please note change in room - university of victoria · 2020-04-30 · university of victoria...

University of Victoria

Office of the University Secretary Tel (250) 721-8 101, Fax (250) 721-6223

SENATE Notice of

Meeting and Agenda

The next open meeting of the Senate of the University of Victoria is scheduled for Friday, November 4, 2016 at 3:30 p.m. in the David Strong Building, Room C116.

*Please note change in room*

AGENDA as reviewed by the Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance.

1. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

2. MINUTES

a. October 7, 2016 (SEN-NOV 4/16-1)

Motion: That the minutes of the open session of the meeting of the Senate held on October 7, 2016 be approved and that the approved minutes be circulated in the usual way.

3. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES

4. REMARKS FROM THE CHAIR

ACTION

ACTION

a. President's Report INFORMATION

5. CORRESPONDENCE

6. PROPOSALS AND REPORTS FROM SENATE COMMITTEES

a. Senate Committee on Academic Standards - Dr. Rosaline Canessa, Acting Chair

i. 2015/2016 Annual Report (SEN-NOV 4/16-2)

ii . University of Victoria Grading Patterns Reporting Portal (SEN-NOV 4/16-3)

INFORMATION

INFORMATION

iii. Report and Recommendations on Grading Patterns ACTION (SEN-NOV 4/16-4) Motion: that Senate approve the recommendations regarding grading patterns as outlined in the attached report entitled Report and Recommendations Regarding Grading Patterns.

b. Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance – Prof. Jamie Cassels, Chair

i. Update on the Proposal to Extend Fall Reading Break ACTION

(SEN-NOV 4/16-5)

ii. Appointments to the 2016/2017 Senate Standing Committees ACTION (SEN-NOV 4/16-6)

Motion: That Senate approve the appointments to the 2016/2017 Senate standing committees for the terms indicated in the attached document.

iii. Appointments to the Appointment Committee for the Chancellor ACTION

(SEN-NOV 4/16-6)

Motion: That Senate approve the appointments of Robin Hicks and Ann-Bernice Thomas to the Appointment Committee for the Chancellor as recommended by the Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance.

c. Senate Committee on Awards – Dr. John Walsh, Chair

i. 2015/2016 Annual Report (SEN-NOV 4/16-7) INFORMATION

ii. New and Revised Awards ACTION

(SEN-NOV 4/16-8) Motion: That Senate approve, and recommend to the Board of Governors that it also approve, the new and revised awards set out in the attached document: • Wendy M Gedney Bursary in Elementary Education (new)* • Tevlin Gleadle Curtis Scholarship in Employment Law (new) • Chair in Transgender Studies Doctoral Research Scholarship for

Trans and Non-binary Students (new) • Chair in Transgender Studies Master’s Degree Research Scholarship

for Trans and Non-binary Students (new) • Jeffrey Rubinoff Scholar in Art as a Source of Knowledge Travel

Award (new)* • Jeffrey Rubinoff Scholar in Art as a Source of Knowledge Bursaries

(new)* • Jeffrey Rubinoff Scholar in Art as a Source of Knowledge Fellowship

(new)* • James A Mossey (SM) Award (new)*

• Edra Ferguson Graduate Scholarship (revised)* • Elaine Gallagher Award (new)* • Chair in Transgender Studies Doctoral Research Scholarship (new) • Chair in Transgender Studies Master’s Degree Research Scholarship

(new) • Davison Graduate Award in Russian and Slavic Studies (new) • Barbara J Shenton Scholarship (new) * Administered by the University of Victoria Foundation

d. Senate Committee on Planning – Dr. Nancy Wright, Chair

i. Request for Centre for Youth and Society extension to ACTION

to June 30, 2017 (SEN-NOV 4/16-9)

Motion: That Senate extend the renewal of Approved Centre Status for the Centre for Youth and Society until June 30, 2017.

ii. Request to disestablish the Centre for Cooperative and Community ACTION

Based Economy (SEN-NOV 4/16-10)

Motion: That Senate approve the disestablishment of the Centre for Cooperative and Community Based Economy (CCCBe) effective immediately.

iii. Request for Renewal of the Centre for Addictions Research BC ACTION

(SEN-NOV 4/16-11)

Motion: That Senate approve the renewal of Approved Centre Status for the Centre for Addictions Research BC (CARBC) for the five-year period January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2021. This recommendation is not contingent upon the suggestions in the external report relating to resources, which are advice to the Vice-President Research.

7. PROPOSALS AND REPORTS FROM FACULTIES 8. PROPOSALS AND REPORTS FROM THE VICE-PRESIDENT ACADEMIC AND

PROVOST a. Update on Library consultations and budgetary pressures INFORMATION b. Enrolment update INFORMATION

c. Policy AC1210 - Accommodation for Students on Days of ACTION Religious Observance (SEN-NOV 4/16-12) Motion: That Senate approve the minor wording change to the “Accommodation of Religious Observance” section of the undergraduate and graduate Calendars, effective May 2017. AND That Senate approve the relocation of the “Accommodation of Religious Observance” section of the undergraduate and graduate Calendars from “General University Policies” to a new heading titled “Accommodation of Religious Observance” immediately preceding “Academic Concessions”, effective May 2017. AND That Senate rescind the university policy AC1210 “Accommodation for Students on Days of Religious Observance”.

9. OTHER BUSINESS

a. Implementation of the UVic Strategic Research Plan INFORMATION

(SEN-NOV 4/16-13)

b. University Orator (SEN-NOV 4/16-14) ACTION

Motion: That Senate appoint Dr. Lynne Van Luven as University Orator for a term from January 1, 2017 until December 31, 2019. AND

Motion: That the Senate appoint Dr. John Archibald as Orator for a term from January 1, 2017 until December 31, 2019.

10. ADJOURNMENT

Open Senate Minutes October 7, 2016

Page 1

DRAFT MINUTES

A meeting of the Senate of the University of Victoria was held on October 7, 2016 at 3:30 p.m. in the Senate and Board Chambers, University Centre, Room A180. 1. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

Motion: (S. Lewis/B. Peterson) That the agenda be approved as circulated.

CARRIED

2. REMARKS FROM THE CHAIR

a. President’s Report Prof. Cassels reported on the start of term, noting that this year’s class was the largest in the university’s history. He commented on the robust orientation activities that had taken place throughout September. Prof. Cassels welcomed new members of Senate and reported on a number of recent university appointments. He also reported on a number of awards that had been received by faculty members. With respect to university initiatives, Prof. Cassels provided information about the International Plan. He commented on the interim report from the Working Group on Sexualized Violence Programs and Policy Development. Prof. Cassels also reported on the launch of the university’s advertising campaign and commented on advertising as an important piece of reputational advancement. Prof. Cassels reported on the repatriation of ancestral remains found on university property to First Nations communities on Vancouver Island. With respect to provincial matters, Prof. Cassels reported that the university had received its budget letter. He reported on upcoming presentations to the BC Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Operations he would be making on behalf of both the university and the Research Universities’ Council of BC. Prof. Cassels also reported on a recent visit from Minister Amrik Virk to announce funding for TRIUMF. On the federal front, Prof. Cassels asked Dr. Castle to provide an update on research. Dr. Castle reported on the results of the funding application to the Canada First Research Excellence Fund, from which UVic did not receive funding. He also reported on some success in attaining operating funding for Ocean Networks Canada.

SEN-NOV 4/16-1 Page 1 of 10


Page 2 With respect to other federal initiatives, Prof. Cassels reported on ongoing engagement and advocacy work being undertaken by both the university and Universities Canada.

b. United Way Presentation Dr. Cedric Littlewood, co-Chair of this year’s University of Victoria United Way campaign, and Mr. Charles McQuade, Leadership Chair, provided a brief presentation to Senate. 3. MINUTES

a. May 6, 2016

Motion: (B. Peterson/R. Lipson) That the minutes of the open session of the meeting of the Senate held on May 6, 2016 be approved and that the approved minutes be circulated in the usual way.

CARRIED 4. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES There was none. 5. ELECTION OF STUDENTS TO THE SENATE

a. Faculties of Education, Graduate Studies, and Human and Social Development Ms. Andersen reported that no nominations had been received for student representatives from the Faculties of Education and Human and Social Development. She said five nominations were received for student representatives from the Faculty of Graduate Studies. Ms. Andersen explained the process for electing one student representative from the Faculty of Graduate Studies and an election was conducted. 6. CORRESPONDENCE

a. University of Victoria Financial Statements as at March 31, 2016 The financial statements were presented. In response to a question, Mr. Murray Griffith, Executive Director, Financial Services explained what accounts and entities were included in the statements.



Page 3 7. PROPOSALS AND REPORTS FROM SENATE COMMITTEES

a. Senate Committee on Academic Standards i. Proposal to add Term GPA information to the academic calendar and

administrative transcript In the absence of the committee chair, Dr. Dechev introduced the proposal.

Motion: (N. Dechev/ B. Peterson) That Senate approve the addition of Term GPA information to the academic calendar and administrative transcript effective immediately for Winter Session 2016-2017.

CARRIED

b. Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance i. Update on the Proposal to Extend Fall Reading Break

Dr. Lepp introduced the report and briefly discussed the work undertaken by the committee to date. In response to a question regarding dates for orientation, Dr. Lepp and Ms. Andersen provided some information about the factors and challenges associated with moving dates for orientation.

ii. Appointments to the 2016/2017 Senate Standing Committees Dr. Lepp presented the nominations. In accordance with the Senate Rules and Procedures, Prof. Cassels invited additional nominations to the Senate standing committees. There were no additional nominations.

Motion: (A. Lepp/B. Peterson) That Senate approve the appointments to the 2016/2017 Senate standing committees for the terms indicated in the attached document.

CARRIED Before continuing with consideration of the agenda, Prof. Cassels reported that Marie Vance had been elected as a student representative from the Faculty of Graduate Studies.

c. Senate Committee on Awards i. New and Revised Awards

Dr. Walsh introduced the proposal. A suggestion was made to include “creative activities” in the terms of reference for the Chair in Transgender Studies Undergraduate Research Scholarship. Dr. Walsh agreed to a friendly amendment to the award’s terms of reference.



Page 4

Motion: (J. Walsh/B. Peterson) That Senate approve, and recommend to the Board of Governors that it also approve, the new and revised awards as amended, as set out in the attached document: • May Yuen Memorial Scholarship (revised)* • Roger Odlum Scholarship in Law (new) • Innis Christie Entrance Scholarship (new)* • Dairyland Vikes Athletic Award (new) • Kutzschan Graduate Scholarship in Philosophy (new)* • Robert J Murphy Travel Award in Greek and Roman Studies (new)* • Anne and Ivor Williams Spain and Latin America Scholarship

(new)* • Canadian History Scholarship (new)* • Maurice William Summerhayes Memorial Fund (revised) • 50th Anniversary Humanities Entrance Scholarship (revised)* • 50th Anniversary Social Sciences Entrance Scholarship (revised)* • 50th Anniversary Vikes Entrance Scholarship (revised)* • Artes Y Letras Scholarship (revised)* • David Harris Flaherty Scholarship (revised)* • Dax Gibson Memorial Award in Gender Studies (revised)* • Dr. Ken and Barbara Thornton Award (revised)* • Edward Philip Oscapella Scholarship in Music (revised)* • Jesse Short-Gershman Memorial Scholarship (new)* • Michael Miller Scholarship (revised)* • Riley Jane Elhom Memorial Scholarship in Civil Engineering

(new)* • Sherry Lovine Sagris Memorial Bursary in Art Education (new) • Simba Technologies Inc. Scholarship (revised)* • Urbanecology.ca Scholarship (revised) • William Petrie Scholarship (revised)* • Henry & Marian Thiel International Business Bursary (revised)* • Maureen McLeod Scholarship in Geography (revised) • Joan Watson Memorial Scholarship (new) • The Leeder Family Memorial Bursary in Economics (new)* • The Leeder Family Memorial Bursary in Education – Elementary

(new)* • The Leeder Family Memorial Bursary in Education – Secondary

(new)* • The Leeder Family Memorial Bursary in Mathematics (new)* • Coast Capital Savings Entrepreneurship Scholarship (new) • E&S Theatre Scholarship (new) • MBA Pay It Forward Award (revised)* • British Columbia Provincial Court Judges Association Bursary (new)



Page 5

• Chair in Transgender Studies Undergraduate Research Scholarship (new)

• Eli Pasquale Basketball Award (new) • Gwyn Morgan “Be An Engineer” Bursary (new) • Union Club Scholarship (new) • Maureen De Burgh Memorial Scholarship (revised) • Humanities Graduate Entrance Scholarship (new) * Administered by the University of Victoria Foundation

CARRIED

d. Senate Committee on Continuing Studies i. 2015/2016 Annual Report

Dr. MacDonald presented the annual report.

e. Senate Committee on Curriculum

i. 2015/2016 Annual Report

Dr. Haskett presented the annual report.

ii. 2016/2017 Cycle 3 Curriculum Submissions

Dr. Haskett introduced the proposal.

Motion: (T. Haskett/B. Peterson) That Senate approve the curriculum changes recommended by the Faculties and the Senate Committee on Curriculum for inclusion in the 2016-2017 academic calendars, effective January 1, 2017.

CARRIED Motion: (T. Haskett/P. Marck) That Senate authorize the Chair of the Senate Committee on Curriculum to make small changes and additions that would otherwise unnecessarily delay the submission of items for the academic calendar.

CARRIED



Page 6

f. Senate Committee on Learning and Teaching i. Effective Practices in Teaching Evaluation

Dr. Aragon introduced the report, noting the three recommendations from the committee. No comments were received.

g. Senate Committee on Planning i. Annual Report on Status of Academic Program Reviews

Dr. Kuehne presented the annual report.

ii. Graduate Certificate in Indigenous Nationhood Dr. Kuehne introduced the proposal. Prof. Webber said he was pleased the proposal was coming forward, noting that it built on a pattern of collaboration.

Motion: (V. Kuehne/B. Peterson) That Senate approve, and recommend to the Board of Governors that it also approve, subject to funding, the establishment of a Graduate Certificate in Indigenous Nationhood, as described in the document “Proposal for Graduate Certificate in Indigenous Nationhood (IN)”, dated July 5, 2016, and that this approval be withdrawn if the program should not be offered within five years of the granting of approval.

CARRIED

iii. Master of Arts in Germanic and Slavic Studies - Holocaust Studies Stream Dr. Kuehne introduced the proposal. Dr. Liddell congratulated the department on this socially conscious program.

Motion: (V. Kuehne/P. Liddell) That Senate approve, and recommend to the Board of Governors that it also approve, subject to funding, the establishment of a Master of Arts in Germanic and Slavic Studies - Holocaust Studies Stream, as described in the document “Proposal for M.A. in Germanic and Slavic Studies - Holocaust Studies Stream”, dated June 30, 2016, and that this approval be withdrawn if the program should not be offered within five years of the granting of approval.

CARRIED



Page 7

iv. Master of Arts Stream in Public History Dr. Kuehne introduced the proposal. She reminded members of the previous proposal approved by Senate and the Board of Governors.

Motion: (V. Kuehne/D. Capson) That Senate approve, and recommend to the Board of Governors that it also approve, subject to funding, the establishment of a Master of Arts Stream in Public History, as described in the document “Proposal for M.A. Stream in Public History”, dated May 1, 2016, and that this approval be withdrawn if the program should not be offered within five years of the granting of approval.

CARRIED

v. Renewal of Approved Centre Status for the Centre for Advanced Materials and Related Technology (CAMTEC)

Dr. Kuehne introduced the proposal. Dr. Salem suggested there was an opportunity to strengthen the university’s response to the recommendation regarding informal activities for students, both with respect to this centre and more generally.

Motion: (V. Kuehne/J. Walsh) That Senate approve the renewal of Approved Centre Status for the Centre for Advanced Materials and Related Technology (CAMTEC) for the five year period 1 October, 2016 through 30 June, 2021. This recommendation is not contingent upon the suggestions in the external review report relating to resources which are advice to the Vice-President Research.

CARRIED 8. PROPOSALS AND REPORTS FROM FACULTIES

a. Peter B. Gustavson School of Business

i. Bylaw Revisions Dr. Klein introduced the proposal.

Motion: (S. Klein/A. Lemieux) That Senate approve the revised bylaws for the Peter B. Gustavson School of Business.

CARRIED



Page 8 9. PROPOSALS AND REPORTS FROM THE VICE-PRESIDENT ACADEMIC AND

PROVOST There were none. 10. OTHER BUSINESS

a. Academic Year Important Dates Ms. Andersen introduced the item, noting that the dates are drawn from the Ten-Year Sessional calendar and other administrative schedules.

Motion: (J. Walsh/B. Peterson) That Senate approve the Academic Year Important Dates for the period September 2017 through April 2018 for submission to the online academic calendar and for the academic calendar January 2017 publication.

CARRIED

b. Proposed Revision to the Admission Declaration at Convocation Ms. Andersen introduced the item, noting that the proposed language was consistent with other initiatives to make the Convocation ceremonies more inclusive for all students.

Motion: (S. Lewis/B. Peterson) That Senate approve the proposed revision to the Admission delivered by the Chancellor at Convocation.

CARRIED

c. Election of Vice-Chair of Senate Prof. Cassels asked for nominations for Vice-Chair. Dr. MacDonald nominated Dr. Capson. As no other nominations were received, Dr. Capson was acclaimed as Vice-Chair of Senate for the 2016/2017 year.

d. Notification of expiry of Chancellor’s first term Dr. Eastman reported that the Chancellor’s first term was ending at the end of December 2017. She noted that the university’s procedures for appointment and re-appointment of the Chancellor require that 18 months’ notice be provided to the Board and Senate.

e. Joint Senate Board Retreat Ms. Andersen provided an update on the Joint Senate Board Retreat, scheduled for November 28, 2016. There being no other business the meeting was adjourned at 4:45 p.m.


S t M f 0 t b 7 2016 ena e ee mg co er '

Name In Regrets Position

Attendance

Alamchandani, Dheeraj D D Student Senator Elected by the students

Andersen, Carrie ~ D Associate University Secretary By invitation

Aragon, Janni >rt' __ D Faculty of Social Sciences Elected by the Faculty

A r m :;t ron0 1 A li cia D D Student senator Elected by the students

Baer, Doug IEi D Faculty of Social Sciences Elected by the Faculty

Bash ir, Rizwan D D Convocation Senator Elected by the convocation

Beam, Sara D 'ti( Faculty of Graduate Studies Elected by the Faculty

Beaveridge, Chandra ~ .

Convocation Senator Elected by the convocation D

Begoray, Deborah x D Faculty of Education Elected by the faculty members

Bengtson, Jonathan ~ D University Librarian Ex officio

Bennett, Paige ~ D Student Senator Elected by the students

Brown, Michelle D D Student Senator Elected by the students

Butler-Palmer, Carolyn 'V D Faculty of Fine Arts Elected by the Faculty

Calder, Gillian ..,L D Faculty of Law Elected by the Faculty

Capson, David ")(. D Dean, Faculty of Graduate Studies Ex officio

Cassels, Jamie l>K: D President and Vice-Chancellor Chai r of Senate

Castle, David Ji!' D Vice-President Research Ex officio

Charlton, Lauren v D Convocation Senator Elected by the convocation

Coates, Zoe-Blue ~ D Student Senator Elected by the students

Colby, Jason D x Faculty of Humanities Elected by the Faculty

Dechev, Nikolai ~ D Faculty of Engineering Elected by the Faculty

Devor, Aaron D ~ Faculty of Social Sciences Elected by the faculty members

Diacu, Florin )if D Faculty of Science Elected by the Faculty

Driessen, Peter D D Faculty of Engineering Elected by the Faculty

Dunsdon, Jim ~ D Associate Vice-President Student Affairs By invitation

Durno, John D )(" Librarian Elected by the Professional Librarians

Eastman, Julia ./1'11 D University Secretary Secretary of Senate

Francis Pelton, Leslee )<1' D Faculty of Education Elected by the faculty members

Gagne, Lynda ){ D Faculty of Human and Social Development Elected by the Faculty

Gillen, Mark ,,,

D Faculty of Law Elected by the Faculty

Gillis, Kat hy 'fj_ D Faculty of Science Elected by the faculty members

Goto-Jones, Christopher x D Dean, Faculty of Humanities Ex officio

Grant, Rebecca ~ D Peter B. Gustavson School of Business Elected by the Faculty

Gray, Garry D ')< Faculty of Social Sciences Elected by the faculty members

Greengoe, Nicole -M D Registrar By invitation

Hallgrimsdottir, Helga ~ D Faculty of Social Sciences Elected by the faculty members

Haskett, Tim ~{ D Faculty of Humanities Elected by the faculty members

Hicks, Robin ){~ D Faculty of Science Elected by the faculty members

Jackson, LillAnne ~ D Faculty of Engineering Elected by the faculty members

Klein, Saul tg/' D Dean, Peter B. Gustavson School of Business Ex officio

Kostek, Patricia ')( D Faculty of Fine Arts Elected by the Faculty

Krull, Catherine D )( Dean, Faculty of Social Sciences Ex officio

Kuehne, Valerie D 'ji( Vice-President Academic and Provost Ex officio

Kushniruk, Andre ,

Faculty of Human and Social Development Elected by the Faculty D D

Lemieux, Andrew JI!!.. D Student Senator Elected by the students

Lepp, Annalee ~ D Faculty of Humanities Elected by the Faculty

Lewis, Susan ~ D Dean, Faculty of Fine Arts Ex officio

Liddell, Peter kf D Convocation Senator Elected by the convocation

Lipson, Robert t1- D Dean, Faculty of Science Ex officio

Lukenchuk, Ben 6 ~ Student Senator Elected by the students

MacDonald, Maureen t< [J Dean, Division of Continuing Studies Ex officio

Marek, Patricia V , l;:J Dean, Faculty of Human and Social Development Ex officio

Maroney, Samual ttf D Student Senator Elected by the students

Peterson, Bernadette ~ D Student Senator Elected by the students

Prendergast, Monica ~ D Faculty of Education Elected by the Faculty

Renwick-Shields, Bronte D \{_ Student Senator Elected by the students

Rogers, Shelagh D 'A Chancellor Ex officio

Salem, Joseph )( D Student Senator Elected by the students

Schallie, Charlotte D v Faculty of Graduate Studies Elected by the Faculty , Shankman, Cory lt D Student Senator Elected by the students

Smith, Brock D y Peter B. Gustavson School of Business Elected by the Faculty

St. Clair, Ralf D x Dean, Faculty of Education Ex officio

Thomas, Ann-Bernice ~ D Student Senator Elected by the students

Tiedje, Tom D y Dean, Faculty of Engineering Ex officio

Timayo, Susan D D Student Senator Elected by the students

Ulysses, Alicia ~ D Continuing Sessional Elected by the Continuing Sessionals

Varela, Diana )( D Faculty of Science Elected by the Faculty

Walsh, John ~ D Faculty of Education Elected by the Faculty

Warburton, Rebecca )i) D Faculty of Human and Social Development Elected by faculty members

Webber, Jeremy ~ D Dean, Faculty of Law Ex officio Wright, Bruce

, ' ).{ Head, Division of Medical Sciences D

Wright, Nancy D )( Associate Vice-President Academic Planning By invitation Wyatt, Victoria ~ D Faculty of Fine Arts Elected by the faculty members


Last updated: 10/19/2016

MEMBERSHIP OF THE SENATE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA

Effective July 1, 2016

EX OFFICIO MEMBERS - University Act: Section 35 (2) (a-f) Chancellor: Shelagh Rogers (31/12/17) President and Vice-Chancellor: Jamie Cassels, Chair V.P. Academic & Provost: Valerie Kuehne V.P. Research: David Castle

Dean, Peter B. Gustavson School of Business: Saul Klein Dean of Education: Ralf St. Clair Dean of Engineering: Thomas Tiedje Dean of Continuing Studies: Maureen MacDonald

Dean of Fine Arts: Susan Lewis Dean of Graduate Studies: David Capson Dean of Humanities: Christopher Goto-Jones Dean of HSD: Patricia Marck Dean of Law: Jeremy Webber Dean of Science: Robert Lipson Dean of Social Sciences: Catherine Krull University Librarian: Jonathan Bengtson MEMBERS ELECTED BY THE FACULTIES

- Section 35 (2) (g) BUSI: Rebecca Grant (30/6/19) Brock Smith (30/6/18)

EDUC: Monica Prendergast (30/6/19) John Walsh (30/6/17) ENGR : Peter Driessen (30/6/19) Nikolai Dechev (30/6/17) FINE: Carolyn Butler Palmer (30/6/19) Patricia Kostek (30/6/18) GRAD: Sara Beam (30/6/19) Charlotte Schallié (30/6/17) HSD: Lynda Gagné (30/6/19) Andre Kushniruk (30/6/18) HUMS: Jason Colby (30/6/18) Annalee Lepp (30/6/19) LAWF: Gillian Calder (30/6/17) Mark Gillen (30/6/19) SCIE: Florin Diacu (30/6/17) Diana Varela (30/6/17) SOSC: Janni Aragon (30/6/18) Doug Baer (30/6/17) MEMBERS ELECTED BY THE FACULTY MEMBERS - Sections 35 (2) (g) Deborah Begoray – EDUC (30/6/18) Aaron Devor – SOSC (30/6/17) Kathryn Gillis – SCIE (30/6/17) Garry Gray – SOSC (30/6/19) Helga Hallgrimsdottir – SOSC (30/6/18) Tim Haskett – HUMS (30/6/17) Robin Hicks – SCIE (30/6/18) LillAnne Jackson – ENGR (30/6/17)

MEMBERS ELECTED BY THE FACULTY

MEMBERS (continued)

Leslee Francis Pelton – EDUC (30/6/17) Joseph Salem – FINE (30/6/17) Rebecca Warburton - HSD (30/6/19) Victoria Wyatt - FINE (30/6/19) MEMBERS ELECTED FROM THE STUDENT

SOCIETIES – Section 35 (2) (h) Dheeraj Alamchandani (ENGR) (30/6/17) Alicia Armstrong (BUS) “ Paige Bennett (SOSC) “ Michelle Brown (SOSC) “ Zoë-Blue Coates (HUMA) “ Andrew Lemieux (GRAD) “ Ben Lukenchuk (SOSC) “ Samual Maroney (LAW) “ Bernadette Peterson (SCIE) “ Brontë Renwick-Shields (SOSC) “ Cory Shankman (GRAD) “ Ann-Bernice Thomas (FINE) “ Susan Timayo (SOSC) “ TBA (EDUC) “ TBA (HSD) “ TBA (GRAD) “ MEMBERS ELECTED BY THE CONVOCATION – Section 35 (2) (i) Rizwan Bashir (30/06/18) Chandra Beaveridge (30/06/18) Lauren Charlton (30/06/18) Peter Liddell (30/06/18) ADDITIONAL MEMBERS - Section 35 (2) (k) Head, Division of Medical Sciences: Bruce Wright Member elected by the Professional Librarians: John Durno (30/06/18) Continuing Sessional: Alicia Ulysses (30/06/17) SECRETARY OF SENATE - Section 64 (2) University Secretary: Julia Eastman BY INVITATION - Seated with specified speaking rights Assoc. V.P. Student Affairs: Jim Dunsdon Assoc. V.P. Academic Planning: Nancy Wright Registrar: Nicole Greengoe Associate University Secretary: Carrie Andersen


MEMO

Senate Committee on Academic Standards

The Terms of Reference for the Senate Committee on Academic Standards define its scope and relationship with Senate and other Senate committees. Each fall term the committee presents an annual report to Senate on its business and proceedings over the previous academic year. The Senate Committee on Academic Standards met seven times in 2015/16: September 11, 2015, October 21, 2015, November 3, 2015, January 12, 2016, March 14, 2016, April 12, 2016 and May 26, 2016. During the course of the year, the committee approved the convocation lists of faculties, made recommendations to Senate, initiated projects in areas of the committee’s concern, and received proposals for input from other Senate committees and campus constituencies. Within these areas, the committee considered a number of issues over the course of the year, including:

• Approval of the convocation lists of the faculties • Recommendations to Senate:

• revisions to the undergraduate academic calendar regarding regulations governing administration of university examinations

• changes to the regulation governing academic probationary status and the requirement to withdraw

• the addition of Term GPA information to the academic calendar and administrative transcript

• Continued Projects in 2015/16 • guidelines regarding the use of editors • undergraduate grading patterns

• Provided input on initiatives • proposals from other Senate committees • proposal from Cooperative Education and Career Services • proposal from the Division of Continuing Studies

Approval of the convocation lists of the faculties: The committee approves, on behalf of Senate, the granting of degrees. At its October 2015 and May 2016 meetings, the committee approved the fall and spring convocation lists respectively. The deans of the faculties or a designate were in attendance.

Date:

October 7, 2016

To:

Senate

From:

Dr. Rosaline Canessa Acting Chair, Senate Committee on Academic Standards

Re: 2015/16 Annual Report


Recommendations to Senate:

To approve revisions to the Regulations Governing Administration of University Examinations

A proposal outlining revisions to the regulations governing administration of university examinations was received by Senate at its October 2015 meeting. The proposal was sent back to the committee for further consideration after a thorough discussion at Senate. A revised proposal was developed by a sub-committee and approved by the committee in January 2016. Revisions to the regulations were approved by Senate at its February 2016 meeting.

To approve changes to the regulation governing Academic Probationary Status and the Requirement to Withdraw At the January 2016 meeting, the committee considered a proposal to change the academic calendar regulations governing academic probationary status and the requirement to withdraw. This proposal was approved by Senate at its February 2016 meeting. To approve the addition of Term GPA information to the academic calendar and administrative transcript At the April 2016 meeting, the Registrar submitted a proposal to add Term GPA information to the administrative transcript and to add a definition of Term GPA to the academic calendar. This proposal was approved by Senate at its October 2016 meeting.

Continued Projects in 2015/16

Guidelines regarding the Policy on Academic Integrity and use of editors In May 2015 the committee provided a preliminary report to Senate outlining the background and recommended approach for consideration of this issue. The proposed approach was endorsed by Senate. Over the course of 2015/16 the committee worked via a sub-committee to consider revisions to the Policy on Academic Integrity and develop guidelines for instructors regarding the use of editors. The sub-committee engaged in a series of consultations during development of the policy revisions and guidelines. A proposal was presented to the committee for feedback in September 2016. The committee continues to work on refining and finalizing a proposal for consideration by Senate.


Undergraduate grading patterns In 2013, with support from Senate, the committee began a more detailed examination of grading patterns across the university with a view to determining how the university should address concerns regarding grading patterns. Discussions at the November 2015 committee meeting, informed by a report and data prepared for the committee, led to the establishment of a sub-committee to consider issues related to grading patterns at the university. Over the course of 2015/16, the sub-committee met to examine what structure and guidance could be provided to faculties and units with respect to grading patterns. The sub-committee presented its report and recommendations to the committee for feedback in September 2016. The report will now be finalized and presented to Senate. Grading Patterns Report The committee received the annual Grading Patterns Report at its November 2015 meeting. The report was provided to Senate in December 2015. Provided input on initiatives: Provided Feedback on Proposals from Other Senate Committees At the September and October 2015 meetings, the committee reviewed a proposal from the Senate Committee on Admission, Re-registration and Transfer to revise calendar entries relating to failure to disclose. At the January 2016 meeting, the committee reviewed a number of proposals from the Senate Committee on Admission, Re-registration and Transfer including changes to the admission requirements for the Music and Computer Science program, changes in admission requirements for the Faculty of Science, and changes to calendar entries relating to transfer credit. At the April 2016 meeting, the committee reviewed a number of proposals from the Senate Committee on Admission, Re-registration and Transfer including revisions to the math grade for admission to the Faculty of Engineering, revisions to the pathway for admission to graduate school for students with a three-year baccalaureate, the establishment of admission requirement for the Combined Major Program in Computer Science and Health Information Science and revisions to the current admission requirements for the Health Information Science program.


