of COU Academic Colleagues and the COU 292nd Meeting of Council

The Academic Colleagues (ACs) from all Ontario universities met for the second time this term on October 13th in Toronto. The meeting commenced with an executive committee update detailing the meetings/events/announcements that took place over the summer. Highlights included:

The Ontario Universities Application Centre (OUAC) is putting forth a proposal for a new building that will remain in the Guelph area.

Plans to develop an international signature program aimed to create “international working groups” have been discussed. The proposed program will be a week long and will draw in approximately 100 students and researchers from around the world where they will investigate intriguing problems or challenges such as “how much can you do with a drop of water?” The cost of running the program is estimated to be approximately $500k and its goals are to demonstrate signature programs and generate media about ingenuity in Ontario.

The recent election resulted in limited contact over the summer with government officials. Relatively speaking, very little was accomplished this past summer.

Following this, several ACs provided updates on recent COU‐based activities that they were involved in. Highlights included:

Mary Kelly (SWL) gave report on OUAC. o Harold Writer gave a presentation in the summer on the use of CASPER (Computer‐

Based Assessment for Sampling Personal Characteristics – a non‐medical personality test using small video clips with scenarios) on students applying for medical school. Investigations on whether CASPER helped to pick the right people were conducted; a decreased dropout rate was observed. Program has been running since last winter. Use for scholarships at undergrad level?

o OUAC is considering signing onto other data handling systems to transfer student info to/from other systems such as US systems and OSAP.

Patrick Oosthuizen (Queens) and Eric Nay (OCADU) discussed quality council. o Approvals for programs (with recommendations, i.e. actions to be taken) are up in the

air at the moment (mostly for grad programs) for some institutions, but should be settled soon.

John Manning (COU) – COU may propose a strategy for student financial management. o Their research is suggesting that finance not always the biggest barrier to participation

within a university. All information will be presented on Monday October 17th, 2011. Only looking at post‐high school students (not adults, minority groups, parents).

Mark Green (UOIT) ‐ graduate committee meeting. o Meeting has not happened yet this term. Going to look at where graduate expansion is

going to go (6000 spaces). Will be looked at closely soon. The ACs met the following morning for an hour to receive a report from Peter Gooch (COU) on the meeting that the Executive Heads held the previous day. Highlights included:

The Executive Heads discussed the new political landscape now that a new government is in place. There are pretty clear signs that the province will be in significant financial stress over the next few years. Discussions included the extent to which this change affects our advocacy agenda? There is clear enthusiasm for increased quality, but will fiscal side be there?

Liberals introduced tuition grants. There are a lot of questions about how this might get implemented.

The government is pushing for differentiation and mandate agreements between universities. There is presently discussion between universities and the government about this, but it is hard to predict the outcome of these discussions.

Ontario Education Numbers – The Ministry of Education is planning on giving a number to every high school student and university student that they will keep for their entire educational journey within Ontario.

Ontario council of admissions and credit transfer (ONCAT) – the Ministry announced a 5 year commitment to universities and colleges of $10M to this new coordinating body that will 1) investigate best ways to transfer credits 2) provide a great deal of information to students 3) be a centre for expertise to grow up on this topic and 4) initiate pathway projects whereby universities and colleges gather to discuss how their programs are transferable. Each university will be asked if they want to be a member of this council.

Ontario Online Institute – the ministry has signed an agreement with Contact North (whose mandate is to provide mediated access to academic communities within remote communities) to create a provincial online institute whereby university courses may be taken online from Ontario universities. There was serious concern at COU with this decision due to the following reasons. 1) Process used. Ministry hired the Director of Contact North as the special advisor for the whole project. 2) This decision departs from core purpose of the institute. It is supposed to help universities / colleges work together; to give it to a separate entity that has no formal connection with universities / colleges makes no sense. University Heads will strongly recommend to ministry that they re‐make this decision.

Following the morning meeting of the ACs, the entire Council (ACs, Executive Heads and invited guests) convened and the meeting was opened with remarks from Bonnie Patterson, Chair of COU. Highlights included:

Discussion about the recent Ontario election: o With a minority government, one could expect an election at any time. It is important

that we continue a discussion with MPPs about the importance of our sector. o Liberals will go back to promises from their platform:

60k spaces for students. 30% undergraduate tuition grants for students with family incomes less than

$160k. Double the length of teaching education programs to 2 years. Build 3 new satellite undergraduate campuses. 12‐month interest free grace period for students who work at non‐profits

following graduation. Maintain OSAP debt ceiling ($7,300).

o The realities of any new investments in this government is that they will be horse trading. Public opinion will be even more important. There is likely to be tough action on administration transparency and efficiency.

Discussion on external factors that influence universities. o The role of universities in creating jobs and sustaining an employable population is

fueling public worry and media discourse. o There is a changing conversation around “educational quality” and the learning

experience for students in light of the associated costs and the current economy. In a recent TD economics report, it was written that “post‐secondary education

is the best investment you can make”.

A recent study by the Frontier Centre for Public Policy showed no positive correlation between lower tuition fees and higher levels of university participation for young adults from low‐income households (reinforcing the HEQCO study).