Proposal - COM 205 and the Academic Writing Requirement At the April 2016 meeting, the committee considered a proposal from the Gustavson School of Business and the Division of Academic Writing. The proposal was to add a new course, COM205, to the list of courses meeting the academic writing requirement on a pilot basis in order to meet the needs of a cohort of international students. The committee approved the pilot on the understanding that a proposal would be brought to the committee and Senate in 2016/17 regarding any ongoing changes. Experiential Learning for Undergraduate Students – notation on transcript At the May 2016 meeting, the Executive Director of Coop Education and Career Services presented a proposal regarding the addition of an experiential learning notation to the official transcript. The notation would identify courses that have been designated as having an experiential learning component. The committee provided preliminary feedback on the proposal, which was sent back for further consideration. Proposal for selected Continuing Studies’ non-credit certificates and diplomas to receive degree credit At the May 2016 meeting, the Division of Continuing Studies presented a proposal regarding awarding transfer credits to students who have completed non-credit certificates and diplomas. The committee reviewed the proposal and provided feedback both to the Division and to the Senate Committee on Admission, Re-registration and Transfer, the committee responsible for making a recommendation to Senate regarding this proposal. Respectfully submitted, 2016/2017 Senate Committee on Academic Standards Rosaline Canessa (Acting Chair), Faculty of Social Sciences Eva Baboula, Faculty of Fine Arts Laurie Barnas, Associate Registrar Gillian Calder, Faculty of Law Jordan Crocker, UVSS Representative Nikolai Dechev, Faculty of Engineering Nicole Greengoe, Registrar David Harrington, Faculty of Science Cindy Holder, Associate Dean Academic Advising (Faculties of Science, Social Sciences and Humanities) Susan Lewis, Dean, Faculty of Fine Arts (VPAC designate) Peter Liddell, Convocation Senator Michele Martin, Division of Medical Sciences Norah McRae, Executive Director, Cooperative Education and Career Services Michael Nowlin, Faculty of Humanities Tim Pelton, Faculty of Education Bernadette Peterson, Student Senator Abdul Roudsari, Faculty of Human and Social Development


Richard Rush, Division of Continuing Studies Ada Saab, Director, Graduate Admissions and Records Brock Smith, Peter B. Gustavson School of Business Sarah Warder, GSS Representative Nancy Wright, Associate Vice-President Academic Planning (President’s nominee) Carrie Andersen Secretary, Associate University Secretary 2015/2016 Senate Committee on Academic Standards Sara Beam (Chair), Faculty of Graduate Studies Eva Baboula, Faculty of Fine Arts Laurie Barnas, Associate Registrar Sarah Blackstone, Advisor to the Provost, Special Projects (President's nominee) Gillian Calder, Faculty of Law Rosaline Canessa, Faculty of Social Sciences Lauren Charlton, Registrar Jordan Crocker, Student Senator Nikolai Dechev, Faculty of Engineering David Harrington, Faculty of Science Cindy Holder, Associate Dean Academic Advising (HUMS, SCIE, SOSC) Valerie Kuehne, Vice-President Academic and Provost Peter Liddell, Convocation Senator Michele Martin, Division of Medical Sciences Norah McRae, Executive Director, Cooperative Education and Career Services Michael Nowlin, Faculty of Humanities Tim Pelton, Faculty of Education Bernadette Peterson, Student Senator Abdul Roudsari, Faculty of Human and Social Development Richard Rush, Division of Continuing Studies Ada Saab, Director, Graduate Admissions and Records Brock Smith, Peter B. Gustavson School of Business Kaylee Szakacs, University of Victoria Students’ Society Representative Elissa Whittington, Graduate Students' Society Representative Carrie Andersen (Secretary), Office of the University Secretary


MEMO


To ensure continued oversight of grading patterns, a grading patterns summary report is presented annually to the Senate Committee on Academic Standards and Senate. The attached report was provided to the Senate Committee on Academic Standards at its meeting on October 19, 2016. Respectfully submitted, 2016/2017 Senate Committee on Academic Standards Rosaline Canessa (Acting Chair), Faculty of Social Sciences Eva Baboula, Faculty of Fine Arts Laurie Barnas, Associate Registrar Gillian Calder, Faculty of Law Jordan Crocker, UVSS Representative Nikolai Dechev, Faculty of Engineering Nicole Greengoe, Registrar David Harrington, Faculty of Science Cindy Holder, Associate Dean Academic Advising (Faculties of Science, Social Sciences and Humanities) Susan Lewis, Dean, Faculty of Fine Arts (VPAC designate) Peter Liddell, Convocation Senator Michele Martin, Division of Medical Sciences Norah McRae, Executive Director, Cooperative Education and Career Services Michael Nowlin, Faculty of Humanities Tim Pelton, Faculty of Education Bernadette Peterson, Student Senator Abdul Roudsari, Faculty of Human and Social Development Richard Rush, Division of Continuing Studies Ada Saab, Director, Graduate Admissions and Records Brock Smith, Peter B. Gustavson School of Business Sarah Warder, GSS Representative Nancy Wright, Associate Vice-President Academic Planning (President’s nominee) Carrie Andersen Secretary, Associate University Secretary /Attachment

Date:

October 19, 2016

To:

Senate

From:


Re: University of Victoria Grading Patterns Reporting Portal


The purpose of the grading reports is to document patterns of grades awarded at the university, faculty, and school or department levels over a five-year period for undergraduate, graduate, and law courses at the University of Victoria. Previous paper reports were prepared every two years for the Senate Committee on Academic Standards and the Vice-President Academic and Provost, with relevant sections distributed to interested parties, such as deans and chairs. In 2013, the system was revamped to be more comprehensive, timely, detailed, and available on-line. This report comprises grading statistics up to the Spring Term of the 2015-2016 academic year. Starting with the Summer 2014 term, percentage grades are now being collected and this report presents some overall percentage grades in addition to the usual 9-point and letter grade statistics. Access is via the Office and Institutional Planning and Analysis website (www.inst.uvic.ca). Full instructions on how to access and navigate the system as well as reports at the following levels are attached to this memorandum. Attached Reports:

• Overall Undergraduate • Overall Graduate • Faculty of Law • Faculty of Education • Faculty of Engineering • Faculty of Fine Arts • Faculty of Human and Social Development • Faculty of Humanities • Division of Medical Sciences • Faculty of Science • Faculty of Social Sciences • PB Gustavson School of Business

Institutional Planning and Analysis PO Box1700 STN CSC VictoriaBritish ColumbiaV8W 2Y2Canada Tel (250) 721-8026 Fax 721-7213 E-mail [email protected] Web www.inst.uvic.ca

Date: Friday, October 7th, 2016 To: Chair, Senate Committee on Academic Standards From: Office of Institutional Planning and Analysis Re: University of Victoria Grading Patterns Reporting Portal

1SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 2 of 44

http://www.inst.uvic.ca/

For the university as a whole, the five academic years with complete information show that the grade distributions have remained relatively constant with perhaps a slight downward trend, with GPAs falling from 5.54 to 5.47 although A+’s have risen from 7.8 to 11 percent and 2nd class grades have fallen from 41.2% to 30.5%. Expanding the academic years into individual terms shows, however, that grade performance during the summer is consistently better than during the fall and spring terms, with better GPAs, first class results, and fail rates. Perhaps not surprisingly, performance in undergraduate courses by level is better as the level goes up. For example, in 2015/16 the average GPA for 100, 200, 300, and 400 level courses were 4.80, 5.24, 5.77, and 6.61 respectively. These reports are intended to be descriptive rather than analytical or prescriptive. There are numerous possible explanations for changes in grade distributions over time, for differences in grade distributions across sections of a course, and for variations in grade distributions among departments and faculties. These reports document general time-series trends and grading anomalies, but do not (nor should they) attempt to explain them. Attachments: Appendix A – Grading reports Appendix B – Accessing and navigating the Grading Reports

2SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 3 of 44

ALL COURSE LEVELS

Applied filters: Time 5 years ending with the last year (currently 2015) AND Course Year Level equal to 100 Level, 200 Level, 300Level, 400 Level, 500 Level, 600 Level, 700 Level

Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2nd

Class%

Pass%

FailGradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

AcademicYear20112012201320142015

5.54 . 7.8% 39.9% 41.2% 14.1% 4.8% 126,199 4.5% 137,4335.45 . 9.9% 43.0% 32.7% 19.6% 4.7% 126,841 4.5% 137,6705.45 . 10% 43.2% 32.2% 19.7% 4.8% 130,629 4.9% 142,9255.42 74.6 10% 42.9% 32.0% 20.2% 4.9% 133,820 4.8% 146,4755.47 74.9 11% 44.3% 30.5% 20.3% 4.9% 137,892 4.7% 150,754

ALL COURSE LEVELS

Applied filters: Time 5 years ending with the last year (currently 2015) AND CourseYear Level equal to 100 Level, 200 Level, 300 Level, 400 Level, 500 Level, 600Level, 700 Level

BY COURSE LEVEL

Applied filters: Course Year Level equal to 100 Level, 200 Level, 300 Level, 400 Level, 500 Level, 600 Level, 700 Level AND Time5 years ending with the last year (currently 2015)

Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2nd

Class%

Pass%


%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYearLevel

AcademicYear

100Level

200Level

300Level

201120122013201420152011201220132014201520112012

4.93 . 6.6% 30.0% 42.5% 19.8% 7.7% 38,103 6.0% 40,6274.83 . 8.7% 34.2% 31.6% 26.5% 7.8% 37,412 5.8% 39,8764.76 . 7.7% 33.3% 31.8% 26.9% 8.0% 39,780 6.4% 43,4204.82 71.4 8.5% 34.2% 31.7% 25.9% 8.0% 41,933 6.3% 45,6444.80 71.3 9.0% 34.9% 30.0% 26.7% 8.4% 42,804 6.2% 46,3115.21 . 7.4% 34.6% 41.6% 17.9% 6.0% 26,996 4.8% 29,3695.03 . 8.7% 37.4% 31.6% 25.0% 5.9% 27,211 5.0% 29,4345.05 . 9.0% 37.8% 31.1% 24.9% 6.1% 27,513 5.3% 29,8695.09 73.1 9.5% 38.1% 31.2% 25.1% 5.5% 29,281 5.3% 31,6805.24 73.8 11% 40.7% 30.5% 23.5% 5.3% 32,020 4.7% 34,6675.83 . 7.3% 43.2% 43.1% 10.8% 2.9% 41,080 3.9% 44,2305.75 . 9.5% 45.7% 35.8% 15.7% 2.8% 42,690 4.1% 45,974

Program Course Level.PROGRAM_COURSE_LEVEL: Undergraduate

Section Grading Patterns - UVic

Note:* 1st Class: Includes grades A+, A, and A-* 2nd Class: Includes grades B+, B, and B-* Pass: Includes grades C+, C, and D* Fail: Includes grades E, F, and N* Headcounts: Reflect the total number of students in all sections for each level of data aggregation, thus unique headcounts are only available when viewing data for an individual course section.* Official Reporting: Please verify with Institutional Planning & Analysis.

3SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 4 of 44

BY COURSE LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2nd

Class%

Pass%


%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYearLevel

AcademicYear

300Level

400Level

700Level

2013201420152011201220132014201520112012201320142015

5.79 . 9.9% 46.6% 35.2% 15.5% 2.7% 43,047 4.3% 46,1725.68 76.0 9.7% 45.2% 34.8% 16.9% 3.0% 42,546 4.3% 45,6055.77 76.6 11% 47.4% 32.9% 17.0% 2.7% 42,910 4.3% 46,1746.55 . 12% 59.0% 34.3% 5.1% 1.5% 19,780 2.7% 22,6076.58 . 15% 61.5% 29.7% 7.4% 1.4% 19,287 2.4% 21,8256.62 . 16% 63.0% 28.1% 7.4% 1.4% 20,081 2.8% 22,9596.61 80.6 17% 63.2% 27.5% 8.0% 1.3% 19,839 2.6% 23,0336.61 80.6 17% 63.8% 26.5% 8.3% 1.4% 19,937 2.8% 23,1066.88 . 1.7% 70.4% 28.3% 0.4% 0.8% 240 0.7% 6006.97 . 9.5% 69.3% 29.0% 0.4% 1.2% 241 0.2% 5616.94 . 13% 54.8% 44.2% 0.5% 0.5% 208 0.2% 5056.88 82.1 3.6% 61.5% 37.6% . 0.9% 221 1.0% 5136.87 81.1 4.5% 69.7% 28.5% 0.5% 1.4% 221 1.4% 496

BY COURSE LEVEL

Applied filters: Course Year Level equal to 100 Level, 200 Level, 300 Level, 400Level, 500 Level, 600 Level, 700 Level AND Time 5 years ending with the last year(currently 2015)




4SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 5 of 44

ALL COURSE LEVELS


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2nd

Class%

Pass%


%Drop

TotalHeadcount

AcademicYear20112012201320142015

7.41 . 17% 81.3% 17.9% 0.4% 0.5% 7,862 1.8% 17,3387.47 . 21% 82.5% 15.9% 0.9% 0.7% 7,472 1.7% 16,9827.47 . 23% 82.1% 16.4% 1.1% 0.4% 7,812 2.0% 17,6947.51 84.8 25% 83.6% 14.7% 1.3% 0.4% 7,705 2.4% 17,8167.50 84.7 25% 83.3% 15.0% 1.3% 0.5% 8,149 2.6% 18,682

ALL COURSE LEVELS


BY COURSE LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2nd

Class%

Pass%


%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYearLevel

AcademicYear

500Level

600Level

2011201220132014201520112012201320142015

7.40 . 17% 80.9% 18.2% 0.4% 0.5% 7,530 2.0% 14,0267.45 . 21% 82.2% 16.1% 0.9% 0.7% 7,184 2.0% 13,5747.46 . 23% 81.8% 16.7% 1.1% 0.4% 7,505 2.3% 14,0547.49 84.7 24% 83.3% 15.0% 1.4% 0.4% 7,394 2.9% 14,0587.48 84.6 24% 83.0% 15.2% 1.3% 0.5% 7,901 3.1% 14,9757.67 . 25% 88.3% 10.2% 0.3% 1.2% 332 0.7% 3,3127.82 . 36% 88.9% 9.4% 0.7% 1.0% 288 0.7% 3,4087.72 . 29% 87.6% 11.4% 0.3% 0.7% 307 0.7% 3,6407.96 87.2 36% 92.3% 7.1% 0.3% 0.3% 311 0.7% 3,7588.02 87.4 47% 90.7% 7.3% 0.8% 1.2% 248 0.7% 3,707

Program Course Level.PROGRAM_COURSE_LEVEL: Graduate



5SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 6 of 44

BY COURSE LEVEL


Program Course Level.PROGRAM_COURSE_LEVEL: Graduate



6SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 7 of 44

ALL COURSE LEVELS


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2nd

Class%

Pass%


%Drop

TotalHeadcount

AcademicYear20112012201320142015

5.50 . 0.9% 25.6% 65.1% 9.0% 0.1% 2,737 0.2% 3,2295.49 . 1.9% 28.4% 59.7% 11.6% 0.2% 2,757 0.2% 3,2425.54 . 1.9% 29.7% 59.5% 10.4% 0.4% 2,633 0.3% 3,0925.61 76.2 1.2% 31.0% 59.6% 8.8% 0.5% 2,503 0.7% 2,9955.64 76.6 1.1% 30.3% 61.4% 8.1% . 2,570 1.6% 3,110

ALL COURSE LEVELS


BY COURSE LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2nd

Class%

Pass%


%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYearLevel

AcademicYear

100Level

300Level

500Level

201120122013201420152011201220132014201520112012

5.26 . 0.6% 14.9% 77.5% 7.5% . 777 . 8905.17 . 1.0% 17.0% 70.4% 12.5% 0.1% 778 . 8865.25 . 0.1% 15.7% 76.7% 7.6% . 724 1.0% 8335.33 75.3 0.5% 22.4% 66.9% 10.7% . 740 . 8505.24 74.9 0.1% 16.3% 74.6% 8.8% . 798 2.4% 9415.58 . 0.9% 29.3% 60.7% 9.6% 0.2% 1,938 0.4% 2,2075.60 . 2.1% 32.3% 55.9% 11.3% 0.3% 1,963 0.2% 2,2305.61 . 2.3% 34.2% 53.7% 11.6% 0.6% 1,885 . 2,1255.70 76.5 1.4% 33.9% 57.2% 8.2% 0.7% 1,741 1.1% 2,0045.80 77.3 1.4% 35.7% 56.2% 8.0% . 1,746 1.3% 2,0237.37 . 16% 78.9% 21.1% . . 19 . 567.75 . 19% 93.8% 6.3% . . 16 . 54

Program Course Level.PROGRAM_COURSE_LEVEL: Law



7SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 8 of 44

BY COURSE LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2nd

Class%

Pass%


%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYearLevel

AcademicYear

500Level

600Level

20132014201520112012201320142015

8.00 . 27% 100% . . . 22 . 687.55 83.9 4.5% 95.5% 4.5% . . 22 . 617.79 86.1 17% 95.8% 4.2% . . 24 . 588.00 . . 100% . . . 3 . 76

. . . . . . . 0 . 728.50 . 50% 100% . . . 2 . 66

. . . . . . . 0 . 808.00 86.5 . 100% . . . 2 . 88

BY COURSE LEVEL


Program Course Level.PROGRAM_COURSE_LEVEL: Law



8SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 9 of 44

FACULTY LEVEL

Applied filters: Time 5 years ending with the last year (currently 2015) AND Course Year Level equal to 100 Level, 200 Level, 300 Level, 400Level, 500 Level, 600 Level, 700 Level

Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2nd

Class%

Pass%


%Drop

TotalHeadcount

AcademicYear20112012201320142015

6.52 . 6.2% 57.1% 38.1% 4.1% 0.7% 10,196 2.1% 12,5106.73 . 14% 65.2% 28.0% 5.8% 1.0% 10,191 2.0% 12,2426.73 . 14% 65.1% 27.7% 6.3% 0.9% 9,892 2.5% 11,8886.77 81.5 16% 66.3% 26.7% 6.1% 1.0% 9,826 2.3% 11,6906.73 81.2 16% 64.8% 27.6% 6.7% 1.0% 10,415 2.5% 12,528

FACULTY LEVEL


COURSE YEAR LEVEL

Applied filters: Course Year Level equal to 100 Level, 200 Level, 300 Level, 400 Level, 500 Level, 600 Level, 700 Level AND Time 5 years endingwith the last year (currently 2015)

Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYear Level

AcademicYear

100 Level

200 Level

300 Level

400 Level

2011201220132014201520112012201320142015201120122013201420152011

5.90 . 5.1% 42.6% 45.8% 10.1% 1.6% 2,192 6.2% 2,3406.17 . 11% 56.4% 29.1% 12.5% 2.0% 2,289 4.2% 2,3906.09 . 12% 53.9% 29.7% 14.4% 2.0% 2,196 4.6% 2,3036.15 78.3 13% 54.9% 30.1% 12.6% 2.4% 2,117 5.1% 2,2835.95 77.4 13% 52.4% 28.6% 16.8% 2.2% 2,272 6.0% 2,5926.14 . 6.3% 45.2% 47.2% 6.8% 0.8% 991 2.3% 1,2786.29 . 14% 52.6% 36.8% 9.7% 0.9% 992 2.5% 1,2246.43 . 13% 59.7% 31.0% 8.2% 1.1% 998 3.1% 1,2516.34 79.5 12% 57.4% 32.4% 9.4% 0.7% 937 2.1% 1,1316.63 80.8 15% 61.9% 31.0% 6.4% 0.7% 955 0.9% 1,2366.55 . 4.9% 55.3% 41.7% 2.6% 0.4% 3,436 1.4% 4,0776.71 . 11% 63.8% 30.7% 4.6% 0.9% 3,476 1.9% 4,1436.77 . 13% 63.5% 31.2% 4.5% 0.7% 3,617 2.7% 4,2066.74 81.4 13% 64.0% 30.4% 5.0% 0.6% 3,617 2.5% 4,1816.73 81.3 13% 62.4% 32.1% 4.8% 0.7% 4,187 2.3% 4,8626.99 . 8.5% 71.1% 27.4% 1.1% 0.4% 3,337 0.6% 4,215

Course Faculty.COURSE_FACULTY_1: Faculty of Education


Section Grading Patterns by Faculty

Note:* 1st Class: Includes grades A+, A, and A-* 2nd Class: Includes grades B+, B, and B-* Pass: Includes grades C+, C, and D* Fail: Includes grades E, F, and N* Headcounts: Reflect the total number of students in all sections for each level of data aggregation, thus unique headcounts are only available when viewing data for an individual course section.

* Official Reporting: Please verify with Institutional Planning & Analysis.

9SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 10 of 44

COURSE YEAR LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYear Level

AcademicYear

400 Level

700 Level

201220132014201520112012201320142015

7.29 . 20% 76.5% 21.5% 1.5% 0.5% 3,193 0.8% 3,9247.25 . 17% 78.3% 19.4% 2.0% 0.3% 2,873 0.9% 3,6237.40 84.4 24% 80.5% 17.0% 2.0% 0.4% 2,934 0.5% 3,5827.38 84.3 22% 79.3% 18.6% 1.8% 0.4% 2,780 0.8% 3,3426.88 . 1.7% 70.4% 28.3% 0.4% 0.8% 240 0.7% 6006.97 . 9.5% 69.3% 29.0% 0.4% 1.2% 241 0.2% 5616.94 . 13% 54.8% 44.2% 0.5% 0.5% 208 0.2% 5056.88 82.1 3.6% 61.5% 37.6% . 0.9% 221 1.0% 5136.87 81.1 4.5% 69.7% 28.5% 0.5% 1.4% 221 1.4% 496

COURSE YEAR LEVEL







10SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 11 of 44

DEPARTMENT LEVEL

Applied filters: Time 5 years ending with the last year (currently 2015) AND Course Year Level equal to 100 Level, 200 Level, 300 Level, 400Level, 500 Level, 600 Level, 700 Level AND Course Department equal to Anthropology, Art History & Visual Studies, Biochemistry & Microbiology,Biology, Business, Chemistry, Child & Youth Care, Civil Engineering, Co-op and Career, Computer Science, Cultural, Sociall&Poltcl Thght,Curriculum and Instruction, Division of Medical Sciences, Earth and Ocean Sciences, Economics, Educ Psychology & Leadership, Education,Electrical & Computer Engg, Engineering, English, Environmental Studies, Exercise Sc, Phys & Health Ed, Fine Arts, French, Gender Studies,Geography, Germanic & Slavic Studies, Graduate Studies, Greek and Roman Studies, Health Information Science, Hispanic & Italian Studies,History, Human & Social Devlmnt, Humanities, Indigenous Education, Indigenous Governance Prgrm, Interdisciplinary Studies, Law, Linguistics,Mathematics and Statistics, Mechanical Engineering, Medieval Studies, Music, Nursing, Pacific & Asian Studies, Philosophy, Physics andAstronomy, Political Science, Psychology, Public Administration, Public Health & Social Policy, Religious Studies, Social Work, Sociology, Studies inPolicy and Practice, Theatre, Visual Arts, Writing

Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseDepartment

AcademicYear

CurriculumandInstruction

EducPsychology&Leadership

Education

Exercise Sc,Phys &Health Ed

IndigenousEducation

2011201220132014201520112012201320142015201120122013201420152011201220132014201520112012201320142015

6.64 . 5.4% 59.5% 37.8% 2.3% 0.4% 3,965 1.8% 4,2646.72 . 10% 63.3% 32.3% 3.6% 0.8% 3,863 1.9% 4,1546.73 . 11% 63.2% 32.4% 3.6% 0.8% 3,851 2.6% 4,2046.65 80.8 9.5% 62.9% 32.1% 4.1% 0.8% 3,785 2.2% 5,0436.67 81.0 10% 62.3% 33.0% 4.2% 0.6% 4,057 2.2% 5,3156.65 . 6.7% 62.7% 32.9% 3.5% 0.9% 2,255 1.6% 2,5447.00 . 19% 72.2% 22.0% 4.3% 1.5% 2,259 1.8% 2,5667.01 . 17% 75.5% 17.5% 6.0% 1.0% 2,133 1.3% 2,4247.09 83.0 23% 74.1% 19.0% 6.1% 0.8% 2,229 1.2% 2,5097.04 82.8 22% 74.9% 16.4% 8.0% 0.7% 2,168 1.4% 2,4207.00 . . 68.0% 32.0% . . 25 9.1% 337.00 . 17% 66.7% 29.2% 4.2% . 24 6.3% 326.11 . . 44.4% 50.0% 5.6% . 18 11.5% 266.80 80.8 . 80.0% 20.0% . . 5 . 136.33 78.5 6.2% 58.0% 32.1% 7.4% 2.5% 81 8.5% 946.28 . 7.1% 49.2% 43.2% 6.8% 0.8% 3,614 3.6% 3,7866.55 . 14% 61.4% 28.6% 9.2% 0.8% 3,750 2.7% 3,9006.49 . 16% 59.3% 30.1% 9.6% 1.0% 3,594 3.7% 3,7866.64 80.9 18% 63.1% 27.2% 8.5% 1.2% 3,573 3.4% 3,7406.58 80.7 17% 60.6% 29.6% 8.9% 0.9% 3,845 2.8% 4,0186.99 . 2.7% 75.9% 23.5% 0.3% 0.3% 332 0.6% 4777.41 . 15% 85.4% 12.5% 1.7% 0.3% 287 0.5% 4187.58 . 19% 88.0% 9.2% 2.4% 0.3% 292 0.3% 3957.93 87.0 27% 94.9% 4.7% . 0.4% 234 0.3% 3857.30 80.4 30% 85.2% 5.7% 1.5% 7.6% 264 6.2% 681

DEPARTMENT LEVEL







11SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 12 of 44

FACULTY LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2nd

Class%

Pass%


%Drop

TotalHeadcount

AcademicYear20112012201320142015

5.85 . 14% 46.0% 37.2% 12.3% 4.4% 9,948 4.8% 10,5215.64 . 15% 47.6% 27.8% 19.7% 4.5% 10,814 4.9% 11,3975.52 . 14% 45.7% 28.6% 20.2% 5.2% 12,494 5.3% 13,7685.56 75.2 16% 46.6% 28.2% 19.1% 5.7% 14,046 5.3% 15,4135.75 76.4 18% 50.2% 26.1% 18.6% 5.0% 16,820 5.0% 17,748

FACULTY LEVEL


COURSE YEAR LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYear Level

AcademicYear

100 Level

200 Level

300 Level

400 Level

2011201220132014201520112012201320142015201120122013201420152011

5.66 . 9.9% 44.4% 37.2% 11.3% 7.1% 3,044 5.6% 3,2265.39 . 14% 44.8% 26.9% 20.2% 8.0% 3,078 6.4% 3,2885.13 . 10% 40.1% 29.8% 21.9% 8.0% 3,774 6.8% 4,6175.22 72.5 15% 44.1% 25.7% 18.9% 10.8% 4,166 6.7% 5,0505.65 75.3 19% 50.3% 24.2% 17.2% 8.4% 4,930 6.5% 5,2745.52 . 13% 39.2% 39.6% 16.4% 4.4% 2,211 6.0% 2,3545.34 . 14% 44.5% 26.9% 22.4% 5.6% 2,269 6.1% 2,4185.14 . 11% 40.7% 28.1% 22.5% 8.0% 2,401 6.1% 2,5605.32 74.0 13% 41.5% 30.8% 21.7% 5.4% 3,135 6.5% 3,3535.50 75.3 14% 44.9% 28.9% 20.9% 5.0% 4,036 4.6% 4,2335.70 . 12% 42.3% 39.9% 13.8% 3.8% 2,687 4.5% 2,8785.43 . 14% 42.6% 30.2% 23.8% 2.8% 3,327 4.1% 3,4885.47 . 14% 43.5% 30.3% 22.6% 3.3% 3,664 4.4% 3,8425.49 75.3 14% 44.0% 30.3% 21.6% 3.7% 4,142 3.8% 4,3055.60 75.7 17% 47.4% 26.5% 22.1% 3.9% 4,885 4.0% 5,1186.70 . 22% 60.8% 30.8% 7.4% 1.0% 2,006 2.5% 2,063

Course Faculty.COURSE_FACULTY_1: Faculty of Engineering





12SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 13 of 44

COURSE YEAR LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYear Level

AcademicYear

400 Level

2012201320142015

6.63 . 21% 62.9% 26.4% 9.6% 0.9% 2,140 2.8% 2,2036.51 . 21% 61.3% 25.2% 12.2% 1.2% 2,655 3.3% 2,7496.53 80.6 23% 61.1% 25.9% 12.1% 1.0% 2,603 3.7% 2,7056.52 80.5 21% 61.9% 24.9% 12.0% 1.2% 2,969 4.7% 3,123

COURSE YEAR LEVEL







13SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 14 of 44

DEPARTMENT LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseDepartment

AcademicYear

CivilEngineering

ComputerScience

Electrical &ComputerEngg

Engineering

MechanicalEngineering

2015

20112012201320142015201120122013201420152011201220132014201520112012201320142015

6.17 79.4 14% 54.0% 30.5% 14.2% 1.3% 226 . 2265.75 . 14% 48.1% 31.7% 13.1% 7.1% 3,751 7.8% 4,0705.51 . 16% 47.0% 25.4% 21.1% 6.5% 4,176 7.5% 4,5135.29 . 13% 43.5% 27.1% 22.4% 6.9% 4,845 8.5% 5,3015.54 74.9 18% 47.9% 25.5% 19.2% 7.4% 5,577 7.7% 6,0455.44 74.6 17% 46.9% 24.2% 21.3% 7.6% 6,104 7.4% 6,6025.53 . 13% 39.1% 39.3% 18.6% 2.7% 2,191 3.2% 2,3255.29 . 16% 40.7% 28.5% 27.7% 2.5% 2,629 3.3% 2,7365.30 . 14% 41.0% 29.5% 25.8% 3.3% 3,167 3.7% 3,2965.28 74.3 15% 41.9% 27.9% 25.3% 4.5% 3,221 5.6% 3,4115.51 75.3 18% 46.7% 24.5% 23.8% 5.0% 3,737 3.9% 3,9126.11 . 15% 48.2% 40.2% 7.8% 3.8% 2,197 3.8% 2,2846.08 . 16% 56.8% 25.5% 12.5% 4.9% 1,922 4.5% 2,0145.98 . 14% 52.2% 29.7% 13.0% 4.8% 2,169 3.5% 2,8025.66 75.3 13% 45.9% 33.4% 14.0% 5.7% 2,598 3.4% 3,2536.33 79.3 21% 58.5% 26.4% 12.2% 2.9% 3,570 3.6% 3,7056.13 . 11% 47.4% 42.3% 8.6% 1.4% 1,809 1.4% 1,8425.93 . 13% 49.3% 33.8% 13.3% 2.6% 2,087 2.1% 2,1345.90 . 14% 50.7% 29.6% 14.5% 4.5% 2,313 2.3% 2,3695.88 76.7 15% 50.6% 29.2% 16.2% 3.4% 2,650 2.0% 2,7045.97 77.5 14% 51.2% 31.0% 14.6% 2.8% 3,183 3.5% 3,303

DEPARTMENT LEVEL







14SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 15 of 44

FACULTY LEVEL

Applied filters: Time 5 years ending with the last year (currently 2015) AND Course Year Level equal to 100 Level, 200 Level, 300 Level, 400 Level, 500Level, 600 Level, 700 Level

Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2nd

Class%

Pass%


%Drop

TotalHeadcount

AcademicYear20112012201320142015

6.39 . 13% 57.7% 32.4% 6.9% 3.0% 8,963 4.5% 9,4706.28 . 12% 56.1% 32.1% 8.9% 2.8% 9,295 4.2% 9,7586.40 . 14% 59.4% 29.0% 8.6% 2.9% 8,355 4.2% 8,7806.24 78.4 14% 57.4% 28.7% 11.1% 2.8% 8,955 4.0% 9,3896.29 78.5 14% 58.4% 28.3% 10.0% 3.3% 9,207 4.4% 9,776

FACULTY LEVEL


COURSE YEAR LEVEL

Applied filters: Course Year Level equal to 100 Level, 200 Level, 300 Level, 400 Level, 500 Level, 600 Level, 700 Level AND Time 5 years ending withthe last year (currently 2015)

Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYear Level

AcademicYear

100 Level

200 Level

300 Level

400 Level

201120122013201420152011201220132014201520112012201320142015201120122013

6.21 . 13% 53.9% 33.2% 9.2% 3.7% 2,844 6.4% 3,0516.03 . 12% 52.2% 31.6% 12.7% 3.5% 3,144 4.6% 3,2966.12 . 13% 54.6% 29.9% 12.1% 3.5% 2,910 5.8% 3,0895.95 77.0 13% 53.4% 28.4% 14.3% 3.9% 3,140 5.2% 3,3135.95 76.8 12% 53.3% 29.1% 13.3% 4.4% 3,551 4.9% 3,7606.14 . 7.9% 52.1% 36.9% 8.1% 2.9% 2,180 4.1% 2,2826.08 . 9.4% 52.5% 34.6% 9.6% 3.2% 1,909 4.7% 2,0176.24 . 11% 55.9% 31.9% 9.7% 2.5% 1,623 4.4% 1,7106.06 77.6 11% 53.3% 31.4% 12.4% 2.9% 1,714 2.9% 1,7766.07 77.4 12% 53.7% 31.0% 11.5% 3.8% 1,870 4.0% 1,9876.59 . 14% 61.8% 30.5% 4.9% 2.7% 2,999 3.6% 3,1296.47 . 12% 58.4% 33.0% 6.6% 2.0% 3,342 3.9% 3,4916.61 . 15% 63.7% 27.4% 6.1% 2.8% 2,989 3.2% 3,1076.45 79.4 15% 59.7% 29.9% 8.1% 2.3% 3,241 4.2% 3,4026.65 80.2 17% 64.0% 27.6% 6.2% 2.2% 2,858 4.6% 3,0346.91 . 18% 68.5% 25.5% 3.7% 2.2% 940 3.0% 1,0086.87 . 16% 68.9% 25.7% 3.2% 2.2% 900 2.9% 9546.89 . 18% 68.1% 26.1% 3.5% 2.4% 833 1.8% 874

Course Faculty.COURSE_FACULTY_1: Faculty of Fine ArtsProgram Course Level.PROGRAM_COURSE_LEVEL: Undergraduate




15SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 16 of 44

COURSE YEAR LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYear Level

AcademicYear

400 Level20142015

6.88 81.7 19% 71.0% 20.5% 7.4% 1.0% 860 1.6% 8986.93 81.9 21% 70.3% 22.0% 6.1% 1.6% 928 2.7% 995

COURSE YEAR LEVEL






16SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 17 of 44

DEPARTMENT LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseDepartment

AcademicYear

Art History &Visual Studies

Fine Arts

InterdisciplinaryStudies

Music

Theatre

Visual Arts

Writing

2011201220132014201520112012201320142015

2015

20112012201320142015201120122013201420152011201220132014201520112012201320142015

6.42 . 17% 58.2% 31.4% 5.8% 4.6% 2,033 5.8% 2,1676.25 . 14% 54.7% 33.4% 7.7% 4.2% 1,983 5.6% 2,1066.40 . 16% 59.7% 28.3% 7.6% 4.3% 1,884 4.3% 1,9726.20 77.5 13% 56.7% 30.1% 9.4% 3.8% 1,957 4.1% 2,0526.15 77.0 13% 54.9% 31.1% 10.0% 4.0% 1,830 5.3% 1,9466.62 . 18% 64.4% 25.9% 6.5% 3.2% 506 8.0% 5505.81 . 6.7% 43.1% 42.3% 12.3% 2.3% 480 4.8% 5045.89 . 11% 47.3% 35.8% 13.1% 3.8% 366 5.7% 3885.72 76.1 12% 47.3% 33.0% 15.6% 4.0% 448 4.3% 4686.75 80.4 7.1% 71.0% 23.3% 4.0% 1.7% 420 2.8% 434

8.00 88.0 . 100% . . . 1 . 16.21 . 11% 55.5% 32.2% 8.3% 4.0% 2,239 4.4% 2,3716.26 . 16% 58.5% 26.5% 11.0% 4.0% 2,216 4.2% 2,3256.56 . 20% 64.2% 23.4% 8.8% 3.7% 2,054 5.5% 2,1836.28 78.7 21% 60.6% 21.5% 14.0% 3.9% 2,330 5.3% 2,4716.43 79.4 24% 63.5% 20.5% 10.9% 5.1% 2,311 5.9% 2,5056.83 . 16% 68.5% 24.1% 5.4% 2.0% 1,555 2.8% 1,6306.57 . 11% 60.5% 31.7% 6.3% 1.5% 1,607 3.3% 1,6976.60 . 12% 65.6% 23.9% 8.7% 1.8% 1,409 2.8% 1,4906.33 79.3 10% 58.4% 29.9% 10.7% 1.1% 1,425 2.5% 1,4966.17 78.1 9.8% 54.3% 32.7% 10.7% 2.3% 1,586 3.5% 1,7125.85 . 3.7% 38.8% 51.5% 7.7% 1.9% 1,259 4.1% 1,3275.95 . 4.3% 46.2% 42.3% 10.2% 1.3% 1,201 3.7% 1,2476.02 . 3.9% 46.3% 44.0% 7.7% 2.0% 1,109 3.9% 1,1545.91 76.9 4.0% 48.9% 38.4% 10.3% 2.4% 1,202 3.8% 1,2506.12 77.8 6.9% 52.4% 35.1% 10.6% 1.8% 1,412 2.7% 1,4546.57 . 12% 62.9% 28.4% 7.6% 1.1% 1,371 3.8% 1,4256.44 . 12% 61.0% 28.7% 8.4% 1.9% 1,808 3.7% 1,8796.38 . 12% 59.6% 29.5% 9.1% 1.8% 1,533 3.6% 1,5936.54 80.3 16% 61.8% 28.1% 8.4% 1.7% 1,593 3.5% 1,6526.41 79.2 15% 60.9% 27.4% 9.1% 2.6% 1,647 4.1% 1,724

DEPARTMENT LEVEL






17SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 18 of 44

FACULTY LEVEL

Applied filters: Time 5 years ending with the last year (currently 2015) AND Course Year Level equal to 100 Level, 200 Level, 300 Level, 400 Level,500 Level, 600 Level, 700 Level

Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2nd

Class%

Pass%


%Drop

TotalHeadcount

AcademicYear20112012201320142015

6.59 . 8.9% 59.5% 35.9% 2.8% 1.9% 8,204 3.6% 10,4936.75 . 13% 66.3% 27.8% 4.3% 1.6% 7,847 3.6% 10,0396.82 . 17% 67.4% 26.1% 5.0% 1.4% 9,439 4.0% 11,4226.57 80.0 14% 62.5% 28.7% 7.1% 1.7% 9,353 4.7% 11,6046.80 81.3 17% 67.0% 26.4% 5.4% 1.2% 9,000 3.7% 11,048

FACULTY LEVEL


COURSE YEAR LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYear Level

AcademicYear

100 Level

200 Level

300 Level

400 Level

20112012201320142015201120122013201420152011201220132014201520112012

6.20 . 14% 48.9% 42.5% 5.0% 3.6% 661 6.1% 7045.99 . 9.7% 50.0% 34.4% 12.2% 3.4% 596 3.1% 6155.64 . 15% 50.0% 25.6% 17.8% 6.6% 640 8.3% 6985.37 74.0 8.8% 39.9% 35.6% 20.4% 4.1% 582 9.3% 6435.34 73.0 8.5% 38.8% 37.0% 18.5% 5.6% 567 7.3% 6136.47 . 8.3% 58.2% 36.1% 3.1% 2.6% 870 4.6% 9136.62 . 12% 62.7% 29.8% 5.7% 1.7% 1,331 4.5% 1,3956.78 . 17% 65.9% 26.8% 6.5% 0.7% 1,520 3.5% 1,5766.30 79.2 15% 59.7% 25.2% 13.3% 1.8% 1,534 5.3% 1,6206.74 81.1 19% 66.8% 24.1% 7.8% 1.3% 1,501 3.4% 1,5566.60 . 7.1% 58.8% 37.3% 2.3% 1.6% 3,517 3.4% 4,3546.83 . 14% 67.4% 28.1% 3.1% 1.4% 3,336 4.0% 4,1366.82 . 15% 66.2% 28.8% 3.9% 1.1% 4,158 4.0% 4,8696.54 79.7 12% 60.6% 32.0% 5.5% 1.9% 3,949 4.7% 4,6816.91 82.0 18% 68.2% 26.8% 4.1% 0.9% 3,740 3.4% 4,3916.70 . 10% 62.7% 32.9% 2.9% 1.5% 3,156 3.1% 4,5226.88 . 12% 70.4% 24.7% 3.4% 1.5% 2,584 2.8% 3,893

Course Faculty.COURSE_FACULTY_1: Faculty of Human & Social Dev.





18SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 19 of 44

COURSE YEAR LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYear Level

AcademicYear

400 Level201320142015

7.08 . 20% 73.3% 22.3% 3.2% 1.2% 3,121 3.4% 4,2796.93 81.9 18% 70.0% 25.1% 3.8% 1.2% 3,288 3.7% 4,6606.95 82.1 16% 70.8% 25.0% 3.4% 0.8% 3,192 3.7% 4,488

COURSE YEAR LEVEL







19SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 20 of 44

DEPARTMENT LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseDepartment

AcademicYear

Child & YouthCare

HealthInformationScience

Human &Social Devlmnt

IndigenousGovernancePrgrm

Nursing

PublicAdministration

Public Health& Social Policy

Social Work

2011201220132014201520112012201320142015201120132014201520132014201520112012201320142015201120122013201420152011201220132014201520112012201320142015

6.23 . 5.2% 50.8% 42.5% 3.2% 3.5% 2,019 4.3% 2,1106.51 . 13% 62.1% 28.1% 7.1% 2.7% 1,896 4.1% 1,9866.62 . 19% 64.9% 24.4% 8.0% 2.7% 2,047 5.2% 2,1596.66 80.2 19% 65.8% 24.4% 7.4% 2.4% 1,984 5.9% 2,1106.84 81.0 23% 68.6% 22.5% 6.4% 2.5% 1,753 5.5% 1,8616.84 . 22% 62.8% 31.9% 4.3% 1.0% 623 1.4% 6326.74 . 14% 66.5% 26.5% 6.1% 0.9% 675 1.7% 6876.74 . 17% 65.5% 26.4% 7.6% 0.6% 872 2.6% 8966.67 81.4 23% 67.2% 19.4% 12.5% 0.9% 857 0.8% 8646.65 81.2 22% 65.7% 22.8% 10.8% 0.7% 899 1.3% 9126.74 . 21% 60.0% 34.8% 4.5% 0.6% 310 3.4% 3227.00 . 7.1% 71.4% 28.6% . . 14 26.3% 195.22 74.3 . 33.3% 50.0% 11.1% 5.6% 18 . 185.91 78.5 9.1% 45.5% 45.5% 9.1% . 11 13.3% 156.67 . 6.5% 67.4% 23.9% 4.3% 4.3% 46 4.2% 486.64 81.2 29% 64.3% 21.4% 14.3% . 14 6.7% 155.89 77.3 . 55.6% 27.8% 11.1% 5.6% 18 . 196.52 . 7.2% 57.0% 38.5% 2.8% 1.8% 2,336 2.5% 4,0276.86 . 16% 67.7% 27.7% 3.1% 1.5% 2,320 2.2% 3,9667.13 . 24% 71.4% 24.5% 3.3% 0.8% 2,654 2.5% 4,0006.72 80.7 17% 63.7% 29.5% 4.9% 1.8% 2,426 3.6% 3,8747.14 83.3 23% 72.6% 23.0% 3.7% 0.7% 2,456 2.3% 3,8026.23 . 1.5% 52.2% 40.1% 5.0% 2.6% 456 7.9% 4956.24 . 1.3% 53.8% 39.8% 4.2% 2.1% 377 9.4% 4166.35 . 2.9% 57.3% 36.6% 4.8% 1.3% 524 4.9% 5516.15 77.8 3.2% 54.1% 37.2% 6.7% 2.0% 505 7.8% 5486.29 78.8 4.8% 52.9% 41.6% 4.8% 0.7% 437 7.8% 4755.39 . 28% 44.4% 22.2% 16.7% 16.7% 18 . 186.57 . 17% 58.9% 33.2% 7.1% 0.9% 693 2.8% 7136.40 . 13% 59.1% 29.9% 9.4% 1.7% 1,025 4.6% 1,0865.73 76.7 12% 47.2% 31.5% 19.3% 1.9% 1,065 6.1% 1,1606.58 80.7 19% 62.3% 27.0% 9.6% 1.1% 1,109 4.3% 1,1876.94 . 10% 69.6% 28.3% 1.4% 0.7% 2,442 4.3% 2,8897.01 . 8.7% 73.9% 23.6% 1.5% 1.1% 1,886 5.1% 2,2716.98 . 12% 71.9% 25.4% 1.5% 1.2% 2,257 5.1% 2,6636.75 80.7 8.6% 65.5% 31.4% 1.8% 1.3% 2,484 5.1% 3,0156.66 80.3 5.1% 65.6% 30.9% 2.3% 1.3% 2,317 4.2% 2,777

DEPARTMENT LEVEL







20SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 21 of 44

FACULTY LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2nd

Class%

Pass%


%Drop

TotalHeadcount

AcademicYear20112012201320142015

5.52 . 6.8% 35.8% 47.4% 12.8% 3.9% 24,113 5.4% 25,8065.48 . 8.0% 39.6% 39.6% 16.9% 3.8% 24,081 5.3% 25,5865.41 . 7.5% 38.6% 39.3% 18.2% 3.8% 24,552 5.8% 26,2435.40 74.3 7.7% 38.6% 39.4% 17.9% 4.1% 24,541 5.6% 26,1045.43 74.4 8.4% 40.0% 37.7% 18.1% 4.2% 23,924 5.2% 25,437

FACULTY LEVEL


COURSE YEAR LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYear Level

AcademicYear

100 Level

200 Level

300 Level

400 Level

2011201220132014201520112012201320142015201120122013201420152011

5.25 . 6.7% 29.5% 51.0% 15.7% 3.8% 8,386 5.7% 8,9625.11 . 7.1% 32.1% 42.5% 20.9% 4.5% 8,438 5.6% 9,0125.11 . 6.1% 32.3% 42.1% 21.5% 4.1% 8,900 6.0% 9,5695.08 72.9 6.5% 32.7% 41.4% 21.1% 4.8% 9,609 6.1% 10,2595.11 73.0 7.1% 34.2% 39.3% 21.4% 5.1% 9,521 5.4% 10,1285.42 . 7.3% 35.2% 45.6% 14.6% 4.6% 5,707 5.8% 6,2475.46 . 8.8% 41.3% 36.1% 18.9% 3.7% 5,727 5.6% 6,0885.24 . 8.6% 37.8% 36.5% 21.0% 4.7% 5,939 6.3% 6,3625.33 74.1 8.8% 38.8% 36.3% 21.1% 3.9% 5,975 5.8% 6,3665.46 74.4 9.6% 41.4% 35.9% 18.4% 4.3% 5,947 5.4% 6,3315.64 . 5.3% 38.5% 46.8% 10.7% 4.0% 6,730 5.1% 7,1335.66 . 7.1% 42.7% 39.9% 13.7% 3.7% 6,943 5.3% 7,3905.58 . 6.0% 41.1% 40.1% 15.5% 3.4% 6,751 5.8% 7,1995.65 75.1 7.4% 42.4% 40.4% 13.4% 3.8% 6,768 5.2% 7,1745.65 75.3 8.0% 43.0% 38.9% 14.7% 3.4% 6,158 5.3% 6,5566.12 . 9.2% 47.7% 42.7% 6.5% 3.1% 3,290 4.3% 3,464

Course Faculty.COURSE_FACULTY_1: Faculty of Humanities





21SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 22 of 44

COURSE YEAR LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYear Level

AcademicYear

400 Level

2012201320142015

6.13 . 11% 50.2% 38.0% 9.2% 2.6% 2,973 3.5% 3,0966.27 . 13% 54.0% 34.7% 9.1% 2.1% 2,962 4.3% 3,1136.17 78.2 11% 52.6% 35.6% 9.4% 2.3% 2,189 4.2% 2,3056.09 77.7 12% 52.7% 32.6% 12.3% 2.3% 2,298 3.6% 2,422

COURSE YEAR LEVEL







22SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 23 of 44

DEPARTMENT LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseDepartment

AcademicYear

English

French

GenderStudies

Germanic &SlavicStudies

Greek andRomanStudies

Hispanic &ItalianStudies

History

Humanities

201120122013201420152011201220132014201520112012201320142015201120122013201420152011201220132014201520112012201320142015201120122013201420152011

5.02 . 0.9% 21.2% 60.9% 14.2% 3.7% 6,576 4.0% 6,8675.02 . 1.4% 26.5% 51.5% 18.1% 3.9% 7,006 4.0% 7,3045.03 . 1.5% 27.7% 49.3% 19.2% 3.8% 7,341 4.5% 7,7004.92 72.2 1.7% 26.3% 48.9% 20.1% 4.6% 7,670 4.2% 8,0154.94 71.9 2.0% 28.6% 46.2% 19.4% 5.7% 7,436 4.2% 7,7906.16 . 15% 50.1% 37.6% 9.5% 2.8% 1,064 3.2% 1,1356.09 . 13% 51.7% 33.1% 13.6% 1.6% 1,089 4.3% 1,1866.04 . 12% 51.5% 33.0% 13.5% 2.0% 1,112 5.6% 1,2246.12 78.4 17% 55.5% 27.1% 15.0% 2.5% 968 4.3% 1,0646.17 78.6 18% 56.4% 26.4% 14.9% 2.3% 920 4.4% 1,0055.80 . 4.6% 38.6% 50.8% 7.6% 2.9% 956 3.9% 9975.72 . 4.0% 41.7% 45.5% 10.1% 2.7% 1,000 5.5% 1,0675.72 . 5.8% 44.6% 37.8% 14.9% 2.8% 1,003 4.4% 1,0535.73 75.8 3.6% 42.4% 43.0% 12.3% 2.3% 1,004 4.8% 1,0575.52 75.0 5.6% 40.5% 39.2% 17.6% 2.6% 1,179 4.5% 1,2466.88 . 22% 67.1% 26.2% 4.8% 1.9% 1,557 3.5% 1,6166.79 . 23% 65.9% 25.0% 7.9% 1.2% 1,555 2.9% 1,6016.38 . 17% 57.4% 29.9% 11.1% 1.6% 1,670 3.7% 1,7346.34 79.0 14% 57.4% 31.7% 8.6% 2.3% 1,185 4.4% 1,2416.18 78.7 14% 54.8% 29.6% 14.1% 1.6% 1,430 3.7% 1,4915.15 . 5.4% 32.8% 42.6% 19.8% 4.8% 1,606 4.7% 1,6875.56 . 11% 46.7% 29.5% 19.1% 4.7% 1,551 5.3% 1,6415.41 . 12% 42.1% 33.5% 18.5% 5.9% 1,193 6.9% 1,2835.98 77.0 14% 50.0% 33.7% 13.2% 3.1% 1,242 5.8% 1,3206.29 77.8 19% 58.9% 26.1% 10.8% 4.2% 1,155 3.9% 1,2116.05 . 17% 51.3% 32.0% 13.0% 3.7% 1,302 6.2% 1,3915.85 . 19% 51.7% 24.9% 19.9% 3.5% 1,332 4.2% 1,3955.92 . 16% 54.1% 25.6% 16.6% 3.8% 1,267 6.1% 1,3545.93 77.1 17% 53.0% 26.3% 17.4% 3.3% 1,379 6.0% 1,4695.85 77.0 19% 50.8% 26.1% 19.6% 3.5% 1,228 5.7% 1,3055.20 . 2.0% 28.8% 53.0% 12.6% 5.6% 3,742 6.9% 4,0225.10 . 2.3% 30.8% 46.4% 18.2% 4.6% 3,776 7.2% 4,0775.02 . 2.7% 30.5% 44.2% 20.6% 4.7% 4,005 6.2% 4,2764.96 71.4 2.4% 29.7% 45.4% 19.6% 5.3% 3,750 6.5% 4,0154.98 71.5 2.0% 29.4% 45.7% 20.0% 5.0% 3,524 6.2% 3,7736.07 . 9.7% 48.3% 41.3% 6.8% 3.6% 443 7.1% 478

DEPARTMENT LEVEL







23SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 24 of 44

DEPARTMENT LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseDepartment

AcademicYear

Humanities

Linguistics

MedievalStudies

Pacific &AsianStudies

Philosophy

ReligiousStudies

20122013201420152011201220132014201520112012201320142015201120122013201420152011201220132014201520112012201320142015

5.46 . 14% 39.0% 36.9% 18.6% 5.5% 344 6.2% 3705.25 . 12% 36.9% 34.2% 25.6% 3.2% 371 4.1% 3876.35 78.7 18% 57.9% 28.1% 11.0% 3.0% 473 2.5% 4855.85 76.6 13% 47.9% 34.2% 15.6% 2.3% 307 5.2% 3295.59 . 7.5% 42.1% 37.5% 17.0% 3.4% 1,698 5.0% 2,0325.72 . 15% 50.3% 25.5% 19.7% 4.5% 1,517 4.2% 1,6565.64 . 13% 48.6% 26.6% 20.7% 4.0% 1,486 5.3% 1,6685.78 76.6 18% 51.1% 25.9% 18.7% 4.3% 1,500 5.7% 1,6165.90 77.0 18% 54.7% 23.0% 18.3% 4.0% 1,516 5.5% 1,6556.17 . 12% 49.9% 41.0% 5.0% 4.1% 339 4.2% 3546.29 . 7.7% 57.4% 32.4% 7.4% 2.9% 312 9.0% 3436.13 . 5.3% 55.5% 30.8% 9.5% 4.2% 263 8.4% 2876.32 78.7 14% 56.4% 32.7% 9.0% 1.9% 312 7.4% 3375.92 77.6 8.2% 47.1% 40.0% 12.4% 0.6% 170 5.0% 1796.33 . 15% 53.6% 35.8% 7.6% 2.9% 1,256 5.6% 1,3336.37 . 17% 55.8% 33.5% 8.4% 2.3% 1,351 4.7% 1,4186.40 . 19% 57.5% 29.9% 10.3% 2.4% 1,469 5.3% 1,5556.33 79.2 16% 56.4% 31.7% 10.0% 1.8% 1,682 4.9% 1,7716.27 79.1 16% 55.7% 31.5% 11.4% 1.4% 2,008 4.1% 2,0985.42 . 7.2% 35.1% 46.2% 14.3% 4.4% 3,107 8.3% 3,3915.25 . 8.7% 39.6% 33.7% 21.0% 5.6% 2,709 8.3% 2,9645.13 . 8.0% 35.3% 37.4% 22.4% 4.9% 2,963 9.8% 3,2885.03 72.2 6.9% 35.2% 35.2% 24.3% 5.2% 3,023 9.4% 3,3435.19 73.0 8.3% 37.6% 35.2% 22.5% 4.7% 3,018 8.6% 3,3225.44 . 5.8% 35.1% 45.2% 14.8% 4.9% 467 7.2% 5035.27 . 6.5% 36.4% 39.9% 21.2% 2.6% 539 4.3% 5645.41 . 8.8% 42.5% 33.3% 19.8% 4.4% 409 5.5% 4345.02 71.8 5.4% 34.3% 36.8% 23.2% 5.7% 353 4.9% 3715.79 76.0 6.1% 45.5% 39.4% 12.1% 3.0% 33 . 33






24SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 25 of 44

FACULTY LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2nd

Class%

Pass%


%Drop

TotalHeadcount

AcademicYear20112012201320142015

5.82 . 32% 52.9% 20.6% 20.6% 5.9% 34 5.6% 366.31 . 31% 61.1% 19.4% 16.7% 2.8% 36 2.7% 378.78 . 78% 100% . . . 18 10.0% 206.57 81.8 37% 61.1% 20.4% 16.7% 1.9% 54 . 556.61 81.4 31% 66.1% 20.3% 13.6% . 59 3.2% 62

FACULTY LEVEL


COURSE YEAR LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

% A+ % 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYear Level

AcademicYear

300 Level

400 Level

201120122014201520112012201320142015

5.50 . 27% 50.0% 20.0% 23.3% 6.7% 30 6.3% 325.54 . 11% 50.0% 25.0% 21.4% 3.6% 28 3.4% 295.32 75.9 13% 38.7% 32.3% 25.8% 3.2% 31 . 325.12 74.8 8.0% 36.0% 40.0% 24.0% . 25 3.8% 268.25 . 75% 75.0% 25.0% . . 4 . 49.00 . 100% 100% . . . 8 . 88.78 . 78% 100% . . . 18 10.0% 208.26 89.7 70% 91.3% 4.3% 4.3% . 23 . 237.71 86.3 47% 88.2% 5.9% 5.9% . 34 2.8% 36

Course Faculty.COURSE_FACULTY_1: Medical Sciences





25SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 26 of 44

COURSE YEAR LEVEL







26SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 27 of 44

DEPARTMENT LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseDepartment

AcademicYear

Division ofMedicalSciences

20112012201320142015

5.82 . 32% 52.9% 20.6% 20.6% 5.9% 34 5.6% 366.31 . 31% 61.1% 19.4% 16.7% 2.8% 36 2.7% 378.78 . 78% 100% . . . 18 10.0% 206.57 81.8 37% 61.1% 20.4% 16.7% 1.9% 54 . 556.61 81.4 31% 66.1% 20.3% 13.6% . 59 3.2% 62

DEPARTMENT LEVEL







27SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 28 of 44

FACULTY LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2nd

Class%

Pass % Fail GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

AcademicYear20112012201320142015

4.72 . 8.0% 29.8% 37.4% 22.2% 10.5% 25,149 6.2% 26,8944.41 . 9.1% 30.9% 26.6% 32.4% 10.1% 25,577 6.2% 27,3924.54 . 9.1% 32.7% 27.0% 30.5% 9.8% 27,038 6.7% 29,0804.50 70.0 8.9% 31.8% 27.3% 31.2% 9.7% 28,609 6.6% 30,7324.47 69.8 9.6% 32.1% 25.8% 31.8% 10.3% 28,567 6.7% 30,873

FACULTY LEVEL


COURSE YEAR LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYear Level

AcademicYear

100 Level

200 Level

300 Level

400 Level

2011201220132014201520112012201320142015201120122013201420152011

4.19 . 5.8% 22.7% 37.3% 25.2% 14.7% 11,465 7.9% 12,4493.90 . 6.8% 24.5% 25.4% 36.1% 14.0% 11,342 7.6% 12,2894.04 . 6.7% 26.2% 26.3% 33.9% 13.6% 12,840 8.0% 13,9524.09 67.6 7.1% 26.5% 26.7% 34.1% 12.7% 13,672 7.7% 14,8203.85 66.0 6.3% 24.3% 24.7% 36.5% 14.5% 13,241 8.0% 14,4584.55 . 7.4% 28.1% 36.2% 24.7% 11.0% 6,960 5.3% 7,3713.97 . 7.8% 26.0% 24.0% 38.5% 11.5% 7,133 5.7% 7,5914.30 . 8.8% 30.2% 24.9% 34.5% 10.4% 6,978 6.4% 7,4904.36 69.4 9.5% 30.6% 25.3% 33.6% 10.4% 7,797 6.2% 8,3414.57 70.6 11% 33.3% 25.7% 31.7% 9.2% 8,204 5.9% 8,7885.58 . 10% 39.5% 40.9% 16.2% 3.5% 4,497 4.6% 4,7215.36 . 11% 40.8% 33.4% 22.8% 3.1% 4,737 4.9% 5,0165.29 . 9.8% 40.0% 32.8% 24.0% 3.3% 4,716 4.9% 4,9935.09 73.6 8.0% 37.3% 32.1% 26.5% 4.0% 4,452 5.4% 4,7485.16 74.1 12% 39.2% 29.3% 27.1% 4.4% 4,776 6.0% 5,1316.24 . 17% 52.1% 35.0% 11.3% 1.6% 2,227 4.0% 2,353

Course Faculty.COURSE_FACULTY_1: Faculty of Science





28SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 29 of 44

COURSE YEAR LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYear Level

AcademicYear

400 Level

2012201320142015

6.27 . 21% 57.2% 26.2% 15.0% 1.6% 2,365 3.3% 2,4966.33 . 21% 59.0% 24.8% 14.7% 1.4% 2,504 4.0% 2,6456.00 78.1 18% 52.8% 27.6% 17.6% 2.1% 2,688 3.6% 2,8236.22 79.1 20% 57.2% 25.3% 15.4% 2.0% 2,346 3.6% 2,496

COURSE YEAR LEVEL







29SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 30 of 44

DEPARTMENT LEVEL

Applied filters: Time 5 years ending with the last year (currently 2015) AND Course Year Level equal to 100 Level, 200 Level, 300 Level, 400 Level,500 Level, 600 Level, 700 Level AND Course Department equal to Anthropology, Art History & Visual Studies, Biochemistry & Microbiology, Biology,Business, Chemistry, Child & Youth Care, Civil Engineering, Co-op and Career, Computer Science, Cultural, Sociall&Poltcl Thght, Curriculum andInstruction, Division of Medical Sciences, Earth and Ocean Sciences, Economics, Educ Psychology & Leadership, Education, Electrical & ComputerEngg, Engineering, English, Environmental Studies, Exercise Sc, Phys & Health Ed, Fine Arts, French, Gender Studies, Geography, Germanic &Slavic Studies, Graduate Studies, Greek and Roman Studies, Health Information Science, Hispanic & Italian Studies, History, Human & SocialDevlmnt, Humanities, Indigenous Education, Indigenous Governance Prgrm, Interdisciplinary Studies, Law, Linguistics, Mathematics and Statistics,Mechanical Engineering, Medieval Studies, Music, Nursing, Pacific & Asian Studies, Philosophy, Physics and Astronomy, Political Science,Psychology, Public Administration, Public Health & Social Policy, Religious Studies, Social Work, Sociology, Studies in Policy and Practice, Theatre,Visual Arts, Writing

Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseDepartment

AcademicYear

Biochemistry&Microbiology

Biology

Chemistry

Earth andOceanSciences

Mathematicsand Statistics

Physics andAstronomy

201120122013201420152011201220132014201520112012201320142015201120122013201420152011201220132014201520112012201320142015

5.23 . 7.7% 34.4% 40.6% 20.9% 4.1% 2,017 5.1% 2,1305.29 . 11% 40.7% 30.6% 26.0% 2.7% 1,995 5.0% 2,1085.13 . 7.2% 38.8% 31.5% 26.8% 2.9% 1,980 5.4% 2,0965.07 73.8 7.5% 37.5% 31.0% 28.1% 3.4% 2,059 5.1% 2,1905.06 74.0 8.4% 39.1% 27.6% 30.6% 2.7% 2,286 5.3% 2,4505.19 . 8.7% 33.3% 41.4% 20.9% 4.4% 6,523 3.7% 6,7974.78 . 9.0% 33.3% 30.4% 31.9% 4.4% 6,446 3.8% 6,7384.99 . 9.6% 36.8% 29.5% 29.7% 4.0% 6,581 4.0% 6,8754.79 71.8 8.7% 33.3% 30.2% 31.6% 4.9% 6,540 3.8% 6,8154.67 71.5 8.0% 31.8% 29.7% 33.8% 4.7% 6,383 4.4% 6,7234.83 . 8.2% 30.8% 38.9% 19.5% 10.9% 4,045 5.4% 4,3024.31 . 7.8% 30.7% 24.4% 33.9% 10.9% 4,076 5.0% 4,3534.57 . 10% 33.4% 26.1% 29.3% 11.3% 4,235 5.7% 4,5484.59 71.4 8.3% 32.0% 28.9% 29.8% 9.3% 4,495 5.1% 4,7924.54 70.8 10% 32.2% 26.7% 30.4% 10.7% 4,451 6.1% 4,8255.40 . 6.2% 35.3% 45.5% 13.8% 5.4% 1,948 3.2% 2,0135.01 . 6.4% 34.8% 35.3% 24.7% 5.2% 2,005 2.6% 2,0615.12 . 7.5% 34.9% 38.0% 22.7% 4.5% 1,884 4.2% 1,9674.99 73.2 6.0% 33.9% 35.3% 26.1% 4.7% 1,781 3.5% 1,8455.05 73.3 7.4% 35.9% 34.0% 25.8% 4.3% 1,736 3.0% 1,7943.89 . 7.4% 23.4% 30.1% 26.8% 19.7% 7,950 8.8% 8,7303.73 . 10% 25.5% 20.3% 35.6% 18.5% 8,349 8.7% 9,1493.88 . 9.2% 27.5% 21.2% 34.3% 17.1% 9,123 9.5% 10,0854.01 66.5 10% 29.0% 21.3% 33.6% 16.1% 10,217 9.6% 11,3074.07 66.5 11% 30.7% 20.0% 32.3% 17.0% 10,384 9.0% 11,4484.99 . 9.7% 31.6% 39.3% 22.9% 6.0% 2,666 8.6% 2,9224.72 . 9.3% 32.2% 30.6% 31.4% 5.8% 2,706 8.8% 2,9834.73 . 8.5% 33.0% 30.0% 30.2% 6.8% 3,235 7.4% 3,5094.68 71.3 9.4% 32.2% 30.9% 29.8% 7.0% 3,517 6.6% 3,7834.55 70.5 9.5% 30.3% 29.6% 32.1% 7.8% 3,326 7.4% 3,632

DEPARTMENT LEVEL







30SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 31 of 44

FACULTY LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2nd

Class%

Pass%


%Drop

TotalHeadcount

AcademicYear20112012201320142015

5.20 . 5.8% 32.1% 45.3% 18.3% 4.3% 32,659 4.2% 34,1635.14 . 8.7% 36.8% 34.6% 24.2% 4.4% 31,976 4.6% 33,6005.10 . 7.7% 36.0% 35.3% 24.2% 4.6% 32,023 4.8% 33,7075.08 73.3 8.0% 36.1% 34.4% 25.3% 4.3% 31,197 4.7% 32,7815.10 73.4 8.8% 37.3% 32.6% 26.0% 4.1% 32,168 4.6% 33,900

FACULTY LEVEL


COURSE YEAR LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYear Level

AcademicYear

100 Level

200 Level

300 Level

400 Level

201120122013201420152011201220132014201520112012201320142015201120122013

4.63 . 4.5% 23.4% 45.2% 25.7% 5.7% 9,158 3.9% 9,5304.68 . 9.6% 31.5% 30.9% 31.4% 6.2% 8,106 4.6% 8,4984.49 . 6.2% 28.4% 31.9% 33.1% 6.6% 8,231 5.1% 8,6744.70 71.5 7.4% 31.0% 33.3% 29.6% 6.1% 8,158 4.6% 8,5564.60 70.9 7.6% 30.1% 31.4% 32.4% 6.1% 8,344 4.8% 8,7795.04 . 5.9% 28.9% 46.0% 20.3% 4.8% 6,946 4.1% 7,2454.83 . 6.6% 32.1% 35.1% 27.9% 5.0% 6,736 4.8% 7,0814.82 . 7.2% 32.1% 33.9% 28.7% 5.3% 6,870 4.7% 7,2194.84 72.3 6.9% 32.4% 34.4% 29.0% 4.2% 6,938 4.7% 7,2885.02 73.0 8.9% 36.1% 32.4% 27.2% 4.3% 8,037 4.4% 8,4385.47 . 5.8% 36.0% 46.2% 14.4% 3.4% 14,449 4.5% 15,1685.37 . 8.5% 39.0% 36.8% 20.7% 3.6% 14,788 4.7% 15,5595.39 . 8.2% 38.8% 38.2% 19.5% 3.5% 14,479 4.8% 15,2625.20 73.9 8.3% 37.3% 35.5% 23.6% 3.7% 13,663 4.9% 14,3985.25 74.2 8.4% 38.7% 34.5% 23.7% 3.1% 13,250 5.0% 14,0226.37 . 11% 54.5% 37.0% 6.4% 2.1% 2,106 4.0% 2,2206.23 . 13% 54.5% 32.5% 11.0% 2.0% 2,346 3.7% 2,4626.25 . 11% 55.4% 33.3% 8.7% 2.7% 2,443 3.6% 2,552

Course Faculty.COURSE_FACULTY_1: Faculty of Social SciencesProgram Course Level.PROGRAM_COURSE_LEVEL: Undergraduate




31SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 32 of 44

COURSE YEAR LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYear Level

AcademicYear

400 Level20142015

6.31 79.1 12% 56.5% 32.3% 9.8% 1.4% 2,438 3.3% 2,5396.23 78.6 15% 58.2% 26.8% 12.8% 2.2% 2,537 3.2% 2,661

COURSE YEAR LEVEL






32SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 33 of 44

DEPARTMENT LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseDepartment

AcademicYear

Anthropology

Economics

EnvironmentalStudies

Geography

InterdisciplinaryStudies

Political Science

Psychology

Sociology

20112012201320142015201120122013201420152011201220132014201520112012201320142015201120122013201420152011201220132014201520112012201320142015201120122013

5.73 . 7.5% 41.1% 43.2% 13.6% 2.1% 3,152 3.7% 3,2755.81 . 11% 46.9% 34.3% 16.1% 2.7% 3,052 3.7% 3,1795.59 . 11% 43.2% 35.4% 17.7% 3.7% 2,864 4.9% 3,0125.17 73.7 8.5% 38.5% 32.5% 24.6% 4.3% 2,611 4.7% 2,7415.24 73.5 7.8% 40.5% 32.0% 23.3% 4.2% 2,508 4.8% 2,6464.73 . 6.8% 26.6% 42.1% 24.6% 6.8% 6,760 4.7% 7,0924.48 . 8.9% 29.9% 28.8% 33.8% 7.6% 6,532 5.0% 6,8794.53 . 6.9% 30.1% 30.4% 32.9% 6.5% 7,048 4.6% 7,3864.70 71.9 9.0% 33.2% 28.7% 32.5% 5.5% 7,539 4.3% 7,8804.49 70.8 8.9% 30.2% 28.3% 35.5% 6.0% 8,383 4.5% 8,7866.17 . 8.0% 49.6% 41.6% 6.3% 2.5% 2,033 3.5% 2,1345.92 . 8.1% 49.7% 34.6% 13.2% 2.5% 1,898 3.4% 1,9915.93 . 8.9% 49.7% 35.0% 12.4% 2.8% 1,936 3.7% 2,0275.96 77.5 7.2% 49.0% 37.6% 11.6% 1.7% 1,825 3.7% 1,9126.17 78.4 11% 55.3% 31.9% 11.0% 1.8% 1,759 3.3% 1,8425.41 . 5.1% 34.0% 47.1% 15.6% 3.4% 4,358 3.5% 4,5175.04 . 4.8% 32.2% 40.3% 24.3% 3.2% 4,294 4.5% 4,4975.23 . 5.3% 35.5% 39.6% 21.6% 3.3% 4,115 4.0% 4,2885.23 74.3 5.6% 37.7% 36.6% 23.0% 2.7% 3,777 3.9% 3,9305.40 75.2 7.3% 41.2% 34.3% 22.5% 2.0% 3,617 4.4% 3,7995.40 . 2.1% 29.1% 56.7% 12.1% 2.1% 141 4.1% 1476.37 . 12% 61.0% 29.2% 4.1% 5.7% 318 3.6% 3305.94 . 4.0% 48.7% 38.5% 8.7% 4.0% 275 4.8% 2925.60 74.4 6.6% 47.7% 32.1% 14.6% 5.6% 302 5.9% 3225.96 76.3 6.8% 50.8% 34.6% 10.1% 4.5% 396 5.9% 4245.02 . 1.6% 24.4% 55.2% 15.1% 5.4% 3,643 6.2% 3,9064.91 . 2.0% 27.2% 47.7% 19.8% 5.4% 3,572 6.2% 3,8164.76 . 1.5% 24.6% 47.6% 21.6% 6.1% 3,493 7.1% 3,7664.74 70.6 1.2% 23.9% 48.6% 22.0% 5.5% 3,266 6.7% 3,5104.75 70.6 1.1% 24.7% 47.7% 22.2% 5.4% 3,244 5.1% 3,4595.24 . 6.7% 34.2% 42.5% 19.8% 3.5% 8,855 3.6% 9,1895.51 . 14% 45.0% 28.4% 23.3% 3.3% 9,013 4.1% 9,4185.37 . 13% 43.2% 28.8% 24.4% 3.6% 8,939 4.5% 9,4025.29 74.7 12% 40.5% 30.5% 25.3% 3.7% 8,743 4.8% 9,2035.43 75.5 14% 43.5% 28.6% 25.2% 2.7% 8,706 4.6% 9,1684.93 . 3.8% 25.9% 49.3% 20.4% 4.4% 3,717 4.6% 3,9034.66 . 4.1% 25.1% 42.5% 28.1% 4.4% 3,297 5.2% 3,4904.77 . 3.0% 26.4% 44.1% 24.3% 5.2% 3,353 5.0% 3,534

DEPARTMENT LEVEL






33SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 34 of 44

DEPARTMENT LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseDepartment

AcademicYear

Sociology20142015

4.90 71.8 3.4% 30.5% 41.3% 23.6% 4.6% 3,134 4.4% 3,2834.99 72.1 5.0% 34.0% 37.5% 23.4% 5.1% 3,555 5.3% 3,776





34SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 35 of 44

FACULTY LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2nd

Class%

Pass%


%Drop

TotalHeadcount

AcademicYear20112012201320142015

5.99 . 5.4% 46.9% 41.6% 10.0% 1.4% 6,933 1.5% 7,5405.87 . 5.1% 44.1% 43.1% 12.1% 0.8% 7,024 0.9% 7,6195.82 . 5.3% 46.0% 38.6% 13.5% 1.8% 6,818 1.2% 8,0175.99 77.9 6.7% 48.8% 38.2% 11.9% 1.1% 7,239 0.9% 8,7075.96 77.9 6.5% 48.4% 38.1% 12.2% 1.2% 7,732 1.0% 9,382

FACULTY LEVEL


COURSE YEAR LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYear Level

AcademicYear

100 Level

200 Level

300 Level

400 Level

2011201220132014201520112012201320142015201120122013201420152011

4.19 . 4.0% 18.7% 37.7% 39.4% 4.2% 353 3.3% 3655.04 . 5.5% 35.6% 34.1% 28.2% 2.1% 419 2.5% 4883.90 . 4.5% 23.5% 24.9% 41.5% 10.0% 289 2.1% 5184.69 71.4 3.3% 31.3% 32.1% 31.7% 4.9% 489 1.3% 7205.28 74.3 3.2% 39.9% 36.8% 19.6% 3.7% 378 1.3% 7075.17 . 5.4% 35.2% 40.0% 20.2% 4.7% 1,131 3.2% 1,6795.36 . 6.1% 39.0% 37.2% 21.7% 2.1% 1,114 2.5% 1,6204.73 . 3.9% 30.6% 34.3% 30.2% 5.0% 1,184 2.6% 1,7015.60 75.9 8.6% 43.9% 33.3% 21.1% 1.8% 1,251 3.5% 1,8055.06 73.7 8.5% 35.2% 34.1% 28.0% 2.7% 1,470 3.0% 2,0986.02 . 5.6% 44.5% 46.9% 8.2% 0.4% 2,735 0.1% 2,7385.70 . 4.0% 37.2% 50.8% 11.7% 0.3% 2,713 0.3% 2,7225.93 . 5.4% 46.1% 41.3% 12.3% 0.4% 2,673 0.7% 2,6945.82 77.5 4.8% 42.2% 45.1% 12.2% 0.4% 2,683 0.0% 2,6845.95 78.1 5.4% 45.5% 42.8% 11.4% 0.3% 3,031 0.1% 3,0346.53 . 5.5% 58.0% 37.4% 3.8% 0.8% 2,714 1.6% 2,758

Course Faculty.COURSE_FACULTY_1: PB Gustavson Schl of Business





35SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 36 of 44

COURSE YEAR LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseYear Level

AcademicYear

400 Level

2012201320142015

6.37 . 5.7% 54.1% 39.2% 6.1% 0.6% 2,778 0.4% 2,7896.39 . 5.9% 55.2% 39.4% 4.4% 1.0% 2,672 0.7% 3,1046.54 80.3 8.3% 60.4% 34.8% 4.0% 0.8% 2,816 0.2% 3,4986.52 80.5 7.1% 59.6% 35.3% 4.1% 1.1% 2,853 0.6% 3,543

COURSE YEAR LEVEL







36SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 37 of 44

DEPARTMENT LEVEL


Mean9PointGrade

MeanPercentGrade

%A+

% 1stClass

%2ndClass

%Pass

%Fail

GradeableHeadcount

%Drop

TotalHeadcount

CourseDepartment

AcademicYear

Business

20112012201320142015

5.99 . 5.4% 46.9% 41.6% 10.0% 1.4% 6,933 1.5% 7,5405.87 . 5.1% 44.1% 43.1% 12.1% 0.8% 7,024 0.9% 7,6195.82 . 5.3% 46.0% 38.6% 13.5% 1.8% 6,818 1.2% 8,0175.99 77.9 6.7% 48.8% 38.2% 11.9% 1.1% 7,239 0.9% 8,7075.96 77.9 6.5% 48.4% 38.1% 12.2% 1.2% 7,732 1.0% 9,382

DEPARTMENT LEVEL







37SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 38 of 44

Appendix B: Accessing the SAS Portal

The UVic SAS Reporting System portal can be accessed via: • Institutional Planning & Analysis homepage

http://www.inst.uvic.ca • https://sas.uvic.ca/

1.1 Supported Browsers

Currently, the SAS Portal fully supports: • Internet Explorer 7.0 (or higher) for the PC • Firefox 3.6 (or higher) or the PC or for the Mac • Testing reveals that the portal also works with Safari (although not strictly “supported” by SAS and may

not contain all functionality that is present in the other two browsers listed above).

Logging into the Portal

NOTE: If you are accessing the portal from off campus, you will need to use our Virtual Private Network client software (http://www.uvic.ca/systems/services/internettelephone/remoteaccess/). If you are on campus, or have started the VPN client, navigate to the following URL using Internet Explorer (for the PC) or using Firefox (for the Mac):

https://sas.uvic.ca/ Once there, you will see the login screen where you will need to enter your NetlinkID and password.

Once you have successfully logged into the Portal you will see something like the following:

38SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 39 of 44


https://sas.uvic.ca/

http://www.uvic.ca/systems/services/internettelephone/remoteaccess/

Locating the Grading Reports

From your “Home” tab, you will need to click on the “Courses” tab:

Viewing Each Grading Report

The UVic SAS Reporting System currently contains seven grading reports:

The first report “Grading Patterns – UVic” consists of two tables (and associated graphs) that present, by default, the last five academic years of summary undergraduate grades for the university as a whole, including 1st class (A+, A, and A-), 2nd class (B+, B, B-), pass (C+, C, and D), fail (E, F, N), and dropped, as well as mean grade point averages and headcounts. Note that the dropped percentages are based on initial course enrolment, while the other categories are based on final course enrolment. The second table expands the information by course year level such as, “100 level” or “200 level”.

Selecting the plus icon on the left of any row will expand that table to show the equivalent information on the three terms that make up the academic year. Selecting the down arrow (drill-down) has a filtering effect and will expand the information on only the item selected. Note that, depending on the time of year, not all three terms that make up the most recent academic year may yet be available.

39SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 40 of 44

There are two sets of options on the left of this screen. The first allows the user to examine summary grade information by graduate and law programs in addition to undergraduate programs. The second set allows the addition or subtraction of columns from the default tables. For example, the user may wish remove the percentage of A+’s displayed and add the percentage of fails instead.

The second home-page report, “Grading patterns – By Faculty”, is similar to the first except that it allows an examination of grades by faculty. The third report “Grading patterns – By Department” does the same for school or department. At the department level, each subject area can be expanded (plus symbol) or drilled-down (down arrow symbol) to the course and course section level of detail.

Grading Patterns UVic.srx

Grading patterns at the University level (tables & charts): • All course levels • By course level

Grading Patterns By Faculty.srx

Grading patterns at the Faculty level (tables & charts): • All courses at the faculty level • All courses by course year level • All courses by department

Grading Patterns By Department.srx

Grading patterns by Department level: • All courses at the department level • All courses by course year level • All courses by subject (can go all the way down to

the individual section level)

The next three reports: “Grading Pattern Distribution – UVic”, “Grading Pattern Distribution – Faculty”, and “Grading Pattern Distribution – Department”, operate in the same way as the first three, the main difference being that actual grades, such as D, C, C+, are displayed. Again, the expanding and drill-down buttons can present course and course section levels of detail.

Grading Pattern Distribution - UVic.srx Grading pattern distributions at the University level: • All course levels • All courses by PASS, 2nd CLASS, & 1st CLASS grades • All courses by course level (PASS, 2nd CLASS, & 1st

CLASS) Grading Pattern Distribution - Faculty.srx Grading pattern distributions at the Faculty level:

• All courses at the faculty level • All courses by PASS, 2nd CLASS, & 1st CLASS grades • All courses by course level (PASS, 2nd CLASS, & 1st

CLASS) • All courses by department (PASS, 2nd CLASS, & 1st

CLASS) Grading Pattern Distribution - Department.srx Grading pattern distributions at the Department level:

• All courses at the department level • All courses by PASS, 2nd CLASS, & 1st CLASS grades • All courses by course level (PASS, 2nd CLASS, & 1st

CLASS)

40SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 41 of 44

• All courses by subject (PASS, 2nd CLASS, & 1st CLASS) and can go all the way down to the individual section level

The seventh and final report is “Grading Pattern Alerts”, and is designed to show possible grading pattern anomalies for a given school or department over any of the last three academic years. The table allows the user to expand or drill down to the level of a course section for a given term. Grading anomaly criteria were chosen to capture possible grading issues, and include sections with mean GPAs 8.0 or greater, GPAs 2.0 or less, A+’s accounting for 33% or more of the grades, A’s accounting for 50% or more of the grades, and failure or drop rates at 20% or more. Any section with an enrolment of 20 or less is flagged with an exclamation mark to indicate that an anomaly may say more about the individuals enrolled than about the characteristics or presentation of the section itself. Such sections should be viewed with even greater than usual circumspection.

Grading Pattern Alerts.srx Possible grading pattern anomalies by department. This report *only* contains sections that meet at least one of the following criteria:

• Mean GPA: Greater than or equal to 8.0 • Mean GPA: Less than or equal to 2.0 • % Students Receiving an A+: 33% or higher • % Students Receiving an A: 50% or higher • % Students Receiving a Fail: 20% or higher • % Students who Dropped: 20% or higher • Gradeable Headcount: 20 or less

Navigating the Reports

All reports have some common navigation methods:

Table of Contents

Use the Table of Contents item to directly select a sub-set of data for the report. For example, in the report “Grading Patterns – By Faculty” the Table of Contents reveals that the data is first subdivided into “Undergraduate”, “Law,” and “Graduate” courses. Then the data is further sub-divided by faculty. Thus, in the example to the right, the data currently selected shows “Undergraduate” sections from the “Faculty of Education.” These selections are also reflected in the report’s red sub-titles.

41SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 42 of 44

Reveal More Detailed Data

To reveal more detailed data click the “Expand” button, the plus sign ( + ). You will note that it changes to a “minus sign” once clicked. In this example, you can see that we have “expanded” the “Faculty of Engineering” to reveal the next level of detailed information, while still keeping the rest of the information for the other faculties visible.

View a Subsection of Data (Drill Down)

To view a subsection of data Use the “Drill Down” button, the down arrow button ( ). In this example, if you click the drill down arrow for the course subject “A E”, you will change the table to view all “A E” course numbers (to the exclusion of all other data). When you “drill down” into a subsection of data, a “breadcrumb” trail is formed (see the pink arrow to the right). To return “up” a level, click on the breadcrumb trail text (in this example click on “Subject Org”).

42SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 43 of 44

Export Data

To export table (or chart) data to MS Excel or MS Word, right-mouse-click over the table data you are interested in and select the “Export Table…” item from the resulting pop-up menu (Item E shown to the right). NOTE: This will *only* export the table (or chart) data. We strongly encourage you to copy/paste the following information to your exported file to ensure that in the future you know where the data came from, along will all filters that were applied:

A. Report title B. Report section C. Report sub-section D. All filters applied to the data

Print Data

To print a report to a PDF, select “Print…” from the File menu. To print landscape or portrait, along with adjusting margin widths, select “Page Setup…” from the File menu.

SAS Training

Institutional Planning & Analysis provides regular training for the UVic SAS Reporting System. For a list of upcoming training dates visit http://www.inst.uvic.ca

To arrange for customized group training, contact Institutional Planning & Analysis.

43SEN-NOV 4/16-3

Page 44 of 44


MEMO


At its October 19, 2016 meeting, the Senate Committee on Academic Standards (SCAS) reviewed the attached report and recommendations regarding grading patterns, prepared by the SCAS Sub-Committee to Consider Grading Patterns. The report is now presented to Senate for review and approval of the recommendations. Recommended Motion:

Motion: That Senate approve the recommendations regarding grading patterns from the Senate Committee on Academic Standards outlined in the attached report entitled Report and Recommendations Regarding Grading Patterns.

Respectfully submitted, 2016/2017 Senate Committee on Academic Standards Rosaline Canessa (Acting Chair), Faculty of Social Sciences Eva Baboula, Faculty of Fine Arts Laurie Barnas, Associate Registrar Gillian Calder, Faculty of Law Jordan Crocker, UVSS Representative Nikolai Dechev, Faculty of Engineering Nicole Greengoe, Registrar David Harrington, Faculty of Science Cindy Holder, Associate Dean Academic Advising (Faculties of Science, Social Sciences and Humanities) Susan Lewis, Dean, Faculty of Fine Arts (VPAC designate) Peter Liddell, Convocation Senator Michele Martin, Division of Medical Sciences Norah McRae, Executive Director, Cooperative Education and Career Services Michael Nowlin, Faculty of Humanities Tim Pelton, Faculty of Education Bernadette Peterson, Student Senator Abdul Roudsari, Faculty of Human and Social Development Richard Rush, Division of Continuing Studies Ada Saab, Director, Graduate Admissions and Records Brock Smith, Peter B. Gustavson School of Business Sarah Warder, GSS Representative Nancy Wright, Associate Vice-President Academic Planning (President’s nominee) Carrie Andersen Secretary, Associate University Secretary /Attachment

Date:

October 19, 2016

To:

Senate

From:


Re: Report and Recommendations on Grading Patterns


MEMO

1. Summary

For many years, members of Senate and the Senate Committee on Academic Standards (SCAS) have expressed questions and concerns regarding grading patterns and standards at the university. These are long standing concerns that are complex in both their nature and analysis. In 2013, with support from Senate, SCAS began a more detailed examination of the issue with a view to determining how the university should address concerns regarding grading patterns. Discussions in 2015, informed by a report and data prepared for the committee, have led the committee to determine that specific management of grades is a responsibility that lies within faculties and units. Because of the diversity across the university, the committee agreed that a Senate-mandated unilateral approach to address grading concerns/anomalies would not be effective or appropriate. Instead, it is the role of Senate to provide structure and guidance for units to carry out the task effectively. Over the course of the 2015/16 academic year, a sub-committee of the Senate Committee on Academic Standards met to examine what structure and guidance could be provided to faculties and units with respect to grading patterns. Throughout its work, the sub-committee acknowledged that all members of our academic community have a responsibility for grading policy and practices, and all should engage in discussion and examination of the issue. As such, the sub-committee has formulated the following recommendations:

1. More information should be provided to faculty members, Chairs/Directors and Deans about

grading patterns for individual courses, units and faculties.

a. Information regarding grading trends should be made available to instructors at the time they submit their grades. (As these recommendations were developed, a change was made to FAST to provide information regarding grade distribution for a course available to instructors at the time grades are submitted.)

b. Grading workshops should be offered for instructors and Chairs/Directors.

2. All instructors, Chairs/Directors and Deans should review grading information and patterns at

their unit and faculty level. 3. All units should take the opportunity to review and discuss the academic regulations related to

grading. They should engage in a discussion of the grading information and patterns for their unit, guided by the discussion questions outlined in this report.

Date:

October 3, 2016

To:


From:

Senate Committee on Academic Standards Sub-Committee to Consider Grading Patterns

Re: Report and Recommendations Regarding Grading Patterns


4. Chairs/Directors and Deans should provide guidance and direction to their unit regarding grading issues, in accordance with their responsibility and authority for grading.

a. A toolkit should be developed to assist Chairs/Directors in carrying out responsibilities and

facilitating discussion in their units.

b. A document outlining the authority of Chairs/Directors and Deans should be prepared and distributed by the Office of the Vice-President Academic and Provost. This document should include information about authority, responsibilities and mechanisms for accountability.

5. Senate should re-examine the grading scale to confirm that the expectations for grade

distribution are appropriate at each year level.

2. Background According to its terms of reference, the Senate Committee on Academic Standards shall foster and protect the overall academic standards of the university; and oversee and advise Senate on those broad areas of academic standards that affect the welfare and reputation of the university, including policies on grading and academic integrity. As part of fulfilling this mandate, the committee has exercised oversight of grading patterns across the institution. Each year, the committee receives a report from Institutional Planning and Analysis outlining average GPAs at the faculty and institutional level, comparing average GPAs across year level and over time. Following review by the committee, the report is forwarded to Senate for information. Detailed information regarding grading, including information from the institutional level to section level, is available through the SAS reporting portal. Instructions for accessing this information are attached. For many years, members of Senate and the Senate Committee on Academic Standards (SCAS) have expressed questions and concerns regarding grading patterns and standards at the university. These are long standing concerns that are complex in both their nature and analysis.

2004-2005 In 2004, in response to concerns about grading patterns and grade discrepancies, a discussion paper on grading practices was prepared for SCAS by Dr. Robert Anthony, a member of the committee at the time. His findings concluded that grades had been systematically increasing in all UVic faculties over the previous 12 years. The report also found that there were disparities in grading patterns between faculties. The report examined grading pattern surveys at other universities in Canada and the US and found a similar pattern of increasing grades. The report also reflected on rising admission grades of grade 12 students and the increasingly better performance on grade 12 provincial exams. SCAS consulted on the report’s findings with all faculties and incorporated the faculties’ response into a 2005 report to Senate that included a number of recommendations regarding grading – revisions to the “With Distinction” criteria, creation of clear qualitative indicators for specific letter grades, inclusion of comparative grading information on the transcripts, and collection of aggregate information about the distribution of grades in courses.

2013-2016 In 2013 SCAS returned to the question of grading patterns and initiated an examination of the data contained in the grading patterns reports prepared by Institutional Planning and Analysis to determine if institution-wide concerns exist regarding grading patterns and standards (e.g. upward trend in grading patterns). Over the course of 2013 and 2014, the committee reviewed a preliminary assessment of the issue and information gathered regarding grading patterns. It then commissioned Dr. Robert Anthony to


conduct a more detailed analysis of grading information at the university, and to conduct a review of sector-wide trends. Dr. Anthony was assisted by Dr. Tim Pelton, member of SCAS, with the data analysis. A report and accompanying slide presentation were presented to SCAS at the May 2015 meeting.

Discussions in 2015, informed by data from Institutional Planning and Analysis and the report prepared for the committee by Dr. Anthony, led the committee to determine that specific management of grades is a responsibility that lies within faculties and departments. Because of the diversity across the university, the committee agreed that a Senate-mandated unilateral approach to address grading concerns/anomalies would not be effective or appropriate. Instead, the committee agreed that is the role of Senate to provide structure and guidance for units to carry out the task effectively. At the November 2015 SCAS meeting a sub-committee was established to:

1. review the reports and data presented to SCAS regarding grading patterns at the university; 2. identify areas of concern that require consideration by faculties; 3. draft an informational document and a set of questions for Deans and Chairs/Directors to guide

discussions regarding grading patterns in their units (to be recommended to Senate for approval);

4. in consultation with the Provost’s Office, consider developing some information for Chairs/Directors and Deans regarding their responsibility and authority to manage grades within their units/faculties; and

5. examine the grading anomaly parameters used to create alerts in the grading patterns portal, and recommend any changes to the Senate Committee on Academic Standards that it considers advisable.

The SCAS sub-committee included the following members – Dr. Sara Beam (Chair), Dr. Sarah Blackstone, Prof. David Leach, Dr. Annalee Lepp, Dr. Tim Pelton, Dr. Richard Rush, and Ms. Carrie Andersen (Secretary). The sub-committee met regularly from December 2015 to June 2016. It reviewed information and reports regarding grading patterns; the report prepared by Dr. Anthony; academic calendar regulations regarding grading; and literature regarding grading and teaching evaluation, the purposes of grading, and learning outcomes and grading. In accordance with its terms of reference, the sub-committee made a number of observations about grading and grading patterns at the university, collected information for units about grading at the university and across the sector, and prepared a set of discussion questions to guide faculties and departments through an examination of grading patterns in their units (outlined below). The sub-committee also engaged with the Office of the Vice-President Academic and Provost about the provision information to Deans and Chairs/Directors regarding their responsibility and authority to manage grades.

3. Observations/Anomalies During the course of its review of grading information and background literature (see Appendix One for some of the information about grading collected by SCAS), the sub-committee made a number of observations about grading and grading patterns at the university. The sub-committee acknowledged that not all of the observations were problematic, that some observations required consideration and that others were beyond the scope of the sub-committee’s mandate.

Sector-wide Observations • An increase in average grades has occurred across the post-secondary education sector. The

increase in average grades over the past 20 years at UVic is not inconsistent with patterns at other universities in Canada.


Grading Principles • Grading is a complex, multi-faceted issue. Differences in grading practices are expected across

faculties, year level and course types. Direct comparisons regarding grading practices or average grades achieved are not always possible.

• Expectations for grading must be made clear at the outset of a course and should be guided by university regulations, pedagogy and a clear grading rubric. Changing grades after they have been submitted by instructors is controversial and raises issues of fairness for students.

Grading Patterns at UVic • The B range of grades is often not the largest. This is inconsistent with the grading scale

descriptors in the academic calendar. (Recent grading patterns reports include the following statistics regarding B range grades at the institutional level: 2010 – 41.0%, 2011 – 41.2%, 2012 – 32.7%, 2013 – 32.2%, 2014 – 32.0%)

• Across the university there is a tendency for students in 300 and 400 level courses to achieve higher grades.

• There are differences in average grades across faculties. Some faculties have consistently higher average GPAs than others.

• There are sometimes differences in average GPAs between sections of the same course. There are also some courses with higher average GPAs than other courses at the same year level. The rationale for these differences warrants consideration.

• There is the perception that some departments offer general interest courses in which a large number of students enrol and achieve high grades.

Additional Observations • A change to the university’s grading scale was introduced in 2012. The change warrants

discussion and the develop of resources for instructors if units identify the change as a factor in changing grading patterns.

• Higher grades tend to be achieved in summer courses. The reason for this is multi-faceted and cannot be attributed to one cause.

• There is some discussion at post-secondary institutions about grades being influenced by desired outcomes on teaching evaluations. This issue is beyond the scope of the sub-committee’s mandate.

• There are a number of current initiatives at the university that address issues related to ongoing improvement of academic processes (e.g. academic concession, academic accommodation, teaching evaluation, add/drop dates).

4. Recommendations

Throughout its work, the sub-committee acknowledged that all members of our academic community have a responsibility for grading policy and practices, and all should engage in discussion and examination of the issue. As such, the sub-committee makes the following recommendations:

1. More information should be provided to faculty members, Chairs/Directors and Deans about grading patterns for individual courses, units and faculties.

a. Information regarding grading trends should be made available to instructors at the time

they submit their grades. (As these recommendations were developed, a change was made to FAST to provide information regarding grade distribution for a course available to instructors at the time grades are submitted.)

b. Grading workshops should be offered for instructors and Chairs/Directors.


2. All instructors, Chairs/Directors and Deans should review grading information and patterns at

their unit and faculty level. 3. All units should take the opportunity to review and discuss the academic regulations related to

grading. They should engage in a discussion of the grading information and patterns for their unit, guided by the discussion questions outlined in this report.

4. Chairs/Directors and Deans should provide guidance and direction to their unit regarding grading

issues, in accordance with their responsibility and authority for grading.

a. A toolkit should be developed to assist Chairs/Directors in carrying out responsibilities and facilitating discussion in their units.

b. A document outlining the authority of Chairs/Directors and Deans should be prepared and

distributed by the Office of the Vice-President Academic and Provost. This document should include information about authority, responsibilities and mechanisms for accountability.

5. Senate should re-examine the grading scale to confirm that the expectations for grade

distribution are appropriate at each year level. 5. Discussion Questions for Units

As outlined above, it is recommended that all units take the opportunity to review and discuss the academic regulations related to grading. They should engage in a discussion of the grading information and patterns for their unit, guided by the discussion questions outlined in this report. In preparation for a discussion in the unit, Chairs/Directors are encouraged to circulate appropriate grading patterns information. Information on grading patterns at the faculty and unit level are available in the SAS grading portal. In addition to consideration of the discussion questions, the Senate Committee on Academic Standards would appreciate feedback from units regarding the observations outlined in this report and any questions or concerns the unit may have regarding grading policy or grading patterns at the university. Policy/General Questions

• How familiar are members of the unit with the UVic grading policies and procedures? Distribute and discuss any issues, questions or concerns.

• What are perceived as the purposes of grading and how do these relate to learning outcomes in the unit? How often does the unit discuss the purpose(s) of grades?

• What information and resources regarding grading and grading patterns would be helpful to instructors?

Unit Level Questions

• What differences in grades can be seen across different sections of the same course (within a single term/year or across a multi-year span)? What methods of ensuring fairness in grading across multiple sections has the unit considered (rubrics, grade norming, etc.)?


• What courses stand out as having a grading pattern that is different from other unit courses at that size/level? Is there an agreed upon rationale for these differences?

Individual Course Level Questions

• How well does the range of grades reflect the performance of students in the class? How does grading compare with the historical grading spreads (mean, standard deviation)?

Faculty Level Questions

• At the faculty level, which units have a grading pattern that is difference from other units? Is there an agreed upon rationale for this difference?


APPENDIX ONE: INFORMATION ABOUT GRADING

Grading Trends in Post-Secondary Education The following information was provided to SCAS by Dr. Anthony in his May 2015 report:

The literature on grading patterns, especially the focus on grade inflation, in higher education is now so vast that a comprehensive review of it would be ambitious undertaking beyond the scope of this background paper. Nonetheless the grading issues at UVic can be situated within the broader context of post-secondary education locally and internationally in a general sense. Published accounts regarding grading patterns at Canadian universities tend to appear in the ‘informal’ literature such as newspaper editorials or blogs. A great deal of anecdotal evidence was available about concerns about grade inflation at a number of Canadian universities... There is a great deal of concern about grade inflation at a number of universities in Canada, however, evidence-based research is very limited. Most universities in Canada… do not allow open access to institutional analysis reports of grading practices; the exceptions include the University of Calgary and Simon Fraser University. The availability of grading reports from these universities can be related to UVic. Comparisons with these two institutions is particularly relevant because they are included in the same category as UVic in some common classifications of universities like Maclean’s and the Globe and Mail. Table 4 presents some comparative figures comparing overall GPA and % of 1st class grades. In order to compile this table, it was necessary to restructure some of the data from other institutions. For example, the University of Calgary is organized into a Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences together. In order to present comparative data, it was necessary to disaggregate the data for this Faculty by burrowing into the department level data in order to distinguish grading data for departments that would belong to Humanities at UVic from those U of C departments which would be part of the Faculty of Social Sciences at UVic. Similarly, the data from the Division of Applied Science at SFU were selected on the basis of those disciplines that are part of the Faculty of Engineering at UVic. There was considerable uncertainty about how to equate the Faculty of Human and Social Development to the departments at either Calgary or SFU. For that reason, the Faculty of Human and Social Development is not included with the reconstructed data in Table 4. The averages reported are derived from 3 years (Calgary) or 5 years (SFU) of data.

Table 4 Comparison of overall GPA and % of 1st class grades at UVic, U of C, and SFU

FACULTY

GPA1 % 1st class Grades UVIC U of C SFU UVIC U of C SFU

Business 3.34 3.1 3.07 46.1 26.8 30.7 Education 3.52 3.8 3.57 61 77.5 65 Engineering 3.40 3.3 2.91 45.9 32.7 29.8 Fine Arts 3.54 3.45 3.12 59.5 61.5 39.5 Humanities 3.27 3.02 37.2 35.0


Science 3.16 2.8 2.91 32.7 27.7 32.2 Social Sciences 3.27 2.93 34.8 32.1

1 UVic 9-point scale and U of C 4 points scale converted to SFU 4.33-point scale via http://cgi.sfu.ca/~gradap/cgi-bin/facstaff/grading/GPAConversion.html

There are hundreds of reports in the popular media and an extensive and diverse body of more scholarly accounts of grade inflation across the globe. There is an abundance of evidence regarding grade inflation at university in Europe… all decrying the lowering of student performance and higher grades. The level of concern in Australia has been especially widespread… leading to legislation in 2011 to create the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency, a government operated regulatory agency that monitors university standards including grading patterns annually, but unfortunately does not make their findings available to the public, yet. The volume of literature about grade inflation in the US is massive. A recent comprehensive survey of nearly 150 institutions has been prepared by Rojstaczer & Healy (2012). They document the widespread upward march of grades across over a wide range of American post-secondary institutions. The trend of grade inflation is widely reported and seldom rebutted in American reports. It is more common to find claims that inflated grades are a positive indicator that students are getting better over time. Rojstaczer & Healy consider this and soundly dismiss it with evidence from SAT, GRE and other College Board entrance exams. They report that the average student performance on these exams has been declining over time, not increasing. Grade inflation is a common feature of post-secondary institutions across Canada, North America, Europe and Australia.

Grading Trends at UVic With respect to the history of grading patterns at UVic, the following information was provided to SCAS by Dr. Anthony in his May 2015 report:

There can be no doubt that overall GPA has increased at the university level over the past 20 years... It is also clear that the proportion of 1st class grades has been rising from 21% in 1993 to 44% in 2013, along with a reciprocal decline of grades in the B range. This is an indication of grade compression at the upper limit of the grading scale. The evidence from the most recent 5 years indicates that the overall rate of inflation across the entire university has moderated.

Detailed information about grading patterns at the university is available in the Grading Patterns Report presented to Senate each year or in the grading reports available through the SAS reporting portal.


http://cgi.sfu.ca/%7Egradap/cgi-bin/facstaff/grading/GPAConversion.html

MEMO

Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance

Summary Over the course of the past year, the Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance has been considering a proposal to extend Fall Reading Break. The committee has determined that it is unable to make a recommendation regarding the proposal within current academic and operational parameters, and is now exploring alternative options. To that end, the committee is seeking feedback and direction from Senate regarding whether to engage in a consultation process about scheduling examinations on Sunday. Background At the October 7, 2016 Senate meeting, members of Senate received an update regarding a proposal to extend Fall Reading Break (attached). As indicated in that memo, the Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance determined it was unable to make a recommendation regarding the extension of Fall Reading Break within current academic and operational parameters. The committee identified that it might be possible to develop a feasible option for extending Reading Break if the parameters for scheduling examinations were revised. In particular, the committee identified that scheduling examinations on Sundays could provide the flexibility needed to continue considering the proposal to extend Fall Reading Break. Over the course of the summer, the Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance undertook a preliminary investigation into the operational possibility of holding examinations on Sunday. The following information was gathered with respect to Sunday examinations:

• The number of requests for examination accommodations are continuing to increase. Requests for accommodation of Sunday examinations would add to the number of requests and result in increased costs associated with examination accommodations.

• There are some students who would request accommodation for Sunday examinations; however, it is not anticipated that a large segment of the student population would be affected.

• The parameters for accommodations on religious grounds are fairly strict and require that work and study be prohibited during the exam time.

• It is not anticipated that additional food services would be required if examinations were scheduled on Sunday, although a review of services available would be required to ensure the needs of students are being met.

• Transportation options would have to be reviewed to ensure students who use transit are able to arrive on campus in time for morning examinations (9:00 am) and travel home following evening examinations (10:00 pm).

Date:

October 19, 2016

To:

Senate

From:


Re: Update on the Proposal to Extend Fall Reading Break


• Some administrative offices would have to be operational during Sunday examinations (e.g. RCSD), which will require staff to work outside normal operating hours.

• There are labour relations considerations that need to be investigated. • Faculty members and other invigilators will be required to work Sundays, which will

be a change to current expectations. • Test scenarios run using the December 2014 and April 2016 exam requirements

indicate that scheduling examinations on Sunday could result in the examination period being shortened by two days.