Discussion on practical and immediate issues. o The roles of colleges in Ontario are evolving and have many dimensions from research

to independent degrees in nursing to credit transfer. All Ontario colleges now allow transfer of credit from college to college to

college – universities can expect this challenge from the government next. o The implementation of public policy started before election.

ONCAT, Ontario Online Institute, international expansion, growth management, satellite campuses, accountability, tuition framework for the future, differentiation, bending the cost curve…

The Council then heard a report from Paul Davidson, President of the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada. Highlights included:

The federal cabinet is considering 5 to 10% cuts to all government agencies, including granting councils.

We now have a majority fed government: o Will enable us to look at big public policy issues and move on them with greater ease. o Universities are back at the table with the Federal government in a way we haven’t been

for a while.

When Harper went to Brazil recently, he focused a great deal on higher education. He seems to have a high interest in developing higher education further.

AUCC needs to develop a new narrative for higher education. Some of the objectives of this new narrative include:

o Refresh our message, rethink our position, and respond to legitimate criticisms. o Move from what universities need to what universities contribute to Canada. o Assemble an international panel of experts that will advocate to the Federal

government that they should advertise Canadian Universities globally

Government is set to release its new innovation agenda, which will have significant implications for Canadian Universities.

A Government report was released Monday, October 10th, 2011 on Canadian universities and colleges. Report indicated that universities are unresponsive to the needs of the private sector, which is in stark contrast to the nimbleness of colleges in this regard. A discussion ensued how this is completely untrue, however this sentiment seems to be pervasive throughout the media and is affecting the public perception of universities and colleges alike.

The AC then presented two papers that were written on topics that they had previously determined. The first paper was written by Mary Kelly (SWL) on Student Evaluations of Teaching (SET). There is a vast amount of literature on SET and they are used for several purposes including student feedback in order to improve teaching and/or course content, (self) evaluation of student learning and for administrative purposes such as the tenure and promotion process. Questions remain however on why SETs are done and how best to do them; what do they actually measure and/or accomplish? Research has shown that students appreciate the opportunity to provide feedback, although they are skeptical that SETs actually result in any change or improvement. There seems to be little literature on whether teachers actually change/improve in response to evaluations, although that, in theory at least, is their

main function. The literature on SETs concludes that they can provide feedback regarding whether the instructor creates an atmosphere conducive to learning; however, more exact results are not very reliable. Thus, SETs should at best be only one aspect of evaluation for tenure and promotion. Collegial observation, whether for formative or summative reasons, is more reliable and effective. Despite this research on SETs, all institutions use them in one way or other. Taken together, several questions were posed to the Council.

1) Given the emphasis on teaching, learning and accountability, should there be, (varied perhaps for discipline), a single procedure for the province? If so, what can and should it measure?

2) How do SETs fit with Degree Level expectations, outcomes, and other directives/measures to regulate the quality of university programs?

The second paper presented by the AC to the Council entitled “What is a University?” was written by Sylvie Albert (Laurentian) and Linda Garcia (U of Ottawa) and edited by Marilyn Rose (Brock). The paper researched several question relating to this topic:

- The perception of the public of what is to be gained from a university education - The efforts made by colleges in defining what they offer to the Ontario public - The discussions around credit transfers - The need to respond to the community - The need to define and market what we do best at universities - Key priority in strategic plan

The paper discussed these areas and reported on general trends (both perceived and proven) across Ontario universities under the three main organizational pillars of our institutions, research, service and teaching. Recent trends observed with university research included the degree to which funding is becoming driven by private industry, how there is a disconnect between how much money is brought in, but not what is actually done with the money, ownership of IP and that researchers are becoming more reluctant to share their research for fear of it being stolen prior to publication. Recent trends regarding service included an acknowledgement that universities offer a service to the community, including the international community, however many faculty members feel that they don’t have adequate time to engage in service work. Regarding teaching, noted trends included a decrease in student‐faculty face to face interactions, a decrease in enrollment in the humanities and a prescriptive focus on market relevance within programs. Also included in the paper was a discussion on the dichotomy of the identity of a university. On one hand the focus of a university is educational; however, on the other hand university institutions are big business and more commonly make decisions along fiscal lines. The paper also contained a dialogue on the relationship between colleges and universities in Canada today. Lately, colleges have been getting good press while universities have been getting the opposite. Colleges should not be considered an opponent; both are a part of the total post‐secondary education package in this country. It was concluded that we need to strengthen our relationships with colleges to determine our interfaces and work together. The next paper that is being prepared by the ACs is a research‐based commentary on the changes that we are observing in federal granting agency practices (e.g. fewer, but larger awards) to address the increasing concern for decreasing support for research. Jeffrey Smith Alternate Academic Colleague October 24th, 2011

Documents

Agenda CLOSED SESSION · Agenda . for the Senate Meeting . on Friday, October 28, 2011 at 2:00 p.m. in the Senate Room, 608 Robertson Hall . CLOSED SESSION . 1. Approval of Agenda