As noted above, scheduling examinations on Sunday could result in shortening of the examination period, which might make it possible to extend Fall Reading Break without impacting the current end date for the examination period. If a decision to schedule examinations on Sunday is made, the Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance could continue its consideration of the proposal to extend Fall Reading Break. The Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance acknowledges that scheduling examinations on Sundays would be a significant change to the university’s culture and operations, and that significant consultation regarding the change would be required before any recommendation is presented to Senate. Request for Feedback Before engaging in consultation regarding scheduling examinations on Sunday, the Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance is seeking feedback and direction in this regard. At the November 4, 2016 Senate meeting, comments and discussion regarding launching a consultation process regarding Sunday examinations will be invited. Members of Senate will not be asked to consider whether a recommendation to schedule examinations on Sundays should be approved. Instead, the committee is looking for direction regarding whether further investigation into and consultation regarding this issue should be pursued. Respectfully submitted, 2016/17 Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance Jamie Cassels, Chair, Chair of Senate Lauren Charlton, Convocation Senator John Durno, Library Julia Eastman, University Secretary Mark Gillen, Faculty of Law Robin Hicks, Faculty of Science LillAnne Jackson, Faculty of Engineering Valerie Kuehne, Vice-President Academic and Provost Andrew Lemieux, Student Senator Annalee Lepp, Faculty of Humanities Carrie Andersen, Secretary, Associate University Secretary


MEMO


At the October 23, 2015 meeting of the Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance, the committee reviewed a request from the UVSS and GSS proposing the extension of fall reading break. Following discussion of the issue, a sub-committee was convened to further examine the issue and make a recommendation to the committee as a whole. The sub-committee met regularly from November 2015 to April 2016. It began its review of the issue by examining policies, principles and practices at UVic, as well as detailed information from universities across Canada (including term dates, reading break length, examination periods and orientation programming.) Preliminary consultations with the Office of the Registrar and the Division of Student Affairs were conducted, followed by a more fulsome consultation process. It was determined during the research and preliminary consultation phase that, because of the orientation program and other operational requirements, classes could not begin earlier in September. It was also determined (assuming the current scheduling principles were utilized) that the length of the exam period could not be shortened without compromising the university’s ability to schedule exams in a way that is fair for students and takes into account special requests and requirements. During the second phase of consultation, requests for input and a consultation memo were circulated to the following groups and individuals - UVSS, GSS, Ombudsperson, Deans, Counselling Services, student members of Senate, Associate Vice-President Faculty Relations, Associate Vice-President Human Resources, Division of Student Affairs, and the Resource Centre for Students with a Disability. A number of responses were received from individuals across the university. The feedback received during the consultation process was robust and varied. Although support was expressed for the idea of extending fall reading break, a number of concerns with the university’s ability to do so within its scheduling constraints were raised. Specific concerns about a shortened December break were raised, and the impacts on both students and instructors were noted. Two options for changing current university practices

Date:

September 21, 2016

To:

Senate

From:


Re: Update on the Proposal to Extend Fall Reading Break


were suggested – scheduling exams on Sunday, and moving reading break to coincide with Thanksgiving weekend. Following review of the feedback received, the sub-committee presented a report to the Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance as a whole in April 2016. The report stated that the sub-committee had determined that a recommendation to extend fall reading break could not be presented at that time. The option proposed to those consulted was not acceptable given the late end date for the December exam period. It was not possible to address this concern within the constraints of the university’s current regulations and scheduling principles. The sub-committee identified that it might be possible to propose an alternative option if the university were to hold exams on Sundays. It was noted that consideration of whether it would be possible or desirable to do so required thoughtful investigation and consultation. At the April 2016 meeting of the Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance, the committee as a whole agreed with the sub-committee’s assessment that a recommendation to extend fall reading could not be made within current parameters. The committee agreed at that time that the sub-committee should continue its investigation by undertaking processes to consider whether it is possible and desirable to hold examinations on Sunday, and whether it is possible and desirable to move fall reading break to coincide with the Thanksgiving weekend. Over the course of the coming months, the Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance will continue to investigate the request to extend fall reading break. This investigation will include robust consultations in the event a recommendation to Senate to change current practices is considered. A report will be provided to Senate in early 2017. Respectfully submitted, 2016/17 Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance Jamie Cassels, Chair, Chair of Senate Lauren Charlton, Convocation Senator John Durno, Library Julia Eastman, University Secretary Mark Gillen, Faculty of Law Robin Hicks, Faculty of Science Valerie Kuehne, Vice-President Academic and Provost Andrew Lemieux, Student Senator Annalee Lepp, Faculty of Humanities Carrie Andersen, Secretary, Associate University Secretary


MEMO


The Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance nominations sub-committee met on October 21, 2016 to consider appointments to the 2016/17 Senate committees and the Appointment Committee for the Chancellor. 2016/2017 Senate Committees These appointments are to fill vacancies on the Senate committees that were not filled at the October 7, 2016 meeting of Senate. The proposed new appointments are bolded in the attached document.

Motion: That Senate approve the appointments to the 2016/2017 Senate standing committees for the terms indicated in the attached document.

Appointment Committee for the Chancellor The Appointment Committee for the Chancellor includes three members of Senate – the President, as Chair of Senate; and two other members, one of whom is an elected faculty member and the other an elected student. Terms begin immediately and end once a Chancellor appointment has been made.

Motion: That Senate approve the appointments of Robin Hicks and Ann-Bernice Thomas to the Appointment Committee for the Chancellor as recommended by the Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance.

Respectfully submitted, 2016/17 Senate Committee on Agenda and Governance Jamie Cassels, Chair, Chair of Senate David Capson, Vice-Chair, Faculty of Graduate Studies Lauren Charlton, Convocation Senator John Durno, Library Julia Eastman, University Secretary Mark Gillen, Faculty of Law Robin Hicks, Faculty of Science LillAnne Jackson, Faculty of Engineering Valerie Kuehne, Vice-President Academic and Provost Andrew Lemieux, Student Senator Annalee Lepp, Faculty of Humanities Carrie Andersen, Secretary, Associate University Secretary /Attachment

Date:

October 19, 2016

To:

Senate

From:


Re: Appointments to the 2016/2017 Senate Standing Committees and the Appointment Committee for the Chancellor


2

2016- 2017 Senate Committees

Senate Committee on Appeals

Name

Faculty or Department Term

Mark Gillen (Chair) (S) Law 2019 (2013) Rebecca Grant (S) Business 2019 (2013)

Monica Prendergast (S) Education 2017 (2014) Poman So (NS) Engineering 2019 (2016)

Stephen Ross (NS) Humanities 2018 (2015) Lynda Gagne (S) HSD 2019 (2016)

Carolyn Butler-Palmer (S) Fine Arts 2018 (2015) Frank van Veggel (Vice-Chair) (NS) Science 2018 (2012)

Aaron Devor (S) Social Sciences 2017 (2014) Gweneth Doane (NS) Graduate Studies 2018 (2012)

Dheeraj Alamchandani (S) Student Senator 2017 (2016) Ben Lukenchuk (S) Student Senator 2017 (2016) Marie Vance (S) Student Senator 2017 (2016)

Sarah MacDonald (NS) Student Representative (GSS) 2017 (2016)

Carrie Andersen (Secretary) Associate University Secretary

(S) Senator (NS) Non-Senator


3

Senate Committee on Honorary Degrees and Other Forms of Recognition

Name

Faculty or Department Term

Shelagh Rogers (Chair) (S) Chancellor (ex officio) Evert Lindquist (NS) HSD 2018 (2012) Rishi Gupta (NS) Engineering 2018 (2015) Joseph Salem (S) Fine Arts 2019 (2016) Rebecca Grant (S) Business 2017 (2014) Gillian Calder (S) Law 2017 (2011) Michael Masson (NS) Social Sciences 2019 (2016) Marie Vance (S) Student Senator 2017 (2016) Anne McLaughlin (NS) Alumni Association 2017 (2014) Jamie Cassels (S) Chair of Senate (ex officio)

Ian Case (NS) Director, University Ceremonies and Events (ex officio)

Carrie Andersen (Secretary) Associate University Secretary

(S) Senator (NS) Non-Senator


MEMORANDUM

TO: Secretary of Senate University Secretary' s Office

University of Victoria

Student Awards and Financial Aid Email: [email protected] Tel: (250) 72 1-8425 Fax: (250) 72 1-8757

DATE: October 6, 2016

FR: Lori Nolt, Director, Student Awards and Financial Aid Secretary, Senate Committee on Awards

RE: Annual Report

The Senate Committee on Awards recommends that the Senate receive the annual report of the Senate Committee on A wards for information.

Lori Nolt


UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA

2015 ANNUAL REPORT

SENATE COMMITTEE ON AWARDS

OCTOBER 6, 2016

NOTE: Previous year's {2015) figures are shown in brackets. Scholarships included in this report were adjudicated on the basis of academic performance in 2015-2016.

SUMMARY

• The Senate Committee on Awards approved 151 (71) new or revised awards for undergraduate and graduate students in 2015/16

• There were 3688 (3790) scholarships awarded to 3118 (3117) undergraduate students, with a total value of $8,289,156 ($8,863,835) .

ENTRANCE SCHOLARSHIPS Student Awards and Financial Aid made offers of entrance scholarsh ips to academically outstanding students from Canadian secondary schools, international secondary schools, and Canadian co lleges and universities. UVic awarded 1658 (1690) entrance scholarships (non-renewable) to 1471 (1509) students with a value of $3,360,197 ($3,500,651) . In addition, 128 (127) students received a renewable scholarship for a va lue of $605,100 ($720,000), increasing the total value of all entrance scholarships awarded to $3,965,297 ($4,220,651) .

Renewable Entrance Scholarships Title of Scholarship 2016 2015 Value TOTAL2016 TOTAL2015

UVic Excellence Scholarship 23 18 @$6,500 $ 40,100 $ 117,000

UVic Excellence Scholarship 65 78 @$5,000 $ 325,000 $ 390,000

UVic Excellence Scho~rship n/a 3 @ $4,000 $ 0 $ 16,000

David Strong Entrance Scholarship 2 0 @ $5,000 $ 10,000 0

Robert & Ellen Pearce Scholarship 5 2 @ $5,000 $ 25,000 $ 10, 000

John Locke Malkin Entrance Scholarship 4 6 @$4,000 $ 16,000-l $ 24,000

David H. Turpin National Entrance Scholarsh ip 1 1 @$5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000

National Entrance Scholarship 3 1 @$5,000 $ 15,000 $ 5,000

Elsa Eleonora & Clara Maria Fagerberg 2 2 @$3,000 $ 6,000 $ 6,000

T.S. McPherson Entrance Scholarship 9 8 @ $4,500 $ 40,500 $ 36,000

Schulich Leader Scholarship 1 1 @ $15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000

Schulich Leader Scholarship 1 1 @$20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Maurice Will iam Summerhayes Scholarship (increased from $5k to $10k) 6 3 @ $10,000 $ 60,000 $ 30,000

Fairfax Financial Ltd. Award 1 1 @ $5000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000

United World Co llege Scholarship n/a 1 @ $22,500 $ 0 1 $ 22,500

Aga Khan Academy Scholarship 1 0 @ $22,500 $ 22,500 0

Council of International Schools Scholarship n/a 1 @$22,500 $ 0 $ 22,500

East China Normal University Entrance Scholarship 0 0 @ $5,000 $ 0 0

-

Totals 128 127 $ 605,100 $ 720,000


IN-COURSE SCHOLARSHIPS UVic awarded 1562 (1549) non-renewable in-course scholarships to 1179 (1057) students with a value of $2,328,859 ($2,263,184). In addition, 340 (424) students received a renewal of their renewable scholarships with a value of $1,995,000 ($2,380,000). The tota l va lue of all in-course scholarships and awards was $4,323,859 ($4,643,184).

In-Course Renewable Scholarships

Title of Scholarship 2016 2015 Value TOTAL2015 TOTAL2016

UVic Exce llence Scholarship $6500 95 128 @ $6,500 $832,000 $617,500

1 17 @ $3,250 $55,250 $3,250

UVic Excellence Scholarship $5000 136 133 @ $5,000 $665,000 $680,000

23 @$2,500 $57,500

UVic Excellence Scholarship $4000 53 81 @$4,000 $324,000 $212,000

15 @ $2,000 $30,000

David Strong Entrance Scholarship 1 4 @$5,000 $20,000 $5,000

Robert & Ellen Pearce Scholarship 5 4 @ $5,000 $20,000 $25,000

0 2 @ $2,500 $5,000

John Locke Malkin Entrance Scholarship 0 3 @$4,500 $13,500

8 5 @$4,000 $20,000 $32,000

1 2 @$2,250 $4,500 $2,250

David H. Turpin National Entrance Scholarship 1 2 @ $5,000 $10,000 $5,000

Nationa l Entrance Scholarship 3 4 @ $5,000 $20,000 $15,000

Elsa Eleonora & Clara Maria Fagerberg 2 2 @$3,000

$6,000 $6,000 Scholarship

T.S. McPherson Entrance Scholarship 14 10 @$4,500 $45,000 $63,000

0 1 @ $2,250 $2,250

Schulich Leader Scholarship 2 0 @$20,000 0 $40,000

3 0 @$15,000 0 $45,000

1 0 @ $14,000 $10,000 $14,000

0 1 @$10,000 $10,000

0 1 @$9,500 $9,500

0 8 @ $7,500 $60,000

0 1 @ $5,500 $5,500

Maurice William Summerhayes Scholarship 4 1 @ $10,000 $10,000 $40,000

1 3 @ $5,000 $15,000 $5,000

Fairfax Financia l Ltd . Award 1 1 @ $5,000 $5,000 $5,000

East China Normal Scholarship 0 0 @ $5,000 0

UVic International Scholarship 0 0 @$5,000 0

Aga Khan Academy Scholarship 2 2 @ $22,500 $45,000 $45,000

United World Col lege Scholarship 2 0 @ $22,500 0 $45,000

Council of International Schools Scholarship 4 4 @ $22,500 $90,000 $90,000

TOTALS 340 448 $2,380,000 $1,995,000


The following table shows the total funds awarded by scholarship category, GPA range for the President's Scholarships,

and the number of awards per faculty or program. The budget for the President's Scholarships is proportionally allocated

by the number of students in each faculty or program in relation to the total student population.

PRESIDENT'S SCHOLARSHIPS RENEWABLE OTHER SCHOLARSHIPS

SCHOLARSHIPS AND AWARDS

AMOUNT GPA RANGE QTY AMOUNT QTY AMOUNT QTY TOTALS

SOCIAL SCIENCES $125,170 8.88-8.38 38 $362,500 54 $220,791 168 $708,461

SCIENCE $119,032 9.00-8.33 38 $651,500 110 $206,667 167 $977,199

HUMANITIES $119,014 8.89-8.10 41 $225,oqo 40 $159,166 204 $503,180

ENGINEERING

ENG-BE NG $12,962 9.00-8.54 6 $46,000 10 $51,654 30 $110,616

ENG-Software Eng $20,241 9.00-8.50 7 $71,000 13 $15,280 10 $106,521

ENG-CompSci $30,787 9.00-8.38 10 $62,000 9 $28,063 14 $120,850

ENG-Mechanical $12,050 9.00-8.83 5 $67,000 13 $38,692 20 $117,742

ENG-Electrical & $13,842 9.00-8.77 5 $40,000 5 $29,713 19 $83,555

Computer Eng

HUMAN & SOCIAL

DEVELOPMENT

H&SO-HINF; Public Health & Social $10,950 8.90-8.38 6 $16,500 3 $32,445 23 $59,895 Policy

H&SO - Nursing $20,235 9.00-8.75 13 0 0 $76,480 28 $96,715

H&SD-Child & $10,766 8.78-8.44 4 $22,500 4 $14,714 16 $47,980

Youth Care

H&SD-Social Work $15,939 8.00-7.14 12 $4,000 1 $23,922 22 $43,861

EDUCATION

EO-EPHE ,BSC $22,794 9.00-8.44 9 $50,500 9 $24,959 38 $98,253

ED-Curriculum & $42,445 9.00-8.40 16 $27,000 4 $54,461 48 $123,906

Instruction

FINE ARTS

FA-General $1,975 8.75-8.00 2 0 0 $2,000 1 $3,975

FA-Art History & $12,392 9.00-8.75 4 $10,000 2 $8,132 12 $30,524

Visual Studies

FA-Music $9,775 9.00-8.55 5 $63,000 12 $102,203 106 $174,978

FA-Theatre $7,000 8.40-8.00 3 $62,000 12 $25,435 30 $94,435

FA-Visual Arts $5,851 9.00-7.88 5 $27,500 6 $20,455 19 $53,806

FA-Writing $9,600 8.88-7.67 5 $102,000 18 $25,539 28 $137,139

BUSINESS $48,700 9 .00-8.20 26 $85,500 15 $230,473 153 $364,673

LAW $14,000 8.17-6.50 20 0 0 $252,095 126 $266,095

TOTALS $685,520 280 $1,'995,000 340 $1,643,339 1282 $4,323,859


UVic aspires to be nationally competitive in recruiting and retaining students of the highest calibre in an increasingly

competitive environment. Significant short term enhancements were made to our entrance scho larship program in

2013/14 and 2014/15. The enhanced scholarship program has been very successful, but was not sustainable. A proposal

was presented to Integrated Planning in November 2015 and that plan included additional reductions in scholarship

values for 2016/17. The impact of those reductions is reflected in the reduction in the total value of scholarships

detailed in this report. Student Awards and Financial Aid continues to work to better align our student financial aid

resources with the enrolment plan.

The Senate Committee on Awards wishes to acknowledge the University's ongoing commitment to undergraduate financial aid programs.

2016-2017 Senate Committee on Awards J. Walsh, Chair L. Nolt, Secretary F. Canjura, Recording Secretary S. Banerjee N. Greengoe K. Barnes A. Cirillo M . Runtz H. Hallgrimsdottir J. Wood Y. Rondeau J. Fortin C. Scha llie S. Timayo

2015-2016 Senate Committee on Awards J. Walsh, Chair L. Nolt, Secretary F. Canjura, Recording Secretary S. Banerjee K. Barnes D. Begoray A. Cirillo M. Runtz H. Hallgrimsdottir D. Mellin J. Wood A. Mcl aughlin L. Charlton Y. Rondeau

QI I 1 I

Dr. John Walsh, Chair c:.enate Committee on Awards


MEMORANDUM University of Victoria

Student Awards and Financial Aid Email: [email protected] Tel: (250) 721-8425 Fax: (250) 721-8757 TO: Secretary of Senate DATE: October 6, 2016 University Secretary’s Office FR: Lori Nolt, Director, Student Awards and Financial Aid Secretary, Senate Committee on Awards RE: Awards Recommended to Senate for Approval

_______________________________

Lori Nolt 2016/2017 Senate Committee on Awards J. Walsh (Chair), S. Banerjee, C. Schallie, K. Barnes, H. Hallgrimsdottir, J. Wood, S. Timayo, J. Fortin, M. Runtz, A. Cirillo, Y. Rondeau, N. Greengoe, L. Nolt, F. Canjura The Senate Committee on Awards recommends that the Senate approves and recommends to the Board of Governors the following awards: *Administered by the University of Victoria Foundation Additions are underlined Deletions are struck through WENDY M GEDNEY BURSARY IN ELEMENTARY EDUCATION* (NEW-UG) A bursary is awarded to one or more students in elementary education in the Faculty of Education. Preference will be given to a mature student or a student who is a single parent. TEVLIN GLEADLE CURTIS SCHOLARSHIP IN EMPLOYMENT LAW (NEW-UG) One scholarship is awarded to an academically outstanding JD student who has achieved the top grade in the Employment Law course. In a year when the course is not offered, the prize may be awarded to a student who has demonstrated excellence in the Labour Law course, or completed a paper or project on a topic related to Employment Law.


CHAIR IN TRANSGENDER STUDIES DOCTORAL RESEARCH SCHOLARSHIP FOR TRANS AND NON-BINARY STUDENTS (NEW-GS) One or more $5,000 scholarship(s) will be awarded to current or entering, academically outstanding trans or non-binary-identified doctoral student(s) pursuing research in any field of study. Preference will be given to students who demonstrate financial need. Students will submit an application, a 500-word statement about their research, unofficial transcript, a current copy of their CV, one academic letter of recommendation and an optional 250-word personal statement to the office of the Chair in Transgender Studies. Selection for the award will be made by the Graduate Awards Committee upon recommendation from the Chair in Transgender Studies Awards Committee. CHAIR IN TRANSGENDER STUDIES MASTER’S DEGREE RESEARCH SCHOLARSHIP FOR TRANS AND NON-BINARY STUDENTS (NEW-GS) Two or more $1,000 scholarships will be awarded to current or entering, academically outstanding trans or non-binary-identified master's students pursuing research in any field of study. Preference will be given to students who demonstrate financial need. Students will submit an application, a 500-word statement about their research, unofficial transcript, a current copy of their CV, one academic letter of recommendation and an optional 250-word personal statement to the office of the Chair in Transgender Studies. Selection for the award will be made by the Graduate Awards Committee upon recommendation from the Chair in Transgender Studies Awards Committee. JEFFREY RUBINOFF SCHOLAR IN ART AS A SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE TRAVEL AWARD* (NEW-UG/GS) The award is to cover travel, food and accommodation costs (the “Forum Costs”) for the recipient of the Jeffrey Rubinoff Scholar in Arts as a Source of Knowledge Fellowship and two graduate or undergraduate students to attend the Company of Ideas Forum (the “Forum”) which is conducted annually by the Jeffrey Rubinoff Foundation at the Jeffrey Rubinoff Sculpture Park (JRSP). Recipients will also be firstly chosen from Art History and Visual Studies, unless no eligible undergraduate or graduate students are available in a given year, in which case the student might be chosen from the Department or Visual Arts. JEFFREY RUBINOFF SCHOLAR IN ART AS A SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE BURSARIES* (NEW-GS) One or more bursaries will be awarded to Art History and Visual Studies graduate students. JEFFREY RUBINOFF SCHOLAR IN ART AS A SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE FELLOWSHIP* (NEW-GS) An award is given to a doctoral student in the field of Modern and Contemporary Art History. If there are no eligible candidates in this field, only outstanding doctoral candidates (excellent PhD proposal, high GPA) in other areas of Art History and Visual Studies will be considered. JAMES A MOSSEY (SM) AWARD* (NEW-GS) One scholarship will be awarded to a graduate student who is in good academic standing entering their final year of the MBA program (either full-time or part-time) in the Sardul S. Gill Graduate School at the Peter B. Gustavson School of Business. Students may be nominated by other students, faculty or staff, or may apply for this award on their own behalf.


EDRA FERGUSON GRADUATE SCHOLARSHIP* (REVISED-GS) A One or more scholarships is are awarded to an outstanding graduate students entering the LLM or PhD program in the Faculty of Law whose focus of study is Aboriginal law. Preference will be given to a student from Nunavut, Northwest Territories, or Yukon. Selection of the recipient will be made by the Graduate Awards committee upon the recommendation of the Faculty of Law. ELAINE GALLAGHER AWARD* (NEW-GS) One or more travel awards are given to outstanding graduate students doing research on aging who are presenting a paper or poster at a conference on aging. Selection of the recipient will be made by the Graduate Awards Committee upon the recommendation of the Director of the Institute on Aging & Lifelong Health. CHAIR IN TRANSGENDER STUDIES DOCTORAL RESEARCH SCHOLARSHIP (NEW-GS) One or more $5,000 scholarships will be awarded to current or entering, academically outstanding doctoral students pursuing trans-related research in any field of study. Preference will be given to trans or non-binary-identified students, or to eligible students who demonstrate financial need. Students will submit an application, a 500-word statement about their research, a current copy of their CV, unofficial transcript, one academic letter of recommendation and an optional 250-word personal statement to the office of the Chair in Transgender Studies. Selection for the award will be made by the Graduate Awards Committee upon recommendation from the Chair in Transgender Studies Awards Committee. CHAIR IN TRANSGENDER STUDIES MASTER'S DEGREE RESEARCH SCHOLARSHIP (NEW-GS) Two or more $1,000 scholarships will be awarded to current or entering academically outstanding master’s students pursuing trans-related research in any field of study. Preference will be given to trans or non-binary-identified students, or to eligible students who demonstrate financial need. Students will submit an application, a 500-word statement about their research, a current copy of their CV, unofficial transcript, one academic letter of recommendation and an optional 250-word personal statement to the office of the Chair in Transgender Studies. Selection for the award will be made by the Graduate Awards Committee upon recommendation from the Chair in Transgender Studies Awards Committee. DAVISON GRADUATE AWARD IN RUSSIAN AND SLAVIC STUDIES (NEW-GS) One award of $1,500 is awarded each April to a graduate student in the Slavic Studies Graduate Program. Preference will be given, in descending order of priority, to a student who is:

a) travelling to Russia, or the countries of the former Soviet Union, to do research b) travelling to an academic conference to present a research paper

If no eligible student will be undertaking travel, the award may be given to an academically outstanding student in Slavic Studies. BARBARA J SHENTON SCHOLARSHIP (NEW-UG) A scholarship of $1,000 is awarded to an academically outstanding undergraduate mature student (23 years of age or older) who is a single parent studying education. Preference will be given to an eligible student with a background in social work or community work.


At its meeting of October 12, 2016, the Senate Committee on Planning discussed and approved the

request for Centre for Youth and Society extension to June 30, 2017.

The following motion is recommended:

That Senate extend the renewal of Approved Centre Status for the Centre for Youth and Society until June 30, 2017.

:hjh Committee Membership: Dr. Nancy Wright, Chair Dr. Abdul Roudsari

Ms. Nicole Greengoe Dr. Stan Dosso Mr. David Schostek Dr. Reuven Gordon Ms. Carrie Andersen Dr. David Castle Dr. Maureen MacDonald Dr. Lisa Surridge

Dr. Merwan Engineer Ms. Holly Hatch, Secretary

Dr. Valerie S. Kuehne Dr. Sang Nam Dr. Graham McDonough Dr. Victoria Wyatt Dr. Anne Stahl Dr. Andrea Giles Dr. Stephen Evans Ms. Gillian Calder Dr. Ralf St. Clair Ms. Paige Bennett Dr. Patrick Nahirney

Associate Vice-President Academic Planning PO Box 1700 STN CSC Victoria British Columbia V8W 2Y2 Canada Tel (250) 721-7012 Fax (250) 721-7216 E-mail [email protected] Web http://www.uvic.ca/vpac

Date: October 17, 2016

To: The Secretary of the Senate

From: Dr. Nancy Wright, Chair, Senate Committee on Planning

Re: Request for Centre for Youth and Society extension to June 30, 2017


Office of the Vice‐President, Research

Administrative Services Building Room A110 PO Box 1700 STN CSC Victoria BC V8W 2Y2 Canada T 250‐472‐5416 | F 250‐472‐5477 | uvic.ca/research

MEMORANDUM

DATE: August 11, 2016

TO: Dr. Nancy Wright; Chair, Senate Committee on Planning

FROM: Dr. Oliver Schmidtke, Acting Associate Vice President Research

RE: Centre for Youth and Society (CFYS)

I am writing under the delegated authority of the Vice‐President Research. Dr.

David Castle has reviewed and is agreement with this recommendation.

An external review of the CFYS was conducted in 2011 and the CFYS was renewed and

approved by Senate for the period of April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2017. I recommend an

extension of the CFYS approval date by three months to June 30, 2017 so that the review of the

Centre can be conducted before Dr. Anne Marshall’s term finishes as CFYS Director.

The process of an external review has been delayed due to the uncertainty of the Centre’s

directorship. Dr. Anne Marshall’s term initially ended on December 31, 2015. We started a

director search but the search failed. Subsequently Dr. Marshall’s term was extended to

December 31, 2015 and then to June 30, 2017.

The requested extension of the Centre’s approval until the end of June 2017 would allow for

sufficient time to conclude the external review and to appoint a new director. In addition, the

extension would bring the CFYS in line with the regular approval cycle of research centres at

UVic to the end of June.

I therefore request that the Senate Committee on Planning recommend the following motion to

Senate:

That the Senate Committee on Planning recommends that Senate extends the renewal of

Approved Centre Status for the Centre for Youth and Society until June 30, 2017.


At its meeting of October 12, 2016, the Senate Committee on Planning discussed and approved the request to disestablish approved Centre Status of the Centre for Cooperative and Community Based Economy. The following motion is recommended:

That Senate approve the disestablishment of the Centre for Cooperative and Community Based Economy (CCCBe) effective immediately.









Re: Request to disestablish the Centre for Cooperative and Community Based Economy


.'.e~"!J University V of Victoria

Office of the Vice-President, Research

Administrative Services Building Room A11o PO Box 1700 STN CSC Victoria BC V8W 2Y2 Canada T 250-472-5416 I F 250-472-5477 I uvic.ca/research

DATE:

TO:

FROM:

RE:

MEMORANDUM

September 8, 2016

Dr. Nancy Wright; Chair, Senate Committee on Planning

Dr. Oliver Schmidtke, Acting Associate Vice President Research

OJ. Disestablishment of the Centre for Cooperative and Community Based Economy (CCCBe)

After an extended attempt to identify appropriate leadership for the Centre for Cooperative

and Community Based Economy (CCCBe), the Vice-President Research acted on the

recommendation of the external review panel to disestablish the centre and has taken

measures to phase-out the centre's activities by using centre carry-forward funds, with the

permission of the donor, for a one-time competition to support cooperative and community

based economy research at UVic. Those funds have been allocated and projects are underway.

Given that the CCBE has been disbanded, it is appropriate for it to no longer retain its status as

a Senate-approved centre. I therefore request that the Senate Committee on Planning

recommend the following motion to Senate:

That the Senate Committee on Planning recommends that Senate disestablish approved Centre

Status for the Centre for Cooperative and Community Based Economy (CCCBe) effective

immediately.

I look forward to answering any questions the Senate Committee on Planning might have

regarding this request.


At its meeting of October 12, 2016, the Senate Committee on Planning discussed and approved the request for renewal of the Centre for Addictions Research BC (CARBC). The following motion is recommended:

That Senate approve the renewal of Approved Centre Status for the Centre for Addictions Research BC (CARBC) for the five-year period January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2021. This recommendation is not contingent upon the suggestions in the external report relating to resources, which are advice to the Vice-President Research.









Re: Request for Renewal of the Centre for Addictions Research British Columbia


~ University W of Victoria

Office of the Vice-President, Research

Administrative Services Build ing Room A 110 PO Box 1700 STN CSC Victoria BC V8W 2Y2 Canada T 250-472-5416 I F 250-472-5477 I uvic.ca/research

Date: 27 September 2016

To: Dr. Nancy Wright, Chair of the Committee on Senate Planning

From: Dr. Oliver Schmidtke, A/Associate Vice-President Research C? j , Re: Renewal of the Centre for Addictions Research BC (CARBC)

The Centre for Addictions Research BC is a multi-faculty research centre. Its current five-year approval expires on December 31, 2016.

An external review of CARBC was conducted on June 13 - 14, 2016. The panel included: • Dr. Robert Mann (CHAIR) - Centre for Addiction and Mental Health - Toronto Ontario

• Dr. Deborah Dawson - Retired, former Senior Scientist with the US National Institute for Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse (part of NIH)

• Dr. Catherine McGregor - Dept. of Educational Psychology and Leadership - University of Victoria

. The attached review report was received on September 16, 2016. The CARBC Director provided his written comments regarding the report on September 26, 2016. The following copies are attached:

ltinera ry of the visit Review panel report Director's response to the review panel report 2011-2015 CARBC Strategic Plan

Panel's Assessment:

The review panel's report is a comprehensive assessment of CARBC that provides an account of the Centre's performance over the past five years. The executive summary comes to the following overall assessment:

It is the unanimous opinion of the review panel that the Centre be continued. CAR BC has achieved a remarkable degree of success over the five-year period of the review. The Centre has met or exceeded all the objectives set by itself, and by the University. The achievements of the Scientists and staff at the Centre over the past five years have been exceptional, marked by substantial success in competing for grants and contracts, publishing leading-edge research, impacting the local and broader community with innovative and valued knowledge mobilization activities, and achieving provincial, national and international recognition for the excellence of the Centre and for the University as well.

The review reports on a thorough consultation process with the Centre's stakeholders and describes the capacity that CARBC has built over the past five years in terms of attracting research funding and creating a multifaceted research community at Uvic. The reviewers note that the Centre has largely outperformed the objectives that it had set itself afte.r the review in 2011 and in its strategic plan. The report highlights how· CARBC has built its international reputation and how the Centre has developed into a world leader in the field of addiction related research. Particular attention is drawn to the successful track record of peer-reviewed publications and the effective multi-sectoral engagement of the Centre. The reviewers make a special note about how instrumental the current leadership team has been in developing the capacity and reputation of CARBC. They explicitly call for the re-affirmation of the ClJrrent leadership of the Centre. At the same time, the report makes some suggestions driven by considerations regarding the sustainability of the Centre's success.


The report concludes by stating that CARBC has successfully met all the university's expectations regarding research centres. The report says:

.. ./2

In summary, CARBC is a very successful centre that is an exceptional resource for the University, and the strong and unanimous recommendation of the Panel is that it be continued. While challenges are arising that must be successfully dealt with, the Panel is confident that CARBC will continue to be an international leader in addictions research and a source of the new knowledge needed to successfully address the many challenges that addictions creates for society.

Review Panel Recommendations:

The panel report makes the following recommendations:

1. Addressing the issue of leadership and renewal of senior faculty that may be considering retirement. The report urges this renewal process to begin soon indicating that senior faculty may be able to reduce their engagement with their home departments and increase their engagement with the Centre.

2. Engaging new and junior faculty with the Centre. For this purpose, the report suggests that:

a. the Centre needs closer engagement in departmental hiring processes b. the university creates a new faculty stream more weighted towards research c. the Centre develops postdoctoral positions to attract new faculty to the Centre and to provide

bridging to promising Centre graduates

3. Addressing the issue of how researchers/ staff are treated at Uvic who do not have a contract with the university but are employed through external grants (for instance, access to benefits such as dental and pension plans). The report states that this is an equity issue that creates difficulties in retaining those talented and experienced Centre staff who are essential to its success.

In his response, the CARBC Director, Dr. Tim Stockwell, is fully accepting of these recommendations and indicates CARBC will be acting upon them. In his response Dr. Stockwell also indicated that access to one additional suite of offices would be critical for the Centre's future plans.

Recommendation to Senate Committee on Planning:

I recommend that the Senate Committee on Planning approve the following motion:

That the Senate Committee on Planning recommends that Senate approve the renewal of Approved Centre Status for the Centre for Addictions Research BC {CAR BC) for the fiveyear period (1 January 2017 through 31 December 2021). This recommendation is not contingent upon the suggestions in the external review report relating to resources, which are advice to the Vice-President Research.

By copy of this memorandum, I am notifying CARBC, through the Director, that the next review of the Centre will include an assessment of the progress the Centre has made on the recommendations in the Review Panel Report. This does not restrict the Centre from undertaking other initiatives as appropriate.

cc: Dr. Tim Stockwell, CARBC Director Dr. 0. Schmidtke, A/ Associate Vice-President Research


Review Panel Assessment Schedule

1

Centre for Addictions Research of BC (CARBC) Five Year Review FINAL AGENDA

June 13 & 14, 2016

REVIEW PANEL MEMBERS Dr. Robert Mann (Chair) – Centre for Addiction and Mental Health ‐ Toronto Dr. Deborah Dawson ‐ US National Institute for Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse (part of NIH), Washington DC Dr. Catherine McGregor – Department of Educational Psychology and Leadership, University of Victoria

TRAVEL /ACCOMODATION INFORMATION Accommodations:

‐ Ramada Limited Downtown Vancouver, 435 West Pender Street, (604‐488‐1088) ‐ Hotel Grand Pacific, 463 Belleville Street, (1‐800‐663‐7550)

Taxi: Please call Yellow Taxi Cab (250‐381‐2222) CARBC contacts: Jen Theil 250‐472‐5445; Tim Stockwell 250‐415‐7376

MONDAY, JUNE 13th

TIME LOCATION ACTIVITY

CARBC Vancouver Office: 909‐510 Burrard Street, Vancouver, BC

9:00 – 11:00 Vancouver Meeting with Dan Reist (Assistant Director, Knowledge Exchange)

Travel to Victoria via Harbour Air Seaplane, Vancouver Harbour Flight Centre, Unit #1 Burrard Landing, 1055 Canada Place

11:40 Vancouver Seaplane to Victoria, BC for lunch, taxi to CARBC

University of Victoria, Salal Room, University Club

1:00 Victoria Lunch with Dr Michael Miller, AVP Research, University Club

CARBC Victoria Office: 2300 McKenzie Avenue, Technology Enterprise Facility, Victoria

2:15 – 3:30 Room 273 Drs. Tim Stockwell (Dir.) and Scott Macdonald (A/Dir., Research)

3:45 – 5:00 Room 264 CARBC Graduate Students (see below for attendees)

Vista 18 Westcoast Grill & Wine Bar 740 Burdett Ave, Victoria

6:30 Dinner at Vista with CARBC Scientists



2

Scientists: Dr Karen Urbanoski, Canada Research Chair in Substance Use, Addictions and Health Services

Research & Assistant Professor, Public Health & Social Policy Dr Scott Macdonald, Assistant Director & Professor, School of Health Information Science Dr Eric Roth, Professor, Department of Anthropology Dr Cecilia Benoit, Professor, Department of Sociology Dr Mikael Jansson, Adjunct Professor, Department of Sociology Dr Cheryl Cherpitel, Adjunct Professor, School of Nursing Dr Bernie Pauly, Professor, School of Nursing Dr Jinhui Zhao, Senior Data Analyst Staff: Samantha Magnus Kate Vallance Cindy Andrew Dakota Inglis Jen Theil Emma Carter Joanne Thompson Jonathan Woods

TUESDAY, JUNE 14th

TIME LOCATION ACTIVITY

2300 McKenzie Avenue, Technology Enterprise Facility, Victoria

9:00 – 10:30 Room 264 CARBC Scientists (see below for attendees)

10:30 – 10:45 Room 264 Break

11:00 – 12:00 Room 264 CARBC Staff (see below for attendees)

12:15 – 1:30 Room 216 Informal lunch meet and greet with all CARBC faculty, staff, students and Board members

1:30 – 2:30 Room 264 CARBC Advisory Board and Community Partners (see below for attendees)

2:30 – 3:15 Room 264 Review Panel conference or free time

3:15 – 4:00 Room 264 Dr. Michael Miller



3

Graduate Students: Renee O’Leary, Social Dimensions of Health Research, (Supervisor: Tim Stockwell) Adam Sherk, Social Dimensions of Health Research, (Supervisor: Tim Stockwell) Chantele Joordens, Social Dimensions of Health Research, (Supervisor: Scott Macdonald) Melanie Callas, Department of Anthropology, (Supervisor: Eric Roth) Marion Selfridge, Social Dimensions of Health Research, (Supervisor: Bernie Pauly) Katrina Barber, Social Dimensions of Health Research, (Supervisor: ) Nozomi Franco Cea, School of Child and Youth Care (Supervisor: Gordon Barnes) Trudy Norman, Department of Interdisciplinary Studies in Nursing and Anthropology,

(Supervisor: Bernie Pauly) Advisory Board and Community Partners: Dr Michael Prince, Lansdowne Professor of Social Policy, University of Victoria & Chair of

Advisory Board Insp. Scott McGregor, OIC Community Services Division, Victoria Police Department Cindy Trytten, Director, Research and Capacity Building Department, Vancouver Island Health

Authority Joann Connolly, Manager, Residential Services, Rock Bay Landing, Victoria Cool Aid Society Kathleen Perkin, Manager, Harm Reduction Policy, Public Health Services, Ministry of Health Other possible attendees to be confirmed: Warren O’Briain, Executive Director, Public Health Services, Ministry of Health Heather Hobbs, Coordinator, AIDS Vancouver Island


REVIEW OF THE CENTRE FOR ADDICTIONS RESEARCH OF BRITISH COLUMBIA: 2016 REVIEWERS: Dr. Deborah Dawson National Institute for Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse (Retired) National Institutes of Health Washington, DC Dr. Robert Mann (Chair) Centre for Addiction and Mental Health and University of Toronto Toronto, Ontario Dr. Catherine McGregor Department of Educational Psychology and Leadership University of Victoria Submitted September 16, 2016


CARBC Review 2016 2

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Centre for Addictions Research – British Columbia (CARBC) is a research centre of the University of Victoria that was established in December, 2005 with an endowment of $10.55 million from the BC Addiction Foundation. Dr. Tim Stockwell was recruited as the Director of the Centre. Dr. Scott Macdonald was recruited as the Assistant Director – Research and Dan Riest was appointed as the Assistant Director - Knowledge Exchange. In keeping with the policy of the University that research centres be reviewed every 5 years, this report describes a review of the Centre and its activities for the years 2010-2015. The review was conducted by Dr. Deborah Dawson (NIH-NIAAA, retired), Dr. Robert Mann (Centre for Addiction and Mental Health and University of Toronto – Chair), and Dr. Catherine McGregor, University of Victoria). Following receipt of background materials, the review panel conducted a site visit on June 13 and 14, 2016. On those days the panel met with CARBC staff, students and stakeholders for wide-ranging discussions of the Centre’s successes, accomplishments and challenges. This review is based on an extensive analysis of the Centre’s progress in achieving its self-selected goals and those of the University between 2010 and 2015, its plans for the next 5 years, and insights gained from the site visit. It is the unanimous opinion of the review panel that the Centre be continued. CARBC has achieved a remarkable degree of success over the 5-year period of the review. The Centre has met or exceeded all the objectives set by itself, and by the University. The achievements of the Scientists and staff at the Centre over the past five years have been exceptional, marked by substantial success in competing for grants and contracts, publishing leading-edge research, impacting the local and broader community with innovative and valued knowledge mobilization activities, and achieving provincial, national and international recognition for the excellence of the Centre and for the University as well. The Centre is very well situated to maintain and increase its leadership in an area that will likely be of increasing importance to the public, government and funders in the future. The Centre is a significant resource for the University, providing access to leading edge research resources for University faculty, an important source of funding and an excellent training environment for students, and a collegial and productive working environment. Because of the success of the Centre in achieving its goals, the Panel also unanimously recommends that the current Centre leadership team be reaffirmed in their roles. The Panel also noted challenges faced by the Centre. Many Centre Scientists and staff, including Centre leadership, are approaching retirement and thus a strategy to address succession and recruitment would be valuable. Several important suggestions were made that would increase the Centre’s ability to attract and retain new Scientists, such as Centre leadership co-chairing hiring committees. An additional issue noted was that University policies currently do not permit staff hired on contracts or grants to participate in the benefits plan, which may impact negatively on the Centre’s ability to attract and retain personnel essential to its success. While these challenges do not detract from the Centre’s substantial achievements in the past 5 years, addressing them will contribute importantly to future success.


CARBC Review 2016 3

2. PREAMBLE/BACKGROUND 2.1 Background Information About the Research Centre The Centre for Addictions Research – British Columbia (CARBC) is a research centre of the University of Victoria. In recognizing the impact of addictions in the province, in 2001 a Task Group of the Provincial Government recommended the establishment of a centre for the advancement of addictions knowledge and practice in British Columbia. The government acted on this recommendation by providing an endowment of $10.55 million for the creation of the new centre. Following a competitive review of proposals to host the centre, the proposal submitted by the University of Victoria was successful, and so the University was chosen to be the host institution, with collaborative links to other BC universities. Additional information on the CARBC’s background, history and function was presented in the Centre’s Self Assessment and is provided here:

“CARBC was established as a research centre at the University of Victoria in December 2005 following confirmation of an endowment of $10.55 million from the BC Addiction Foundation. These funds originated from the BC government in response to a high level enquiry into services for people with addictions. A memorandum of understanding was signed by the then VP Research, Dr. Martin Taylor …, committing UVic to supporting the new centre with the appointment of seven faculty members, principally in the Faculty of Social Sciences and the Faculty of Human and Social Development, over the ensuing five years. Dr. Tim Stockwell was appointed Director of CARBC in July 2004 and Dr. Scott Macdonald as Assistant Director (Research) in July 2005. Both are currently in their third terms in these positions. Dan Reist was appointed Assistant Director (Knowledge Exchange) in 2004 and heads an office in Vancouver funded mainly through government contracts. Since 2005 other faculty have been recruited in collaboration with deans and department/school chairs/directors, either externally (in sociology, economics, public health and social policy) or internally through partial teaching buy-outs (nursing, sociology, anthropology). We also have adjunct faculty who receive salary contributions from CARBC plus Collaborating Scientists and Research Affiliates who do not have offices at CARBC. CARBC has a Faculty Committee comprising faculty, adjunct faculty, the directors, a senior data analyst, a staff representative and graduate student representative. This committee meets 4-6 times per year as needed to review and develop operational policies, discuss new initiatives, oversee allocation of support funds for graduate students and update each other on research/knowledge exchange activities. CARBC has an Advisory Board comprised of senior UVic administrators, provincial stakeholders from government and non-government sectors and CARBC directors.”


CARBC Review 2016 4

2.2 Affiliated Faculty, Researchers, Staff and Students of the Centre CARBC has a large group of participating scientists and core faculty, affiliated faculty, staff and graduate students. The Centre’s faculty (including management) include Dr. Tim Stockwell, Director, Scientist (Psychology); Dr. Scott Macdonald, Assistant Director for Research, Scientist (Health Information Science); Dan Reist, Assistant Director for Knowledge Exchange; Dr. Cecilia Benoit, Scientist (Sociology); Dr. Cheryl Cherpitel, Scientist (Nursing); Dr. Mikael Jansson, Scientist (Sociology); Dr. Bernie Pauly, Scientist (Nursing); Dr. Eric Roth, Scientist (Anthropology); Dr. Karen Urbanoski, Scientist (Public Health & Social Policy); Dr. Jinhui Zhao, Scientist; Dr. Gordon Barnes, Professor Emeritus and Scientist Emeritus (Child and Youth Care). Collaborating scientists include Dr. Jeffrey Brubacher, Emergency Physician and Researcher, Vancouver General Hospital; Dr. Jane Buxton, Professor, School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia and Physician Epidemiologist, Harm Reduction Lead, BC Centre for Disease Control; Dr. Clay Holroyd, Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Victoria; Dr. Bonnie Leadbeater, Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Victoria; Dr. Marjorie MacDonald, Professor CIHR/PHAC Applied Public Health Chair, University of Victoria; Dr. Lenora Marcellus, Associate Professor, School of Nursing, University of Victoria; Dr. Amy Salmon, Coordinator, Sheway, Vancouver Coastal Health; Dr. Amanda Slaunwhite, Post-Doctoral Fellow, Department of Sociology, University of New Brunswick; Dr. Gerald Thomas, Director, Alcohol & Gambling Policy, Healthy Populations and Development, BC Ministry of Health; Dr. Bruce Wallace, Assistant Professor, School of Social Work, University of Victoria. Research affiliates include Lynne Belle-Isle, Project Consultant, Canadian AIDS Society; Clifton Chow, Research Coordinator, Youth Addictions, Vancouver Coastal Health Authority; Dr. Anne George, Associate Professor, Pediatrics, School of Population and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia; Dr. Marvin Krank, Professor, Psychology, University of British Columbia, Okanagan; Philippe Lucas, Vice President, Patient Services, Tilray; Samantha Magnus, Masters Population Health Student, School of Public Health and Social Policy, University of Victoria; Dr. Megan McLarnon, Assistant Professor of Clinical Practice and Director of Clinical Training, Department of Psychology, Simon Fraser University; Dr. Ingrid Pacey, Psychiatrist, Vancouver, BC ; Kathleen Perkin, Manager, Harm Reduction Policy, BC Ministry of Health ; Dr. Rachel Phillips, Executive Director, PEERS; Dr. Diane Rothon, Physician; Dr. Deborah Rutman, Adjunct Associate Professor, Faculty of Human and Social Development, University of Victoria; Dr. Jackie Stokes, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Human, Social and Educational Development, Thompson Rivers University; Dr. Kara Thompson, Post-Doctoral Fellow, Dalhousie University; Dr. Mikhail Torban, Researcher; Dr. Zach Walsh, Assistant Professor, Psychology and Co-Director, Centre for the Advancement of Psychological Science and Law, University of British Columbia; Ashley Wettlaufer, Research Coordinator, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Ontario; Dr. Erica Woodin, Associate Professor, Psychology, University of Victoria.


CARBC Review 2016 5

Staff at the Vancouver office include Cindy Andrew, Program Consultant, Helping Schools; Nicole Bodner, Publications Officer; Dr. Tim Dyck, Research Associate; Bette Reimer, Research Associate; Catriona Remocker, Research Associate; Evelyn Souza, Information Officer; Cathy Spence, Assistant to Dan Reist. Staff at the Victoria office include Diane Allan, Research Coordinator; Katrina Barber, Research Assistant; Stan Bersenev, Research Assistant; Meaghan Brown, Research Assistant; Randi Brown, Research Assistant; Emma Carter, Administrator; Geoff Cross, Research Assistant; Megan Deyman, Research Assistant; Stephanie Dion, Work study; Ben Donoghue, Research Assistant; John Dorocicz, IT Support; Rebecca Elliot, Work study; Renay Maurice, Research Assistant; Amanda Farrell-Low, Research Assistant (Social Media); Ari Franklin, Research Assistant; Catherine Hacksell, Research Assistant; Dakota Inglis, Research Associate; Andrew Ivsins, Research Assistant; Caitlin Janzen, Research Coordinator; Chantele Joordens, Research Associate; Vandana Joshi, Work Study; Chelsie Kadgien, Transcriptionist; Alex Kent, Research Assistant; Bonnie Krysowaty, Research Assistant; Megan Lowe, Work study; Samantha Magnus, Research Assistant; Celeste Macevicius, Transcriptionist; Shane Morrissey, Research Assistant; Nadia Ouellet, Research Associate; Chris Pauley, Research Assistant; Natasha Potvin, Research Assistant; Tina Revai, Research Assistant; Jeremy Riishede, Administrative Coordinator/Research Assistant; Gaelle Nicolussi Rossi, Research Assistant; Sana Shahram, Research Associate; Lindsay Shaw, Research Assistant; Michaela Smith, Research Assistant; Jen Theil, Assistant to the Director; Joanne Thompson, Research Assistant; Kate Vallance, Research Associate; Paul van Dam-Bates, Research Assistant. Postdoctoral fellows with the Centre include Dr. Hasu Ghosh (Population Health); Dr. Megan McLarnon (Psychology); Dr. Rachel Phillips (Sociology); Dr. Sana Shahram (Nursing); Dr. Leah Shumka (Sociology); Dr. Trudy Norman (Nursing). Graduate students with the Centre include Lynne Belle-Isle, Social Dimensions of Health Program (PhD), Department of Sociology and School of Nursing, University of Victoria; Robert Birch, Social Dimensions of Health Program (MA), Department of Anthropology, University of Victoria; Meaghan Brown, School of Nursing (MN), University of Victoria; Melanie Callas, Department of Anthropology (MA), University of Victoria; Lauren Casey, Social Dimensions of Health Program (PhD), Department of Sociology, University of Victoria; Geoff Cross, Dispute resolution in Public Administration (MA), University of Victoria; Megan Deyman, School of Public Health & Social Policy (MPH), University of Victoria; Nozomi Franco Cea, School of Child and Youth Care (PhD), University of Victoria; Phuc Dang, Social Dimensions of Health Program (PhD), University of Victoria; Jessica Fitterer, Department of Geography (PhD), University of Victoria; Peter Greenwell, Department of Sociology (PhD), University of Victoria; Alexandra Holtom, Social Dimensions of Health Program (MA), Department of Sociology, University of Victoria; Andrew Ivsins, Department of Sociology (PhD), University of Victoria; Sarah Janewski, Social Dimensions of Health Program (MA), Department of Anthropology, University of Victoria; Bethany Jeal, School of Nursing (MN), University of Victoria; Chantele Joordens, Social Dimensions of Health Program (PhD), Office of Interdisciplinary Academic Programs, University of Victoria; Vandana Joshi, Social Dimensions of Health Program (PhD), School of Health and Information Sciences, University of Victoria; Alex Kent, School of Public Health and Social Policy (MA), University of Victoria; Philippe Lucas, Social Dimensions of Health Program (PhD), Office of Interdisciplinary Academic Programs, University of Victoria; Enock


CARBC Review 2016 6

Makupa, Department of Geography, University of Victoria; Trudy Norman; Department of Interdisciplinary Studies in Nursing and Anthropology (PhD), University of Victoria; Renee O’Leary, Social Dimensions of Health Program (PhD), Office of Interdisciplinary Academic Programs, University of Victoria; Tina Revai, School of Nursing (MN), University of Victoria; Audra Roemer, Department of Psychology (PhD), University of Victoria; Marion Selfridge, Social Dimensions of Health Program (PhD), Office of Interdisciplinary Academic Programs, University of Victoria; Adam Sherk, Social Dimensions of Health Program (PhD), University of Victoria; Alina Sotskova, Department of Psychology (PhD), University of Victoria; Krystal Summers, Social Dimensions of Health Program, Office of Interdisciplinary Academic Programs and School of Public Health and Social Policy, University of Victoria; Sarah Wojcik, Social Dimensions of Health Program (MA), Office of Interdisciplinary Academic Programs, University of Victoria. Members of the Centre’s Advisory Board include Lynne Belle-Isle, Project Consultant, Canadian AIDS Society; Dr. Laurence Bosley, Director, Addictions Services, Island Health; Meghann Brinoni, Manager, Research, Analysis and Knowledge Management, First Nations Health Authority; Dr. Russ Callaghan, Associate Professor, Northern Medical Program, University of Northern British Columbia; Chief Frank Elsner, Chief Constable, Victoria Police Department; Dr. Perry Kendall, Provincial Health Officer, BC Ministry of Health; Andrea Langlois, Director of Community-based Research, Pacific AIDS Network; Philippe Lucas, Vice President, Patient Services, Tilray; Dr. Michael Miller, Associate Vice President, Research, University of Victoria; Warren O’Briain, Executive Director, Communicable Disease Prevention, Harm Reduction and Mental Health, BC Ministry of Health; Dr. Michael Prince, Chair, Lansdowne Professor of Social Policy, University of Victoria; Sandra Richardson, Chief Executive Officer, Victoria Foundation; Dr. Evan Wood, Director, Urban Health Research Initiative, BC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, St Paul’s Hospital. 2.3 Scope of the Review The University of Victoria mandates that Research Centres are reviewed every 5 years. As outlined in the Research Centre Review Guidelines, a Review Panel is created, and is given the mandate to “Conduct an evidence-based, comprehensive, and constructively critical review focusing on degree to which the Centre has met the purposes of a research centre … through its objectives and goals. The reviewers should examine and be prepared to comment on the Centre’s:

Caliber and quality of the members’ collaborative and/or interdisciplinary research and the degree to which it has enhanced the ability of its members to attract infrastructure and networking opportunities

Success in assisting its members to attract external research funding support Extent and quality of involvement of its members (faculty, students, others) in the

activities of the Centre Adequacy and effective utilization of its resources through its management of

finances, staffing and other resources Advancement of student research training and support Contributions to the academic mission of the university and the centre’s

constituent academic units


CARBC Review 2016 7

Extent of knowledge transfer to the research community and to society through publications, outreach and other methods

Impact on the reputation and image of the university” These guidelines provide for a comprehensive evaluation of the impact and success of a research centre, in terms of meeting its goals, contributions to the University, and impact of the centre in its area of scientific focus. 2.4 Membership of the Review Panel The members of the review panel were Robert Mann, Deborah Dawson and Catherine McGregor. These individuals were selected to reflect CARBC’s mandate. Thus, panel members were able to address CARBC’s impact in the addictions field and its success in establishing an important and valuable presence in the university, the province, and nationally and internationally. Information on the Review Panel members is provided below:

Deborah Dawson was a Senior Staff Scientist at the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism from 1990 to until her retirement in 2010, after which she continued to be employed by NIAAA on a contractual basis until 2014. Currently, she acts as an independent consultant while remaining strongly involved in the alcohol peer review system. Dr. Dawson was the co-winner of the 2011 Jellinek Memorial Award in recognition of her numerous contributions in the areas of measuring alcohol consumption and modeling its associations with alcohol-related harm. She played a primary role in the formulation and validation of the NIAAA low-risk drinking guidelines. In addition, she was active in all aspects of developing and analyzing NIAAA’s groundbreaking National Epidemiologic Surveys on Alcohol and Related Conditions conducted in 2001-2, 2004-5 and 2012-13 and its predecessor the 1991-2 National Longitudinal Alcohol Epidemiology Survey. She also consulted on the development of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, 5th Edition and has served on the Editorial Boards of Addiction, the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs and the Journal of Substance Abuse. Her contributions to the alcohol field include more than 100 senior-authored and numerous co-authored papers in peer-reviewed journals. In 2008, she was on the ISI Highly Cited List, representing the top 0.5% of most highly cited authors. Dr. Dawson received her BA from the University of Michigan in 1970, her MA in Demography from Georgetown University in 1975 and her PhD in Population Dynamics and Epidemiology from Johns Hopkins University in 1986. Robert Mann (Chair) is a Senior Scientist at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) in Toronto, where he is the Head of the Population Health and Community Transformation research section in the Institute for Mental Health Policy Research. He is also Associate Professor in the Dalla Lana School of Public Health (DLSPH) at the University of Toronto, where he was the Director of the Collaborative Program in Addiction Studies from 2005-10. He also led the development of the Addictions and Mental Health field for the MScCH degree at


CARBC Review 2016 8

DLSPH, serving as its inaugural Field Director from 2009 to 2016. He received his PhD in Psychology from the University of Waterloo in 1981. His research interests have included the epidemiology of alcohol and drug problems, as well as program and policy evaluation. He has published more than 220 papers in refereed journals on these and related topics, as well as 10 book chapters and 58 monographs and technical reports. He is the Co-Principal Investigator of the Ontario Student Drug Use and Health Survey, a biennial survey of Ontario students in grades 7-12, and of the CAMH Monitor Survey, an annual survey of substance use and mental health issues among Ontario adults. He has served on the editorial boards of Addiction (1992-2912), Contemporary Drug Problems (2010 – present) and the International Journal of Alcohol and Drug Research (2011-present). He served on the National Board of MADD Canada from 2003 -2015, including a term as Chair (2011-2013). He was awarded the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal for contributions to impaired driving research. Catherine McGregor is the Associate Dean, Research and Graduate programs in the Faculty of Education at the University of Victoria. She formerly served as the Director of Interdisciplinary programs and has extensive experience and background in multi- and trans-disciplinary programs at the graduate and undergraduate level. With experience in both large and small university settings, Dr. McGregor has a record of working with diverse communities and in community based programming and research. Dr. McGregor is an experienced educational researcher, with familiarity in the fields of program evaluation, community engaged or university-community partner research, youth engaged research, feminist research, educational leadership, with a strong focus on educational policy and practice. She is currently the lead researcher and advisor to a consortium of 15 school districts in BC who are engaged in a multi year study of how inquiry enhances professional learning and accelerates educational innovation. She was the author of a major report entitled Lifting All Learners: The Aboriginal Enhancement Schools Network (2013) which set important benchmarks in measuring the impacts of school districts efforts to support Aboriginal learners in the k-12 sector. Her strong field focus, bringing together theory that informs practice and improves learning conditions for all students, has made her a sought out speaker at district and regional educational conferences. She has been extensively involved in equity and inclusion issues during her tenure at the University of Victoria, serving as faculty representative to the University’s Equity and Diversity Advisory group, serving on departmental and faculty committees focused on equity and inclusion, and has participated in and served as an advisor to the annual UVic Diversity Conference.

2.5 The Review Process The Review Panel was assembled in the winter of 2016. Panel members were provided with a description of their mandate, and then were provided with materials necessary for the five-year review. The site visit took place on June 13 and 14, 2016. On those days, the Review


CARBC Review 2016 9

Panel met with CARBC management, scientific and other staff, students, senior University officials, CARBC’s Advisory Board and stakeholders. The review and assessment of CARBC was conducted in accordance with University of Victoria policy on the establishment, purposes and review of research centres as outlined in the following University documents:

Establishment and Review of Research Centres Policy RH8300 (2200)

Duties and Responsibilities of Research Centre Directors Policy GV0715 (1069)

Procedures for the Establishment and Review of Research Centres

Guidelines for Review of Research Centres. These documents describe the purposes of research centres and provide guidance for the conduct and organization of the review of a research centre. In conducting the review, the committee played close attention to CARBC’s Self Assessment, the Annual Reports from 2011/12 to 2015/16, the 2011-2015 Strategic Plan, and the 2010 External Review Report. In addition, this information was supplemented during the site visit by discussions with Dan Reist (Assistant Director of Knowledge Exchange) and the Knowledge Exchange staff, Dr. Michael Miller (Associate Vice-President - Research), the Centre Director and Assistant Director for Research (Drs. Tim Stockwell and Scott Macdonald), CARBC faculty, CARBC staff, CARBC students, and CARBC stakeholders and community partners. 3. REVIEW/ASSESSMENT We provide first a summary of the discussions held on June 13 and 14, followed by an evaluation of the extent to which CARBC has fulfilled its purposes as a Research Centre of the University of Victoria. 3.1 Meeting held on June 13 and 14 3.1.1 Meeting with Dan Reist and Knowledge Exchange Staff: The Review Panel met with Dan Reist and members of the Knowledge Exchange Unit in Vancouver. Topics discussed included the nature and scope of the Unit’s activities, current and planned projects, and challenges faced and anticipated. The Knowledge Exchange Unit has a current staff of 13, but staff numbers fluctuate depending on projects and funding levels. The Unit seeks to mobilize any knowledge that could influence practice, policy and public discourse. Thus, the Unit plays a key translational role in making knowledge created by the Centre usable by communities in addressing their needs. Staff operate primarily from a Health Promotion perspective, and focus on 3 pillars – helping communities, helping campuses and helping schools. The Unit has achieved an impressive degree of success in developing and delivering innovative programming that meets the needs of communities as is evidenced by the widespread implementation of these resources, and the degree of ongoing engagement apparent among organisations both within BC and outside of the province. The Unit’s success appears due to a variety of factors. One key in this is their ‘first principles’ approach


CARBC Review 2016 10

to their efforts, where they closely examine fundamental assumptions and goals in knowledge exchange efforts. This often allows them to recognize unmet needs or significant opportunities for innovation. Examples of these significant innovations include their recognition of the value of taking a “competencies” approach to drug education, and their understanding of the challenges linked to the capacity of schools, postsecondary institutions and communities to deliver and support drug education and prevention programming. The Unit has excellent linkages locally, provincially and nationally which demonstrates the high value of the Unit by important stakeholders and partners. The most significant challenge facing the Unit is maintaining ongoing, highly productive teams in an uncertain funding environment. They have been very successful to date in securing funds to support their activities, but it is often difficult to retain key staff in an uncertain funding environment. 3.1.2. Meeting with Dr. Michael Miller: The Review Panel met with Dr. Michael Miller, Associate Vice President of Research at the University of Victoria. Dr. Miller provided important clarification of the University’s expectations of Centres, of their roles and responsibilities, and of the purpose of the review. In discussions, Dr. Miller recognized some of the challenges facing the Centre. These included succession planning, as several key staff are approaching retirement. Additionally, he identified issues that Centres face at the University because of the academic orientation of university policies. Among these are the challenges in engaging new faculty in Centre activities. Current policies place an emphasis on the contributions of new faculty to home departments in making tenure decisions, for example. Thus new faculty are incentivized to devote greater efforts to their home department rather than to Centres. One possibility for addressing this might be to provide new faculty appointment letters that specifically note expectations that they will participate in research Centre activities and projects. He also asked the Panel to provide an assessment of the Centre’s achievements in research, and its contributions to the University’s impact on the community, and also to the University’s international reputation. In discussions, Dr. Miller provided evidence of the University’s strong support of the Centre. He noted that the University recognizes that the Centre’s mandate to address addictions issues is of central importance to the community, the province and internationally. He noted specific instances that underlined the University’s support, including responsiveness to the Centre’s increasing need for space, and also the University’s financial support of the Centre when downturns in financial markets created challenges in accessing endowment funds for Centre operations. 3.1.3 Meeting with Drs. Stockwell and Macdonald: The Review Panel met with Dr. Stockwell, the Director, and Dr. Macdonald, the Assistant Director, to discuss the Centre’s accomplishments, challenges faced, and plans. Both were very enthusiastic about the Centre’s progress in meeting its goals, and for its prospects for the future. They indicated that since the previous review, the Centre had achieved more capacity, more resources and more impact. The Centre and its mandate will continue to be relevant to the University and



society in general in view of impending legalization of cannabis, the prescription opioid epidemic, and ongoing interest in alcohol policy. They pointed to the Centre’s success in meeting and exceeding its goals as a provincial, national and international leader in addictions research. They noted the impressive level of funding success, with the Centre being among the top 5 Centres at the University in terms of funding received. They pointed to the Centre’s impressive level of publication in leading journals such as Lancet, American Journal of Public Health, and Addiction. They identified several examples of national and international impact. The Centre’s work on Epidemiological Surveillance and Monitoring has provided an important basis for policy work and partnership with provincial, national and international stakeholders. Research on Managed Alcohol Programs has achieved international press interest. A major impact of the Centre’s research has led to its elucidation of Minimum Unit Pricing for alcohol as a key and effective policy strategy for controlling and preventing alcohol-related harm. Impressively, this work has affected alcohol policy nationally and internationally. For example, recently Scotland introduced legislation based CARBC’s policy advice, and the Centre is involved with other jurisdictions in the European Union seeking to introduce similar policies. Additionally, the Centre was recently invited to become a World Health Organisation Collaborating Centre. This prestigious designation will reflect positively not only on the Centre but on the University more generally. Drs. Stockwell and Macdonald highlighted the Centre’s impact on the community. They noted the excellent relationships developed between researchers and members of the Knowledge Mobilisation Unit that enabled Centre research to be made relevant, accessible and impactful. Centre Scientists have developed an impressive reputation for community-based research that engages community members in meeting local needs. As one example, they noted that Dr. Bernie Pauly recently was awarded the Government of BC Community Achievement Award. They also pointed to the Centre’s increased engagement with and contributions to the academic mandate of the university. An increasing number of graduate students are becoming engaged in the Centre’s projects. Centre Scientists have succeeded in attracting very talented graduate students and Postdoctoral fellows, and also have substantially increased their teaching engagements, including introducing addictions content into a large number of courses at the University. One program that the Centre has developed very close links with is the Social Dimensions of Health program. This program is well suited to hosting students with interests in substance use issues, and the Centre has been able to leverage its funding and other resources to provide support for these (and other) students. Several issues facing the Centre were identified. Engaging new faculty continues to be a challenge. New tenure track faculty have no incentive to engage with Centre activities and projects, since tenure decisions are primarily based on their contributions to departmental goals. One recent and substantial success in addressing this issue was the Centre’s ability to secure a Canada Research Chair, and to attract Dr. Karen Urbanoski to this high-profile position. Dr. Urbanoski, trained at the University of Toronto and Harvard, is the foremost young scientist internationally in addiction health systems research and will be closely



engaged with the WHO Collaborating Centre activities. Nevertheless, university policy that all new faculty hires must go to departments continues to create barriers for this and other Centres in attracting new faculty members. Among other suggestions for how this situation might be resolved could be the inclusion of two CARBC faculty members on health-related departmental search committees, including possibly serving as a co-chair of the search committee, and/or the involvement of CARBC in drafting hiring statements and letters of offer. In general, closer cooperation between departments who have faculty members involved in health and addictions research and CARBC would address this gap. Other issues noted also related to the uncertain status of research Centres within the university, where current policies are largely focused on supporting academic departments and their faculties. One result of a policy gap is that contract staff at CARBC are not able to access benefits in the way that other university staff are. Thus, even though the Centre’s success often depends on many talented and committed contract staff, there is a disincentive for these people remaining engaged with the Centre for the long term. A final issue noted was the challenges presented by the impending retirement of key Centre staff and leaders. These challenges are related to issues faced in engaging new faculty with the Centre. Additionally, both Drs. Stockwell and Macdonald are approaching retirement age, and so replacement of Centre leadership must be considered. In the event that these senior leaders do retire, the CARBC self-study recommended an international search. This could serve to attract senior addictions scientists with established reputations to the Centre. 3.1.4 Meeting with CARBC Scientists: CARBC Scientists meet with the Panel in the morning of June 14. They participated in a frank and wide-ranging discussion of their experiences with the Centre. The Scientists unanimously praised the Centre as a focal point for addictions and related research, as a resource for the university and the community, and as an incubator for impactful and internationally recognized research. They described the Centre as providing a welcoming and collaborative environment. They noted that the Centre has grown and evolved substantially. One Scientist noted that, “I have experienced a synergistic, interdisciplinary and collaborative approach to research that I could not have achieved anywhere else.” Several comments highlighted the ability of the Centre to bring together a critical mass of collaborators to pursue funding opportunities that otherwise would not be possible. They described the Centre as welcoming and sharing, not “possessive” about data, and facilitating access to all. They particularly noted the important relationships with Island Health and other stakeholders that have facilitated funding and research initiatives. Scientists commented very positively on the working atmosphere at the Centre, noting that it contributed greatly to productivity. They described it as one of positive competition and excellent collegiality, and “not a lot of ego”. They also noted that the Centre is influencing and even leading curriculum reform. Among other examples, they noted close and synergistic relationships with the Social Dimensions of Health Program, as well as the Public Health and Social Policy graduate programs. Scientists commented that the Centre has served as an important draw for excellent undergraduate and graduate students. For example, they described how several CARBC undergraduate students were winners of the University’s



Jamie Cassels Award, and how this year a CARBC PhD student had received a prestigious SSHRC Doctoral Fellowship. Several challenges were noted. One challenge lay in engaging new faculty members with the Centre. Appointments are made through academic departments, with faculty typically required to devote 40% of their time to teaching, 40% to research, and 20% to administration. These expectations made engagement of new faculty with CARBC less attractive for new faculty, particularly when trying to achieve tenure. It was noted that since the University has recently created teaching professor positions, with an 80% teaching and 20% administration expectation, it might consider creating research professor positions, with the expected engagement shifted towards research. Similarly, Scientists suggested that the Centre might create and maintain one or more Postdoctoral Fellow positions to attract new graduates. Some resource issues were noted. Availability of university support for research can occasionally be problematic. For example, recent reductions in the University’s support of journal subscriptions were identified. Nevertheless, they noted that Centre management do their best to address these problems. Another issue commented on was the lack of benefits for grant-funded staff, which made it a challenge to keep talented people. As well, the current uncertainties with the Canadian Institutes of Health Research funding program meant that planning for future grants was difficult. 3.1.5 Meeting with CARBC Graduate Students: A wide-ranging discussion was held with a group of 8 CARBC graduate students. The students were asked to discuss the benefits and challenges experienced in working at the Centre. Students were uniformly positive and enthusiastic about their experiences with the Centre. They noted that the Centre is particularly sympathetic to students, and seeks to provide them with a supportive and inclusive experience. The students greatly appreciated access to office facilities, copying and similar resources. The ‘Thursday Morning Coffee Sessions’ were highlighted as an opportunity to meet other researchers, find out what students and Scientists were doing, and gain experience in making presentations. The students were particularly appreciative of the administrative staff who are willing to help them succeed in their efforts in many ways. They also praised the networking opportunities at the Centre, which allowed them to become involved other projects and increase publications and funding participation opportunities, as well as contacts for jobs. They also appreciated the Centre’s emphasis on knowledge translation and mobilization, which is uncommon elsewhere. In a related vein, they appreciated the opportunities to work with community partners that are involved in a large proportion of CARBC activities. A challenge that students face, at CARBC and everywhere, is the transition from graduate work to post-degree employment. Students generally felt that CARBC students had done well in this regard, and that the opportunities to network with academics and community stakeholders were a very positive resource in this regard. One suggest that was made was that it would be useful if the Centre were able to create a standing Postdoctoral Fellowship, that could be awarded each year to a recent CARBC graduate, or an applicant from outside the Centre (and University). This fellowship could assist talented new PhD graduates in



transitioning to academic positions, and in transitioning to career as an independent researcher. It could also serve to attract talented new graduates to the Centre. A second challenge identified by students was related to on-campus employment as TA’s and RA’s. While CARBC students praised the many opportunities for employment in the research centre, they noted as interdisciplinary students they were often overlooked for other RA or TA work at the departmental level. This is because departmental policies generally favour students enrolled in their own programs. 3.1.6 Meeting with CARBC Staff: The meeting with CARBC staff was held on the morning of June 14. A wide-ranging and open discussion was held on the benefits and challenges of working at the Centre. It was immediately clear that CARBC staff were a highly motivated group who were engaged with the work of the Centre and committed to achievement and excellence in an environment that supported them and their goals. They described the Centre environment as very dynamic, where everyone was doing something interesting. People made comments like, “I love coming to work every single day,” and “I love doing my job.” They appreciated the collegial environment and a refreshing lack of politics. Also appreciated was the flexibility of the Centre in terms of scheduling, child arrangements, etc. Additional examples of this noted were the standing desk initiative and the negotiation of special rates for gym membership supported by the endowment. They also commented on excellent interactions with other parts of the University. Challenges noted included increased staff workloads and stress that have resulted from recent staff reductions. Also noted was the inconsistent benefits policy at the University between permanent and contract staff. Additionally, staff mentioned issues related to “growing pains”, such as space concerns, technology support and the need for some to share computers. They noted that Centre management has worked hard to communicate these issues to University management. 3.1.7 Meeting with CARBC Advisory Board and Community Partners: The review panel met with members of the CARBC Advisory Board and Community Partners. The discussion began with a consideration of the Centre’s financial position, and how it compared to the financial position at the previous external review in 2010. At that time, because of the economic downturn, funds from the endowment were not available because of investment losses. It was noted that Centre’s financial situation had improved substantially since then. The endowment investments were performing better in an improved market, and as well the Centre has experienced impressive success in obtaining grants and contracts to support its work. They also noted the University’s support in addressing those short-term financial problems. While fundraising was discussed, Board members noted limitations in working through the University’s development office, which had to respond to University-wide fundraising issues. In general, the Advisory Board members were very supportive of the Centre and proud of its many accomplishments.



The discussions with community partners highlight how successful the Centre has been in developing important links and partnerships with the community. The representative from the Ministry of Health identified several joint projects with CARBC, including i-minds and opioid substitution. She noted the long-standing partnership with CARBC, and how the Ministry greatly valued the Centre’s epidemiological surveillance work, which produced highly valued local information for health planning purposes. She described the Centre as the resource to turn to in making evidence-based decisions. She also noted that many CARBC staff and students have been recruited to Ministry projects and positions, and highlighted the Centre’s community orientation as a major factor in the close relationship. The law enforcement representative also highlighted CARBC’s valued role as a knowledge broker and source for information, and noted that impending changes in Canada’s cannabis laws meant that their collaborative relationship with CARBC was expected to increase in the future. The representative from Island Health noted that, in 2012, they began an initiative to increase research capacity in five key areas, including Addiction and Mental Health. CARBC was described as their central partner in this initiative, and they noted developing close links with several CARBC Scientists. As a part of their initiative to increase local research capacity, Dr. Pauly has been appointed as their first Scholar-in-Residence for the next two years. Additionally Dr. Urbanoski was described as a “powerhouse of collaboration” who has been exemplary in working with communities. She noted that the province is creating infrastructure to support research and enhance research capacity, which has important implications for CARBC in the future. In particular, she noted that CARBC is well-positioned to play a lead role in the Strategy for Patient Oriented Research which is being implemented. Participants noted that CARBC has become an important resource for the north of the province, through its affiliate site at the University of Northern British Columbia, with a recognition of the unique issues faced by residents in that part of the province. They indicated that the need to address addiction and mental health issues in the Justice system, and for information sharing between the Justice and Health systems, should create important opportunities for CARBC in the future. They suggested that, with its expertise in ‘big data’ joined with its ability to understand the ‘lived experience’ of those affected by substance abuse problems, CARBC will play an important role in enabling more effective and collaborative responses by the Health and Justice systems and a key partner in addressing these problems. As the conversation continued, it became clear that CARBC is a key community, regional and provincial resource that is a foundational partner in existing and future initiatives. Board members noted how explicit strategic planning initiatives would be useful as a means of mapping future partnership opportunities as well as engaging in deepened knowledge mobilization activities. 3.2 Assessment of CARBC’s Success in Meeting Objectives and Goals.



We assessed CARBC’s success in meeting the six Purposes of a Research Centre, as outlined in the Guidelines for Review of Research Centres: to promote and facilitate collaborative and/or interdisciplinary research and enhancement of research networking capacity and infrastructure; to increase and effectively manage the resources and research support for its members and the wider university community; to provide education and training in research and related skills, especially for graduate and undergraduate students and thereby enhance the academic programs of their constituent academic units; to contribute to the university’s strategic educational and research missions and to support synergies between research, teaching and learning; to transfer and mobilize knowledge gained through research for the benefit of society, via a variety of mechanisms as appropriate; and to enhance the reputation of its members, the constituent academic units, and the university through the quality of its work . CARBC developed five Key Results areas to address these purposes: 1: Building Capacity; 2: Engaging Academic Expertise; 3: Conducting High Quality Research; 4: Dissemination; and 5: Knowledge Mobilisation. We assessed these in comparison to the objectives, goals and performance as documented in CARBC’s Self Assessment, the Strategic Plan from 2010, the Centre’s Annual Reports between 2010/11 and 2015/16, and our discussions on June 13 and 14, 2016. 3.3 Key Result Area 1: Building Capacity

3.3.1 Objectives and Goals: The overarching goal in Key Result Area 1 is to maintain and increase funding support for addictions research in BC, and for CARBC Scientists in particular. Some of the specific metrics identified for this Key Result Area in the 2011-15 Strategic Plan included obtaining $750,000 in funding from national competitions and $125,000 in funding from BC competitions.

3.3.2 Performance Assessment: CARBC has met and substantially exceeded goals in this Key Result Area. Table 1 below from the Self Assessment makes this very clear:

Table 1: Summary of Indicators for Building Capacity

Indicator 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014 2014/2015 2015/2016 Allyears$sPeerreviewedgrants

$1,942,304 $1,139,435 $1,509,196 $1,941,061 $2,123,459 $8,655,455

$sOthergrants&contracts

$1,467,213 $1,404,114 $1,358,756 $2,084,334 $1,803,159 $8,117,576

Incomeallsources

$3,982,964 $3,322,802 $3,723,589 $4,853,256 $4,558,868 $20,441,480

Newgrants

$4,130,000 $3,044,345 $2,946,603 $308,316 $561,392 $10,990,656

Newcontracts

$952,200 $1,956,245 $721,509 $980,241 $897,585 $5,507,780

Total funding from peer review grants exceeded $8,000,000 and total funding from other grants and contracts also exceeded $8,000,000. These totals far exceed the benchmark. It is important to note that this success began in a period of fiscal challenge arising from the



market declines that resulted in reductions in endowment funding prior to 2010. The success of the Centre in meeting and exceeding these targets underscores the ability of the Centre’s Scientists to compete successfully for funding from a variety of sources. It also underscores the high quality of Centre’s scientific staff and their ability to work collaboratively for success in a highly competitive funding environment.

3.4 Key Result Area 2: Engaging Academic Expertise

3.4.1 Objectives and Goals: Research centres at the University of Victoria have a central goal of engaging researchers in the activities of the centre. Among the specific goals related to this Key Result area identified in the 2011-15 Strategic Plan are to engage 11 PhD researchers per year, 3 Postdoctoral fellows per year, and 14 grad students per year.

3.4.2 Performance Assessment: CARBC has achieved substantial success in engaging academic expertise in the work of the Centre. Table 2, taken from the Self Assessment, summarizes indicators in this area:

Table 2: Summary of Indicators for Engaging Academic Expertise.

Indicator 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014 2014/2015 2015/2016UVicFaculty 7 7 5 5 6PhDresearchers 11 13 12 13 16Postdocs 3 3 3 6 5Gradstudents 21 35 38 31 29Undergrads 8 3 4 3 6

The Cente’s ability to attract talented researchers to address its mandate is clearly underscored by these results. In addition to attracting researchers from within the University of Victoria community, the Centre attracts talented researchers to the University as well, which contributes importantly to the University’s reputation in Canada and internationally.

3.5 Key Result Area 3: Conducting High Quality Research

3.5.1 Objectives and Goals: For key result area 3, CARBC’s overall objective is to conduct high quality research that increases understanding of substance use and addiction and informs effective responses. The Centre proposes to accomplish this by conducting innovative research on these topics and publishing the results of these projects in high-quality journals. Several specific goals were identified in the strategic plan. Some of the specific metrics identified in the 2011-15 Strategic Plan included having 15 epidemiological projects initiated, ongoing and/or successfully completed each year, having 10 research projects related to province-wide monitoring of alcohol, tobacco, gambling and other drug use patterns and related harms each year, and having 5 research projects ongoing and/or completed each year dealing with the development and evaluation of more effective community prevention programs.

3.5.2 Performance Assessment: Table 3 provides a quantitative summary from the Self Assessment of the Centre’s accomplishment in achieving its goal of conducting high quality research:



Table 3: Summary of Indicators for Conducting High Quality Research.

Indicator(#projects) 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16BCprojects 37 44 31 27 36N.Americanprojects 10 13 16 16 20Internationalprojects 4 5 7 10 7EpiandMonitoring 15 16 10 14 18Neuroscience 2 5 1 1 1Policy&Regulation 6 5 6 6 11Communityprevention 7 8 5 5 7Treatmentsystems 10 9 16 9 12Socialdeterminants 9 12 6 9 9

These data provide a clear demonstration of the Centre’s academic vitality. All the goals identified in the 2011-15 Strategic Plan were met or exceeded. The range of projects undertaken and successfully completed points to the diversity of topics within the addictions field that the Centre is able to successfully engage and contribute importantly to. The projects range from local community-based projects to those that are provincial, national and international in scope. They range from epidemiological to those with a focus on policy evaluation, community-level harm prevention, social determinants, and treatment systems. This very successful multifactorial and multisectoral engagement with the complex issues of addiction demonstrates the Centre’s exceptional degree of breadth and depth, and is a very positive indicator of future success.

3.6 Key Result Area 4: Dissemination

3.6.1 Objectives and Goals: The fourth goal of the Centre is “to disseminate knowledge that increases understanding of substance use and addiction, awareness of related harms and identifies effectiveness responses”. Several quantitative goals were set in the 2011-15 Strategic Plan for Key Result Area 4. These included receiving 500 citations per year in peer reviewed journals of research by CARBC Scientists and graduate students, publishing 70 articles per year in peer reviewed journals, and teaching 6 courses per year by CARBC members involving additions issues.

3.6.2 Performance Assessment: The Self Assessment presents the following quantitative indicators related to achievement of the goals in key result area 4:

Table 4: Summary of Indicators for Dissemination.

Indicator 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16Peerreviewedarticles 73 81 84 82 76Citations 503 1560 1435 1,392 1,470Invitedpresentations 45 56 55 41 44Otherpresentations 42 39 30 37 56CoursestaughtUVic 2 23 9 7 16Coursestaughtother 3 7 3 3 6



Perhaps the most important indicator of the scientific success of a research centre is its ability to contribute to the larger body of knowledge in its area of focus through its dissemination activities. Again, the Centre has met or exceeded the goals in this key area. For example, while the goal set for citations per year was 500, the annual citation rate in recent years is about three times the goal. The goal of 70 peer-reviewed articles per year has also been met and exceeded in each year since the previous review. The goal of teaching 6 courses per year involving addictions issues at UVic initially appeared difficult to achieve, but by 2015/16 this target as well was being greatly exceeded.

3.7 Key Result Area 5: Knowledge Mobilisation

3.7.1 Objectives and Goals: The overarching goal of Key Result Area 5 is “to present knowledge in ways that maximize the positive impact on policy, practice and public discourse.” Research impact is closely linked to scientific success, and reflects the degree to which a centre’s activities are influencing the world and people’s lives. Specific performance indicators identified for this result area include engaging and collaborating in 15 projects per year related to policy and practice, and receiving at least 5 invitations per year to make submission to policy forums, select committees, or similar bodies.

3.7.2 Performance Assessment: Table 5, from the Self Assessment, presents information on Centre activities relevant to this Key Performance Area per year:

Table 5: Summary of Indicators for Knowledge Mobilisation

Indicator 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16Policy/Practiceprojects 35 25 36 28 39Invitedsubmissions 6 4 7 9 10Resourcescreated 23 39 38 34 68Websitevisits 28,777 33,917 55,000+ 28,855 28,492Mediastories 137 129 166 132 170

The mobilization of knowledge in the service of the public good is often a goal that is overlooked by research centres, or appears too distant from the activities of the centre. CARBC has made knowledge mobilization a central component of its activities, and it appears that this central linkage of knowledge mobilization to Centre activities has been very successful. It is clear the CARBC has met or exceeded the goals in the 2011-15 Strategic Plan. This reflects the Centre’s emphasis on these activities. It also contributes to the Centre’s high visibility locally, and in the broader research, programming and policy communities. 3.8 Review Panel Comments This review involved a comprehensive assessment of CARBC, incorporating detailed discussions with the Centre’s staff and stakeholders as well as evaluation of the extent to which the Centre has met the goals and objectives set by the University for research centres and set by the Centre for itself. These comments will first address the degree to which the Centre has met the university’s, and its own, expectations, followed by an assessment of the



Centre as a resource to the university and the community, and conclude with an assessment of the international stature of the Centre. CARBC appears to have very successfully met all the university’s expectations of a research centre, as identified in the Research Centre Review Guidelines. Over the past 5 years, the Centre has increased its engagement with university departments in several ways. These include contributing to the University’s educational mandate through contributions to the teaching mandate of several departments, through providing an important resource for some of the University’s most productive and engaged researchers to extend their scientific scope and impact, and through providing a resource for graduate students to engage in meaningful and impactful research. The Centre has clearly become a valued resource and partner to the community, both locally and more broadly. This outcome is closely linked to the Centre’s emphasis on knowledge mobilization, which engages the Centre in work directly with community and other partners to address ‘on the ground’ issues by applying research knowledge to address addictions issues faced by communities, schools, colleges and universities and other partners. The assessment of the scientific reputation of the Centre involves considering its international impact as a scientific centre of excellence. In order to do this, it is important to take into account the Centre’s scientific achievements and impact, particularly with regards to funding, publication and citation rate, and impact on policy and programs, and consider these in relation to comparable centres internationally. To make these comparisons, we first identified two research centres that have achieved an international reputation as addictions research centres of excellence. These centres are the Prevention Research Centre (PRC) in Berkeley, California affiliated with the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, and the Centre for Social Research on Alcohol and Drugs (SoRAD) at Stockholm University. Both are widely recognized for their extended record of achievement in the addictions field. Based on the data described above, it is the Panel’s opinion that CARBC’s impact as an international centre of scientific excellence now rivals or exceeds these two centres. For example, CARBC’s achievements in funding, publication and citation rates are comparable to these centres, despite the fact that both have a much longer history than CARBC. Individual CARBC scientific staff are widely recognized as international leaders in their areas of expertise, comparable to leading scientific staff at PRC and SoRAD. Internationally, policy and programs are being influenced by CARBC research. The presence of the Centre at the University of Victoria contributes substantially to the University’s growing reputation as a leading international research university and a centre of research excellence. Nevertheless, the Centre faces issues that will need to be considered and addressed moving into the future. The most significant one is leadership and renewal, as Centre leadership and staff consider retirement. While no specific retirement plans were presented to the Panel, the issue was raised in several contexts in meetings with staff and stakeholders. Several indicators point to likely success in dealing with this issue. First, the Centre has achieved a reputation as a place where excellent research on addictions can be conducted, as witnessed by the successful recruitment of Dr. Cheryl Cherpitel, a leading international expert on alcohol, drugs and injury, and more recently of Dr. Karen Urbanoski, widely considered one



of the leading young scientists in addictions treatment systems. This bodes well for the Centre’s ability to attract leading addictions researchers in the future. Nevertheless, the potential retirement of Centre leadership will create a leadership gap that will be difficult to fill. Several options are available in seeking to fill leadership positions, including external searches. Such an external search would provide the opportunity to attract senior scientists with a proven track record to the Centre and the University. On the other hand, it must be recognized that the current working environment and relationships within the Centre, and between the Centre and the University, are truly excellent. The excellent working climate at the Centre can largely be attributed to the leadership of the Centre and its senior staff. Thus, ensuring continuity of the working climate of the Centre must be a central concern in filling leadership roles at the Centre. Another and related issue is the question of whether to renew the terms of the current leadership team beyond the end of the present 5-year terms. As noted above, this review has determined that the Centre has achieved an exceptional degree of success in a relatively short period of time. The Centre is widely recognized as an international centre of excellence in addictions research, it is highly valued by community partners within and outside the University, it is an outstanding resource for the University and members of other departments, and the working climate of the Centre is exceptional. This remarkable degree of success can largely be credited to the current leadership team (Drs. Stockwell and Macdonald and Mr. Reist). Thus, we believe the best decision would be to retain these individuals in their positions. An additional set of issues relates to the Centre’s status as a research centre within the University. Similar challenges were noted in the previous review, and we first note that significant progress has been made in sorting through these matters over the past five years. This has resulted in a closer integration of the Centre with University departments and has enabled the many substantial benefits accruing to the University with the presence of a world-class research centre, including access by faculty members and graduate students to excellent research facilities, enhancement of the University’s teaching mandate, and enhancement of the University’s national and international reputation. On the other hand, some issues remain. One that continues to present challenges is the engagement of faculty members, and in particular new faculty members, with the Centre. This has remained a challenge because of the nature of the hiring process for faculty at the University. Faculty are hired by departments, and in particular new faculty seeking tenure may encounter disincentives to engaging with the Centre since they are seeking to fulfill departmental requirements for tenure. Several promising suggestions to remedy this concern were made over the course of the visit. One suggestion was that one or two Centre faculty members could serve on relevant hiring committees, perhaps including as co-chair. Centre faculty might also be involved in the drafting of hiring letters, so that engagement with Centre activities becomes a more formal expectation for new hires who are expected to be engaged with the Centre. Another possibility would be the creation of a Research Professor position by the University, with increased expectations for research involvement beyond the 40% currently recommended. A third possibility would be the creation of one or more ongoing Postdoctoral Fellowships, that would serve to attract promising new faculty to the Centre and



also serve as a career bridge for promising Centre students as they transition to an academic career. Another challenge related to the Centre’s status as a research centre relates to the differential treatment accorded to staff paid by the university versus those paid through grants and contacts. The latter group are necessary to the success of projects, and of the Centre more generally. The ability to retain experienced and knowledgeable staff is often essential to obtaining new funding, and for achieving the Centre’s community engagement and academic excellence mandates more generally. However, staff paid through grants and contracts do not participate in the University’s benefits plan (e.g., dental plan, pension). This is an equity issue that also impacts negatively on the Centre’s ability to retain essential personnel. This issue has also been faced by other academic institutions in Canada, many of which have found ways to enable contract staff to participate in benefits plans. 3.9 Review of Proposed Future Objects and Activities The panel reviewed proposed future objectives and activities for the Centre as outlined in the Centre’s Self Assessment and through discussions with Centre staff. Fundamental to the Centre’s future and continued success will be its success in attracting funding. Funding plans and strategies are highlighted in the Self Assessment, and these plans in addition to discussions with staff and stakeholders provide confidence that the Centre will continue its enviable level of success in attracting funding. The Centre has assembled an outstanding team of senior investigators who work collaboratively to develop strong proposals in an area that appears likely to receive higher priority from funders in the future. As well, its exceptional links to community-based organisations and government mean that it is well-situated to be an important partner in increased addictions programming and evaluation activities that are being planned. Specific plans for each of the research and knowledge mobilisation teams were outlined in the Self Assessment. These plans appear to be well thought out, aligned with current research needs and funding opportunities, and in general well-positioned to maintain and increase the Centre’s local and international reputation and value to the university and community. Among other strengths of the plans include taking advantage of opportunities at the University to engage and integrate early and mid-career researchers into the research team, and increase the engagement of senior researchers (Benoit-Jansson and Roth teams), building on Centre success in implementing and expanding the scope of harm-reduction initiatives such as MAPs (Pauly team), contribute to the knowledge base necessary to guide responses to the impending legalization of cannabis in Canada (Macdonald team), respond to increasing demand for epidemiological evidence to guide the implementation of, and assess the impact of, alcohol and drug policies (Stockwell-Zhao team), providing the knowledge base for evidence-informed and effective addiction treatment systems (Urbanoski team), and expand the engagement of successful knowledge mobilization activities with communities, campuses and schools and document the theory and processes underlying these successful knowledge mobilization efforts (Knowledge Mobilisation team). The impressive scope of



these plans highlights the exceptional ability of the Centre to respond to the complex nature of addictions issues and to lead local, national and international efforts to address them. 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS This review has involved a comprehensive assessment of CARBC’s activities and achievements over the past 5 years, including assessment of the extent to which the Centre has met goals set internally and by the University, extensive discussions with Centre staff and stakeholders, and an evaluation of how the Centre compares to addiction research centres in other countries that are acknowledged to be international leaders in this field. As a result, the Panel recommends unanimously and strongly that the Centre be continued. The achievements of the Scientists and staff at the Centre over the past five years have been exceptional, marked by substantial success in competing for grants and contracts, publishing leading-edge research, impacting the local and broader community with innovative and valued knowledge mobilization activities, and achieving provincial, national and international recognition for the excellence of the Centre and for the University as well. The Centre is also very well situated to maintain and increase its leadership in an area that will likely be of increasing importance to the public, government and funders in the future. While the Centre has achieved an enviable degree of success over the past five years, some challenges will be faced in the next few years. Most important are the related issues of leadership and renewal of senior faculty that may be considering retirement. With regards to the former, much of the success of the Centre can be attributed to the current leadership team, and re-affirmation of their leadership role seems to be an ideal solution. Nevertheless, it would seem to be important to begin planning for their eventual departure or decision to step away from senior administrative roles. With regards to the latter, this presents both challenges and opportunities. As senior faculty, who have contributed so substantially to the Centre’s success, draw closer to retirement age they may be able to reduce their engagement with their home departments and increase their engagement with the Centre. However, challenges remain in engaging new and junior faculty with the Centre, related in part to the University’s requirements that new faculty must be hired through departments. Some ways to address this challenge were suggested, including closer engagement of the Centre with departmental hiring processes, creation of a new faculty stream more weighted towards research, and developing ongoing Postdoctoral positions to attract new faculty and to provide bridging to promising Centre graduates. Another challenge is related to University policies dealing with benefits provision. In contrast to University staff, many or most Centre staff are considered contract staff who do not have access to benefits such as dental and pension plans. This is an equity issue that creates difficulties in retaining those talented and experienced Centre staff who are essential to its success. In summary, CARBC is a very successful centre that is an exceptional resource for the University, and the strong and unanimous recommendation of the Panel is that it be continued. While challenges are arising that must be successfully dealt with, the Panel is confident that CARBC will continue to be an international leader in addictions research and a source of the new knowledge needed to successfully address the many challenges that addictions creates for society.


CARBCResponseto2016ExternalReviewThefacultyandstaffatCARBCwelcomethisconstructiveandpositivereview.Foursetsofrecommendationshavebeenidentifiedbelowalongwithourresponsestothese.Recommendation1:ThePanelrecommendsunanimouslyandstronglythattheCentrebecontinued.Response:Weareofcoursegratefulforthisrecommendation.Recommendation2:Re:Leadershipandrenewalofseniorfacultythatmaybeconsideringretirement.Planningforthisneedstobegin.SeniorfacultymaybeabletoreducetheirengagementwiththeirhomedepartmentsandincreasetheirengagementwiththeCentre.Response:Subjecttospacerestraints,everyeffortwillbemadeistosupportretiringfacultywhowishtoretainengagementwiththeirresearchthroughtheCentre.Resourcespermitting,thismayalsoinvolveprovidingthemwithastipendandadministrativesupports.However,ofmoreimportance,whenseniorfacultyannounceretirementplansweurgethataplanningmeetingoccursearlyonbetweentheVPR,relevantdean,departmentalchairandCentredirector.FollowingthesuccessfulCRChiringprocess,weurgetheORStosupportthehiringprocessbeingco‐chairedbyarepresentativefromtherelevantdepartment/schoolandtheCentre.Wealsorecommendthatappointmentsaresubjecttojointapprovalbytherelevantdepartments/school(i.e.approvalbybothCARBCandthedepartment/school)andtheinterdepartmentalCentrefaculty.OurpastexperienceisthatanythingshortofthisfailstoensureacontributiontoCentreresearchcapacityoccurs.Aprocessneedstobeestablishedthatgivesequalprioritytothesuccessfulcandidatehavinga)specialistaddictionsresearchexpertisethatisnotdilutivebymultipleotherinterestsandb)canmeettheteachingrequirementsoftherelevantdepartments/school.CARBCwouldmakeanappropriateannualcontributiontosalaryinaccordancewithanyreductioninteachingloadagreedto.Itmayalsobevaluabletohaveanearly‘headsup’meetingwithDeansofHSDandSocialSciences,theVPR,AVPRandCentredirectorstodiscussahigherlevelinprincipleapproachtonewappointmentsandotherrecommendationsbelow.Recommendation3:Re:EngagingnewandjuniorfacultywiththeCentre.A)TheCentreneedscloserengagementindepartmentalhiringprocessesB)TheuniversitycreatesanewfacultystreammoreweightedtowardsresearchC)DevelopPostdoctoralpositionstoattractnewfacultyandtoprovidebridgingtopromisingCentregraduates.Response:WecreateanewCARBCScientistpositionforAssistantProfessorfacultyatUVicwithademonstratedinterestinAddictionsResearch.Thiswouldbeacompetitiveprocessandtheappointmentwouldbefortwoyearswiththepossibilityofrenewal.Aonecourseteachingbuyoutwouldbeofferedandsomestart‐upresearchfundsmadeavailable.Thiswouldbepromotedtodeans,chairsandfacultyacrossthecampus.


Wewillprioritisethecreationofpostdoctoralstudentpositionsinourresearchgrants.Wewillconsideralso,fundingpermitting,creatinganongoingCARBCPDFpositionwithatwo‐yeartermtobeadvertisedinternationally.Recommendation4:Re:Universitypoliciesdealingwithbenefitsprovision.ManyormostCentrestaffdonothaveaccesstobenefitssuchasdentalandpensionplans.ThisisanequityissuethatcreatesdifficultiesinretainingthosetalentedandexperiencedCentrestaffwhoareessentialtoitssuccess.Response:WerequestsupportfromsenioradministrationinORSintacklingthisdifficultissue.Inthelastninemonthswehavelostthreeexcellentstafftopositionsthatprovidefullbenefitsandpensionentitlements.WerequestpermissiontosubmitourinternalHumanResourcePolicydocumentasevidenceofalong‐standinginstitutionalcommitmenttoprovidingfairbenefitsandpensionstolongertermresearchassociates,coordinatorsanddataanalystswhenweapplyfortri‐councilgrants.WeunderstandtheUniversityisconcernedaboutadditionalexpenseofprovidingcompulsorybenefitsandpensioncontributionstoallresearchstaffoncampus.Wesuggestthataseparatecategory(orcategories)ofresearchstaffiscreatedinvolvingemploymentlongerthan12monthsandhigher‐levelresponsibilitiesthanthoseofaresearchassistant.FinalnoteonofficespaceWeahavecontinuingshortfallinofficespaceandmanyoftheaboveproposalswouldnecessitatetheavailabilityofadditionalspace.Ourpresentaccommodationisexcellentotherwiseintermsoflocationandlayout.Anidealsolutionwouldbeaccesstooneadditionalsuiteofofficeswithinthewingwecurrentlyoccupy.ThereisonewithspaceforfivepeoplecurrentlyoccupiedbyapersoninvolvedonaninternationalhealthprojectundertheauspicesofHSD.Wewouldrenovatethatspacetocreatetwowellsituatedfacultyofficesplusspaceforthreeorfourgraduatestudents.Thatwouldhelpustofulfiltheplansoutlinedabove.TimStockwellandScottMacdonaldCARBC


Studying Substance Use and Improving Health: A Framework for Research and Knowledge Exchange

A Strategic Plan for 2011-2015


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The input of many individuals and agencies is gratefully acknowledged in the development of this Plan. The participation from members of the Advisory Board, faculty and staff of the Centre was critical. The input of collaborating scientists and affiliates as well as colleagues from other collaborating centres enriched the Plan. Particular acknowledgement goes to the members of the review committee whose report and comments provided direction for building on the past and moving forward.

© August 2011, University of Victoria

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CARBC Centre for Addictions Research of BC TRU Thompson Rivers University UVic University of Victoria UBC University of British Columbia UNBC University of Northern British Columbia


CONTENTS Introduction ......................................................................................................................................1 Setting the Context ............................................................................................................................1

The University Context .............................................................................................................................. 1 A Focus on Substance Use in BC ............................................................................................................... 2 An Independent Centre for Research and Knowledge Exchange ............................................................. 4 The Policy Context .................................................................................................................................... 5 The CARBC Partnership ............................................................................................................................. 5 Some Key Considerations ......................................................................................................................... 6

From Mission to Action ......................................................................................................................7 Mission ...................................................................................................................................................... 7 Guiding Principles ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Actions ...................................................................................................................................................... 8

Key Result Areas, Objectives and Performance Indicators ...................................................................9 Key Result Area 1: To Build Capacity........................................................................................................ 9 Key Result Area 2: To Engage Academic Expertise ................................................................................ 11 Key Result Area 3: Implementation of Quality Research ....................................................................... 12 Key Result Area 4: Dissemination .......................................................................................................... 14 Key Result Area 5: Knowledge Mobilization .......................................................................................... 16

Structures and Resources to Implement the Strategic Plan ................................................................ 17 Advisory Board ........................................................................................................................................ 17 Faculty Committee .................................................................................................................................. 17 CARBC Operational Structure ................................................................................................................. 18 CARBC Site Directors ............................................................................................................................... 19 CARBC Scientists ..................................................................................................................................... 19 CARBC Collaborating Scientists ............................................................................................................... 20 CARBC Affiliates ...................................................................................................................................... 20 Financial Resources ................................................................................................................................. 20

References ....................................................................................................................................... 21


Studying substance use and improving health: A framework for research and knowledge exchange

INTRODUCTION This document presents a renewed five-year strategic plan (2011 to 2015) for the Centre for Addictions Research of BC (CARBC), which was first established as an approved research centre of the University of Victoria (UVic) in 2005. The renewed Plan in many respects follows closely the original five-year plan which was deemed to have been successfully implemented following an independent review process conducted in October 2010. The renewed Plan has also been informed by recommendations emerging from a retreat held for CARBC faculty, staff, students, affiliates and community partners in May 2011, as well as by input from the CARBC Advisory Board. The Plan starts with some context regarding the host institution, discussion of key underlying concepts regarding substance use and related harms, and a brief history of the origins of the Centre. The rest of the Plan presents a revised mission and set of objectives and performance indicators across five Key Result Areas: building capacity for research and knowledge exchange, education and training, conducting high-quality research in designated priority areas, disseminating results to multiple audiences, and contributing to improved policy and practice outcomes.

SETTING THE CONTEXT

THE UNIVERSITY CONTEXT CARBC is a provincial research centre whose main office is situated on the UVic campus. The university offers an intellectual environment where independent scholarly inquiry and academic freedom are embedded in its mandate. Since issues surrounding substance use in society are highly controversial and political, this environment creates a space where innovative and sometimes unpopular research can be freely carried out and appropriate recommendations articulated without undue pressure by vested interests. As well, CARBC offers a unique opportunity within the university where multi-disciplinary research can be conducted on a specific area of content. Current Centre membership is drawn from the disciplines of sociology, psychology, epidemiology, community medicine, bio-statistics, nursing, economics, geography and anthropology. The Centre provides students access to a dynamic learning environment to discuss research ideas with a range of faculty approaching substance use and related issues from diverse perspectives. Teaching by CARBC faculty members helps to provide linkages between the Centre’s research, the academic departments and students in other areas of the university.

CARBC also links to and draws upon significant faculty expertise located at other universities in British Columbia. This is effected through site director agreements such as those currently in place with the University of Northern British Columbia and Thompson Rivers University. It is also made possible through collaboration on funding applications and research and knowledge exchange activities, including co-supervision of graduate students working on projects related to substance use.


A FOCUS ON SUBSTANCE USE IN BC

There is no society on Earth that does not in some way celebrate, depend on, profit from, enjoy and also suffer from the use of psychoactive substances. Most developed and developing societies have well established relationships with and legally sanction the use of older psychoactive substances such as ethanol and nicotine… The last 100 years has also seen an upsurge in the cultivation, manufacture and trade of other psychoactive substances, some quite ancient and others new… For almost all areas of human activity, there are psychoactive substances that are used with the intention of facilitating that activity in some way: religious ceremonies, physical exercise, battle, eating, sex, study, work, dancing, public performances and socializing make up a list indicative of the range… The difference between the enhancement of human performance in some sphere as opposed to its impairment is … a function of the dose taken, the manner of its administration and the setting in which use occurs. (Stockwell, Gruenewald, Toumbourou & Loxley, 2005, p.4).

CARBC’s mandate involves the study of psychoactive substance use, with particular attention to the exploration of ways to minimize negative impacts on individuals and society. Substance use, like other human behaviours, is influenced by multiple factors: personal, social and environmental. Effectively addressing the negative impacts requires understanding the various factors that influence substance use and that contribute to the differential impact of that use (positive or negative). These “determinants of health” extend far beyond individual lifestyle choices or health actions to encompass social, economic and political contexts that shape health capacities and health opportunities. This necessarily involves the study of social and health inequities and their root causes as they relate to substance use, and the development of authentic community partnerships to help reduce harm and promote health.

The negative impact of substance use on health and well-being is best established in relation to tobacco and alcohol. The misuse of prescription drugs likely also has a sizeable negative contribution but this is less well established. Measures of substance use such as smoking prevalence and levels of alcohol consumption correlate with measures of substance-related harms such as hospitalization rates. Together these indicators provide a way to measure and track the relative impact of substance use on the total burden of disease in British Columbia over time.

In BC, smoking prevalence has been steadily decreasing while alcohol consumption has increased. Parallel to this trend, hospitalizations for tobacco-related illnesses have declined while hospitalizations for alcohol-related illnesses have increased. Between 2001 and 2009, alcohol consumption in BC increased faster than in the rest of Canada. Comprehensive public policy interventions for tobacco seem to be having a positive effect on smoking prevalence and the reduction of related harms. Current policy interventions related to alcohol may be having the opposite effect.

The use of alcohol, tobacco and other drugs has a high cost for residents of BC. In 2008, tobacco use was estimated to have caused approximately 5,051 premature deaths, alcohol wholly or partly caused 1,233 deaths, and 293 deaths were due to illicit drugs (see www.AODmonitoring.ca). The latest WHO estimates regarding the burden of disease in North America suggest that alcohol is now the single leading cause of preventable death, illness and disability in the region (Rehm, 2009). The


http://www.aodmonitoring.ca/

total economic cost of substance use problems in BC was last estimated to be just over $6 billion, including only part of the costs to the criminal justice system (Rehm et al, 2006).

The vast majority of British Columbians use alcohol. Many use it in ways that present a low risk of harm to the health and well-being of themselves and those around them. Nonetheless, 42% of alcohol consumed in BC is drunk on high risk drinking days (Stockwell et al, 2009a). Regular consumption of alcohol above low risk drinking guidelines contributes a substantial proportion of alcohol-caused deaths in the province, and 21.5% of British Columbians have five or more alcoholic drinks in a day at least once a month (Stockwell et al, 2009a).

In BC, the 2008 Adolescent Health Survey indicates lower prevalence of alcohol, marijuana and tobacco use among school-aged youth compared with previous years. Heavy drinking episodes (defined as consuming five or more drinks within a two-hour time frame), while declining slightly, remains fairly common among school-aged youth. Even though the overall trend is encouraging, the risky use of alcohol remains a significant concern in the province (Stewart et al, 2009).

There also remains a substantial problem with illicit drug use in British Columbia. The BC AOD Monitoring Project’s ongoing surveys of illicit drug users in Victoria and Vancouver indicate shifting and differing rates of injection drug use between the two cities. Vancouver has significantly higher rates of crystal meth, heroin and marijuana use, while Victoria has significantly higher rates of injection of dilaudid and morphine (Ivsins et al, 2010). There has also been a significant shift towards crack cocaine use in British Columbia and North America generally, which presents its own unique set of problems associated with dependence, mental health sequelae and risks of transmission of blood-borne viruses through the sharing of smoking equipment.

A particular focus of research at CARBC over the past five years has been on the patterns and consequences of combining different drugs at the same time, both legal and illegal. The mixture of alcohol with various types of stimulants has been a marked trend over the last decade, being expressed in terms of alcohol combined with cocaine or crack (Macdonald et al, 2004; Pakula et al, 2009) on the one hand and often highly caffeinated "energy drinks" on the other (Brache et al, in press). In each case, there is evidence that this pattern of use results in greater consumption of both alcohol and the stimulant than if either was consumed in isolation - with increased risks of harm. Combined use of opioid drugs with alcohol and/or other central nervous system depressant drugs increases risk of overdose, and combined alcohol and marijuana use before driving appears to increase risk of road crashes beyond the use of either substance in isolation. CARBC scholars have been involved in research that aims to identify why there are differences in substance use and health outcomes across the life course as a result of inequities in access to healthcare and other key resources, including employment, housing, training and so forth (Benoit et al, 2008). Complementary to this focus is research on the effectiveness of policy and program interventions that reduce the harms of substance use among vulnerable and marginalized populations.

In short, substance use is related to health and social problems that result in considerable economic cost to the people of British Columbia. While the bulk of this burden is contributed by legally available psychoactive drugs, a growing amount of preventable health and social problems are contributed by the use of illegal drugs and also the combined use of both legal and illegal drugs.


By investigating the distal, proximate and individual determinants of substance use, evaluating interventions, developing and promoting effective responses and monitoring trends, CARBC contributes to addressing these substantial problems and reducing the burden in terms of health, social and economic consequences. This renewed Plan has been developed to provide a statement of the broad strategic directions CARBC will take over the next five years. It sets out the principles that will govern our work and the partnerships we will build on and further develop to achieve our objectives. It also lays out the performance indicators we will use to measure progress.

AN INDEPENDENT CENTRE FOR RESEARCH AND KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE Solutions and strategies for dealing with the problems of substance use are often controversial and can be the topic of heated public debate. In relation to pharmaceutical drugs, gambling, alcohol and tobacco, there are powerful commercial vested interests whose primary allegiance is to their shareholders, albeit within a regulatory framework. In relation to illicit drugs, harm reduction interventions and even the location of treatment services can be strongly opposed. In both instances, there is a strong case for an independent centre to provide expert commentary on the extent and nature of problems, identify evidence-based solutions, and monitor and evaluate harm reduction strategies so as to better inform the community and all involved in policy, prevention and treatment systems.

An endowment of $10.55 million to UVic from the BC Addiction Foundation in mid-2005 created the basis for such an independent centre. The proposal from UVic was supported with an agreement from the three other major research universities in BC for the formation of a collaborative network of addictions researchers across the four campuses. The University of Victoria also committed a total of seven faculty appointments to contribute to the Centre by 2008. In early 2004, funding from the BC Ministry of Health, the Provincial Health Services Authority, the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, and Health Canada also enabled the creation of a Knowledge Exchange Unit under the auspices of CARBC. The University of Victoria has a strong tradition of psychosocial and community-based research in areas such as health promotion, youth, ageing and Indigenous health, and thus provided an ideal administrative base for such a new Centre to develop.

The creation of CARBC was first recommended by a task group consisting of health practitioners, scientists, community partners and government officials in the addictions field who were appointed by the BC government to study and make recommendations on the future of addiction services. The task group was led by the Kaiser Foundation, an independent, privately funded agency with a long and distinguished track record of policy development and knowledge exchange in the BC addictions field. The task group’s March 2001 report, Weaving Threads Together, made recommendations to prevent and reduce harms from substance use and problem gambling. They also recommended investment in the infrastructure necessary to evaluate outcomes and enhance knowledge and practice. The BC Addiction Foundation was established to oversee the process of establishing CARBC, and formally approved the permanent transfer of funds for this purpose to UVic in April 2005. An extract from the memorandum of understanding between UVic and the BC Addiction Foundation is reproduced in Appendix A.


Since the inception of CARBC, a number of other agencies have adopted a research networking and dissemination role with a special focus on addictions. These include the BC Mental Health and Addictions Research Network (funded by the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research until March 2010), BC Mental Health and Addiction Services (an agency of the BC Provincial Health Services Authority), the Centre for Applied Research on Mental Health and Addiction (Simon Fraser University), the UBC Leading Edge Chair in Addiction Medicine, and the Alcohol and Social Responsibility Unit coordinated through the University College of the Fraser Valley. CARBC has had links with each of these groups, while remaining distinct as the only provincial agency that is arm’s length from government, and while working across issues of concern to multiple government departments, including health, police, education and liquor licensing. CARBC will continue to develop its role, where possible, in partnership with these and other agencies with potentially overlapping functions.

THE POLICY CONTEXT There are markedly different policy contexts relating to the different psychoactive substances widely used in British Columbia, with increasingly strict controls over the sale and promotion of tobacco use, loosening controls over the distribution and promotion of alcohol, a complex environment regarding cannabis which is still available on prescription and through the unique Canadian system of Compassion Clubs, and the legal prohibition of sale and use of a range of illicit substances. Against this backdrop, Canada - and British Columbia in particular - has been progressive in the development of services and resources for individuals who continue to use illicit drugs so that they minimize risks to themselves and others, e.g., of the transmission of blood-borne viruses through the sharing of drug-using equipment and of drug overdose. CARBC has contributed to a number of provincial policy statements in relation to methadone prescribing (Reist, 2010), housing and harm reduction (Pauly et al, 2011), tobacco (BC Ministry of Health, 2006a), and the prevention of harmful substance use (BC Ministry of Health, 2006b). CARBC has also contributed policy-relevant research studies and reviews regarding issues such as safe drug consumption sites (Fischer et al, 2007), privatization of the government alcohol monopoly (Stockwell et al, 2011), alcohol and public health policy (Kendall, 2008), hours of trading for bars and nightclubs (Stockwell et al, 2009b), and drug testing in the workplace (Macdonald et al, 2010).

CARBC will continue to work with its partners in the government and non-government sectors to contribute to policy development frameworks, while being cognisant of significant alcohol and other drug policy statements such as, Healthy Minds, Healthy People: A 10-year Plan to Address Mental Health and Substance Use in British Columbia (British Columbia, 2010) and Towards a Culture of Moderation: Recommendations for a National Alcohol Strategy (National Alcohol Strategy Working Group, 2007).

THE CARBC PARTNERSHIP Since the inception of CARBC, initial partnerships were established beyond the original three universities, with other individuals and agencies with significant addictions research expertise in BC and elsewhere. Formal agreements are still established and site directors are located at each of the following:

• University of Northern British Columbia • Thompson Rivers University


CARBC has established “collaborating centre” agreements with addiction research institutions in Canada and other countries. So far, these include the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse (Ontario), the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (Ontario), the Prevention Research Center (USA), the Alcohol Research Group (USA), the MRC Alcohol and Drug Abuse Research Unit (South Africa) and the National Drug Research Institute (Australia). It will be important for other partnerships to be developed as CARBC’s research and networking activities expand. It will be valuable for CARBC to forge further links with other centres in Canada and internationally with expertise in tobacco, alcohol, gambling and other substance use issues.

Of equal importance are partnerships with individual researchers in BC, elsewhere in North America and overseas who have interest and expertise in addictions-related research. We are fortunate to have active collaborations with many researchers located on other BC university campuses and research agencies, including the University of British Columbia, Simon Fraser University, Kwantlen College and the University College of the Fraser Valley.

SOME KEY CONSIDERATIONS

Concepts and terminology There are many terms used to describe the problematic use of psychoactive substances and problem behaviours such as gambling. The term "addiction" has wide currency even though there is no such term used in medicine or in international classifications of diseases. The common understanding of the term is of excessive and problematic use of a drug that is hard for the individual to control. The term is now frequently used for addictions or excessive attachment to a wide range of things and activities such as food, exercise and the internet. In this document, the term "addiction" will be used to refer primarily to problematic use of psychoactive substances and also to problem gambling. We avoid, however, terms referring to individuals as "addicts" or "alcoholics" as well as to the terms "drug abuse" or "alcohol abuse" as each of these can be seen to be derogatory. The problems caused by and associated with both substance use and gambling are far broader than might be suggested by the term “addiction”. They include problems partly or wholly caused by intoxication, such as injuries and some acute illnesses, long term effects on health of a pattern of substance use that does not otherwise disrupt social functioning, acute and chronic health problems caused by unsafe ways of using drugs (e.g., using dirty needles) that are otherwise unrelated to pharmacological effects and impacts on other people, and impacts of the criminal justice system on people engaging in illegal behaviours. The mandate of CARBC extends beyond an exclusive focus on what might traditionally be referred to as "addiction”.

“Policy” and “practice” are also key terms. “Policy” is used here to refer to aspects of community, private sector and government structures that can be influenced by decision makers – and which, in this context, have implications for substance use problems and addictions. Some diverse examples are the nature of sanctions for personal cannabis use, the way drink-driving laws are intended to be enforced, the recommended levels of methadone prescribed for opioid dependence, and the rate of taxation on tobacco products. “Practice” refers more specifically to the practices of individual professionals in the conduct of their work, whether this be treatment, prevention, harm reduction, law enforcement or policy development.


A community systems approach The Centre supports an ecological approach to understanding problems related to substance use. This approach acknowledges that substance use impacts on and is affected by multiple factors at all levels of society ranging from the individual to the family and social relationships, to school, workplace and local community, and through to provincial, national and even international levels. This model also requires that research is planned to support and guide policies and interventions in multiple sectors across government, non-government and private sectors.

Population health research CARBC recognizes that research, practice and policy have often been constructed to affect the entire population without specific attention to differential effects on women or, for example, on Aboriginal populations. As such, evidence is usually lacking on the impact of population level policies on many subpopulations, as well as for targeted approaches that address vulnerabilities specific to diverse groups of women and men. To this end, CARBC supports an approach to research that looks at the impacts of substance use across and within multiple populations. Population health intervention research takes such an approach. Population health intervention research aims to produce knowledge that has the potential to impact population health through the study of policies and programs in health and other sectors (Hawes & Potvin, 2009).

FROM MISSION TO ACTION

MISSION The mission of CARBC is to be an internationally recognized centre dedicated to the study of psychoactive substance use and addiction in order to support community-wide efforts to promote health and reduce harm.

GUIDING PRINCIPLES

Collaborative relationships Dynamic, collaborative relationships are essential for maintaining relevance to the multi-faceted concerns related to substance use and addictions. Key relationships include those with policy makers, researchers from many disciplines, practitioners and people with personal experience of substance use, addictions and related problems.

Independent research Protection from vested interests is essential to ensure that rigorous research is conducted and communicated clearly, with a view only to furthering the public interest. This will be ensured through excluding representatives of alcohol, tobacco and gaming industries from membership of the Advisory Board and not accepting direct research funding from such sources.

Ethics, social equity and justice Commitment to solid ethical principles governing internal and external relationships, financial management, the conduct of research and the communication of research findings is essential. Also required is a commitment to the promotion of equity and fairness and the pursuit of social justice


through attention to the impact of the social determinants that shape substance use and the development of health inequities.

Reducing risk and increasing protection Attention is required to both immediate factors (e.g., behavioural patterns and contexts) and distal factors (e.g., social, economic and developmental influences) to effectively address the harms from substance use and addictions across the life course.

Harm reduction Recognition that some people will continue to use psychoactive substances and experience related problems is critical, so strategies are needed to reduce harmful consequences in addition to those that aim to directly reduce or prevent high-risk behaviours.

Informed public debate Commitment to informing public debate to achieve effective public policy on substance use and addictions through the communication of research findings is required.

ACTIONS

Building new capacity while complementing existing strengths Prior to the establishment of CARBC, there were already some exceptional strengths in specific research areas relating to addictions. BC researchers were known for their work in relation to preventing problems with injection drug use in particular, as well as research on the biology of dependence, on fetal alcohol syndrome, and on gender issues and addiction. CARBC will strive to complement these existing strengths while filling gaps in areas such as prevention, alcohol policy, program evaluation, treatment systems research and epidemiological monitoring. During the next five-year period, CARBC will need to continue to build capacity in terms of both junior and senior faculty with relevant expertise appointed to the University of Victoria, skilled research staff and increasing numbers of graduate students and postdoctoral fellows engaged in relevant research activities.

Multidisciplinary approaches to substance use and addictions Problematic substance use stems from a complex mix of biological, psychological and social causes. Research on substance use and addictions, on the other hand, has traditionally been conducted within separate disciplines singularly focused on either the biomedical and clinical or socio-cultural and prevention dimensions of addictions, limiting the exchange of knowledge across the disciplines and to the knowledge users. While the focus of the Centre’s programs is on the psychosocial aspects of substance use and addictions, we will promote collaboration among researchers drawn from a broad range of disciplinary areas, including biomedical, psychological, social, epidemiological and historical perspectives. In 2011, CARBC scientists span the disciplines of sociology, nursing, health information sciences, epidemiology, community medicine, psychology and health economics. Affiliated scientists also encompass the disciplines of anthropology, emergency medicine, public health and political science.


Networking and partnerships Research centres at the University of Victoria have a strong record of fostering collaboration among a variety of institutional partners and community stakeholders. To this end, the Centre, while located at the University of Victoria, is based on a model of cooperation among the key research-based stakeholders in BC. To ensure the Centre facilitates research activities throughout the province and stakeholders have a meaningful voice in the activities, there is a commitment to involving the stakeholders in the development of the Centre’s research priorities and projects. Of particular significance to the forthcoming five-year period is the opportunity for the Centre to contribute to the province’s new 10-year plan to improve responses to mental health and substance use, Healthy Minds, Healthy People (British Columbia, 2010).

Knowledge exchange CARBC is committed to facilitating linkage and exchange between researchers, policy makers, professionals and communities, and to developing capacity as a knowledge broker within these relationships. This involves providing easy access to evidence-based information that can be used by a range of audiences in various settings (e.g., research, policy, service system, community). In particular, the Centre seeks to ensure policy makers from all levels of government have access to practical evidence provided in a clear manner.

KEY RESULT AREAS, OBJECTIVES AND PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Five Key Result Areas have been identified for the period of this Plan, each of which has a number of main objectives linked to at least one performance indicator. These are summarized below in Tables 1 to 5 for each Key Result Area. Benchmarks for these indicators have been calculated based on the period 2006-2010. Many of them are numeric indicators that focus on the amount and completion of activities in priority areas.

KEY RESULT AREA 1: TO BUILD CAPACITY “To build infrastructure and capacity across BC to conduct research and knowledge exchange that will increase understanding and support more effective responses to substance use.”

In the first five years, CARBC experienced substantial growth in the number of core scientists and collaborating scientists at the University of Victoria, meeting commitments made when agreeing to host the Centre. It is envisaged that this growth will continue over the next five years, though at a slower pace. The development of infrastructure will become particularly focused on obtaining funds for research and knowledge exchange activities. CARBC obtains base funding through a $10.5 million endowment that provides basic infrastructure funds for our operations. In order to conduct independent research, additional funds are needed in the form of peer reviewed grants. As well, CARBC is responsive to external priorities which are reflected by research contracts, often from governmental agencies, or through collaborations with community groups. Finally, CARBC has gained considerable expertise in data management and statistics and has established several databases that can be used by others for research purposes.


Specific initiatives planned for 2011-2015 include: The appointment of two more faculty at the University Victoria, one of whom will be in the new School of Public Health, and obtaining at least two senior research fellowships or chairs in areas relevant to the study of substance use.

Table 1: Performance Indicators for Key Result Area 1

Objectives Performance Indicators

1.1 To maintain or increase funding for substance use and health research at CARBC

• Maintain or increase funding for substance use research won by CARBC scientists from (a) Canadian and international peer reviewed sources (b) Canadian and international contracts

Benchmarks: (a) $750,000 (b) $150,000 per annum

1.2 To maintain or increase funding for knowledge exchange concerning substance use and health promotion at CARBC

• Maintain or increase funding for substance use knowledge exchange held by CARBC from (a) Canadian and international peer reviewed sources (b) Canadian and international contracts

Benchmarks: (a) $250,000 (b) $750,000 per annum

1.3 To maintain or increase the number of funding applications for long-term research programs addressing research areas of high priority in BC

• Maintain or increase number of funding applications for new research programs identified in one or more identified priority areas (see Key Result Area 2)

Benchmark: 15 applications

1.4 To achieve successful collaborations with researchers and community partners on projects that will lead to increased capacity and increased expertise in addictions research

• Number of projects initiated that involve (a) community partners (b) researchers with relevant expertise who are new to substance use and addictions research

Benchmarks: (a) 12 (b) 6

1.5 To attract and retain high quality researchers from a broad range of disciplines to the BC addictions field

• Maintain or increase number of PhD-qualified researchers and affiliates with CARBC each year

• Maintain or increase number of postdoctoral fellows with CARBC

Benchmarks: 11 / 3

1.6 To improve access to data sets and platforms for addiction researchers

• Number of data sets created, developed and/or maintained for use by BC researchers

Benchmark: 7


KEY RESULT AREA 2: TO ENGAGE ACADEMIC EXPERTISE “To capitalize on the resources of BC universities through the recruitment of high-calibre graduate and postdoctoral students from multiple relevant disciplines to the study of substance use, addiction and harm reduction.”

CARBC has contributed significantly to graduate student mentorship in the last five years and plans to enhance its activities in this area in the next five years. Centre scientists and research affiliates currently supervise 22 graduate students and three postdoctoral fellows. CARBC had contributed significantly to UVic’s newly launched Social Dimensions of Health Research (SDHR) program - currently the Centre has provided trainee grants to four SDHR students and supervision to a total of nine. The Centre also employs former and current trainees to conduct research and evaluation for its diverse projects. Priorities for future development include increasing trainee support in the Centre’s priority research areas, increasing the number of masters, doctoral and postdoctoral trainees located at the Centre, development of an interdisciplinary concentration in substance use and addictions, initially at the graduate level but eventually at the undergraduate level, increasing recruitment of undergraduate and graduate students as research assistants on the Centre’s projects.

Specific initiatives planned for 2011-2015 include: Collaboration with the UVic Director of the Health Research and Education Council to create (a) an undergraduate minor in the area of substance use policy and practice, (b) a special stream of the SDHR interdisciplinary program dedicated to substance use policy and practice under the support and supervision of CARBC faculty, and (c) scholarships to encourage high quality graduate students to enrol in the SDHR program while studying topics relevant to substance use and/or addiction. These initiatives would span multiple departments and faculty.



2.1 To attract and retain high quality researchers from a broad range of disciplines to the BC substance use and addictions field

• Maintain or increase number of PhD-qualified researchers and affiliates with CARBC each year

• Maintain or increase number of postdoctoral fellows with CARBC

Benchmarks: 11 / 3

2.2 To attract and retain high quality students from a broad range of disciplines to the BC substance use and addictions field

• Maintain or increase number of CARBC students under supervision per year

Benchmark: 14


KEY RESULT AREA 3: IMPLEMENTATION OF QUALITY RESEARCH “To conduct high quality research that increases understanding of substance use, addiction and related harms in order to inform effective responses and promote health.”

The diverse research programs already underway at CARBC build upon a strong foundation of multidisciplinary expertise, including specific expertise in research design and statistical analysis. Established areas of content expertise include alcohol and public health policy, homelessness and harm reduction, substance use by vulnerable populations, substance use in developmental context, epidemiological monitoring of trends in substance use and related harms, substance use and injury, and patterns of combined alcohol and other substance use and related harms.

Specific initiatives planned for 2011-2015 include: Continuing to take advantage of the "natural experiments" in Canadian alcohol policy to increase understanding of the public health and safety impacts of less well studied initiatives such as minimum liquor prices and the privatization of government alcohol monopolies, the evaluation of Herway Home (a new array of services for vulnerable women with substance use problems), analysis of the unique longitudinal Victoria Healthy Use Survey which has tracked health-related behaviours of adolescents from age 12 to over age 30 to explore the interplay between risk and protection factors and patterns of substance use and health and mental health consequences, the evaluation of managed alcohol programs for individuals suffering the twin problems of unstable housing and alcohol dependence, studies of the economic costs and benefits of prevention and treatment strategies, and studies of the relationship between substance use and risky sexual behaviour and the transmission of blood-borne viruses. The appointment of a CARBC scientist with a faculty appointment in Department of Economics will facilitate in the factoring in of economic costs and benefits in our evaluations of policies and programs.

2.3 To provide training opportunities and programs for the development of additional research skills among CARBC staff, students and affiliates, taking advantage of existing opportunities through CIHR and research partners

• Maintain or increase number of research staff and/or students attending conferences or training events

Benchmark: 15

• Contribute to graduate research training programs within CARBC and also university departments at UVic and other BC universities

• Contribute to graduate training in SDHR program at UVic

Benchmark: 8

2.4 To provide mentorship to new researchers and support to existing researchers across a range of community settings

• Attract new substance use researchers to work on CARBC projects under supervision

Benchmark: 6 per year




3.1 To conduct research on the patterns, distribution, determinants and consequences of substance use

• Number of epidemiological projects initiated, ongoing and/or successfully completed each year in this area

Benchmark: 15

3.2 To conduct research that is valued by stakeholders as being of high quality, responsive to emerging issues and relevant to public policy and practice

• Number of CARBC special reports and commissioned reports focused on policy and practice

Benchmark: 5

3.3 To identify key strategic research opportunities that will inform policy, practice, strategy development and implementation

• Number of research projects initiated in response to emerging issues and opportunities that are consistent with this Plan

Benchmark: 5

3.4 To conduct research in the following key priority areas: • Province-wide monitoring of

alcohol, tobacco, gambling and other drug use patterns and related harms

• Studies of the neuroscience and learning bases for drug-seeking behaviour

• The impact of educational, legislative and regulatory strategies to minimize alcohol and other drug-related harms

• Development and evaluation of more effective community prevention programs

• Development and evaluation of more effective treatment systems and programs

• Investigation of the influence of structural determinants and the social contexts of drug use on the implementation of strategies designed to reduce and prevent harmful drug use

• Research and evaluation of effectiveness of knowledge translation and exchange activities and strategies

• Number of research projects ongoing and completed Benchmark: 10

Benchmark: 2 Benchmark: 6

Benchmark: 5

Benchmark: 8 Benchmark: 10 Benchmark: 5


KEY RESULT AREA 4: DISSEMINATION “To disseminate knowledge that increases understanding of substance use and addiction, raises awareness of related harms and identifies effective responses.”

CARBC will continue to use a diverse range of media and outlets for disseminating results of research programs. For research to be useful to decision makers, practitioners and the broader community, it is essential that relevant information is communicated effectively and in ways targeted appropriately for specific audiences. On the one hand, it is vital for the credibility of a university-based research centre that its work is published in peer reviewed journals. There is also value in promoting new publications through the use of media releases as well as for documenting more detailed methodological aspects of studies in technical reports. CARBC has produced a series of more locally relevant statistical bulletins designed to be widely accessible to many audiences. Similarly, a series of policy reports have been prepared by CARBC, often initially commissioned by provincial or federal government departments. The CARBC websites (www.carbc.ca and www.AODmonitoring.ca) have been carefully developed to maximize electronic access to information about CARBC publications, to provide up-to-date information about trends in the patterns of substance use and related harm in British Columbia, and to provide access to data sets for other researchers. Many CARBC researchers also strive to reach, with our dissemination strategies, user groups and individuals personally affected in different ways by substance use and related problems. We see this as one way to reduce the stigma experienced by many individuals who have problematic substance use.

3.5 To develop and maintain significant collaborative projects with other researchers and research centres in BC working on harm reduction, substance use and related areas

• Number of collaborative projects with other BC-based researchers and research agencies each year

Benchmark: 20

3.6 To develop and maintain research projects that engage researchers from several relevant disciplines and which integrate different disciplinary perspectives

• Number of collaborative projects involving multi-disciplinary participation with individuals and other centres both at UVic and other BC campuses and research settings

Benchmark: 25

3.7 To develop and maintain significant collaborative projects with other researchers and research centres in North America

• Number of collaborative projects with other North American researchers and research agencies each year

Benchmark: 10

3.8 To develop collaborative projects with international organizations such as WHO and the International Harm Reduction Association

• Number of collaborations with WHO and other international organizations each year

Benchmark: 5


Specific initiatives planned for 2011-2015 include: Increasing the number of CARBC peer reviewed publications in high impact journals, continuing the series of focused CARBC statistical bulletins and policy reports on topical issues, introducing an interactive component to the BC Alcohol and Other Drug Monitoring website to facilitate the creation of tailor-made reports for local areas on particular topics of interest.



4.1 To publish research findings in articles in peer reviewed journals

• Number of articles published each year by CARBC researchers and students in peer reviewed journals

Benchmark: 70

4.2 To publish research findings in book chapters, books and research monographs

• Number of book chapters, books or research monographs published by CARBC researchers and students each year

Benchmark: 25

4.3 To disseminate research findings through reports, systematic reviews and other resources

• Number of reports, systematic reviews or other resources published each year

Benchmark: 36

4.4 To achieve a high academic impact for BC addictions-related research so that it is well known, frequently requested and often cited

• Number of citations in peer reviewed journals of research by CARBC scientists and graduate students per year

Benchmark: 500

4.5 To conduct seminars, lectures and occasional conferences on the state of knowledge and its application to policy, practice and the research agenda

• Number of public research seminars, symposia or conferences convened or co-convened by CARBC

• Number of invitations to CARBC researchers to present at conferences or symposia each year

• Number of papers accepted for presentation by CARBC researchers and students at conferences or symposia each year

Benchmarks: 5 / 25 / 35

4.6 To contribute to teaching programs on substance use and addictions for undergraduate and graduate courses/programs

• Number of courses in addictions issues taught by CARBC members at UVic

• Number of courses in addictions issues taught by CARBC members at other campuses

Benchmarks: 6 / 3


KEY RESULT AREA 5: KNOWLEDGE MOBILIZATION “To contribute to constructive communication and cooperation between producers, intermediaries and users of various types of knowledge for the implementation of evidence-based policy and practice.”

CARBC has contributed significantly to knowledge exchange related to substance use in a variety of ways. The Centre maintains a team dedicated to knowledge exchange that nurtures relationships, facilitates dialogues, develops information products, and contributes to provincial, national and international discussions related to the application of knowledge and evidence. Priorities for future development include focusing efforts around key audiences and settings, and creating improved linkages between the Centre’s research and knowledge exchange efforts.

Specific initiatives planned for 2011-2015 include: Initiating a major new symposium to be held in BC on alternate years to the Issues of Substance conference which will be designed to bring together networks of researchers, policy makers, practitioners, users and other community groups. The first symposium will be organized for the fall of 2012 and on alternate years thereafter. Collaboration with other research centres, government and community partners will be sought.



5.1 To ensure access to relevant knowledge while working in partnership with policy makers and practitioners in planning and implementing projects to address substance use

• Number of projects in which CARBC members collaborate with policy makers or practitioners

Benchmark: 15

5.2 To provide proposals, briefings and submissions to government and parliamentary inquiries, policy advisors and relevant provincial and national committees on emerging issues related to substance use

• Number of policy proposals contributed to by CARBC members each year

• Number of invitations received each year to make submissions to policy forums, select committees or other such bodies

• Number of provincial or national committees, advisory boards or other such bodies on which CARBC members are active

Benchmarks: 5 / 5 / 20

5.3 To develop and promote resources with the potential to make direct contributions to policies, programs or service delivery systems

• Number of resources completed in any one year

Benchmark: 10


STRUCTURES AND RESOURCES TO IMPLEMENT THE STRATEGIC PLAN

ADVISORY BOARD The CARBC Advisory Board meets annually and is chaired by Prof. Michael Prince of the University of Victoria, a distinguished Canadian scholar in the field of disability and public policy. Membership of the Board includes people with a wide range of relevant expertise from the fields of healthcare, academia, addiction research, community organizations, advocacy for drug users and administration. The Board contributes to the development of overall strategic direction, receives financial reports and performance data, and will advise on the implementation of this Plan. See Appendix B for full terms of reference and membership.

FACULTY COMMITTEE Membership on the CARBC Faculty Committee includes directors, scientists and the CARBC administrator. Meetings occur every four to six weeks. The responsibilities of the CARBC Faculty Committee include:

• Planning the implementation of strategic research directions • Developing priorities for Centre activities and establishing working groups to implement these • Promoting research initiatives, projects and applications for funding • Reviewing applications for membership • Reviewing policies and procedures • Planning public seminar series

5.4 To facilitate mechanisms that increase the sharing of knowledge among policy makers, practitioners, researchers and community members related to challenges, trends and effective interventions for promoting health and preventing harm related to substance use

• Number of networks or communities of practice in which CARBC members are active

• Number of multi-sectoral symposia or knowledge exchange events each year

Benchmarks: 20 / 1

5.5 To provide access to balanced factual information on substance use and related harms and health promotion approaches through a variety of knowledge exchange strategies

• Number of visits to CARBC websites each year • Number of presentations/workshops/displays each year • Number of articles in the print media and interviews used

by the electronic media annually as a result of CARBC activities

• Number of e-bulletins/blog articles published each year • Publication of articles from CARBC members in magazines,

newsletters, websites and unrefereed journals each year • Number of consultations provided each year

Benchmarks: 30,000 / 15 / 150 / 10 / 5 / 10


CARBC OPERATIONAL STRUCTURE

The chart below illustrates the relationship between various operational elements within CARBC and the Centre’s relationships with UVic, the CARBC Advisory Board, and external partners.

Main Administration and Research Office The main office of CARBC is located on campus at UVic. The CARBC Director, Assistant Director (Research), Administrator, support staff and many CARBC researchers are based in this office. Core functions of this office include:

• Oversight of the implementation of the Strategic Plan • Reporting progress and outcomes to the Advisory Board and University of Victoria • Oversight of contractual arrangements with funding bodies • Responsibility for the smooth running of CARBC activities and events


Knowledge Exchange Office A satellite knowledge exchange office operates in downtown Vancouver. The Assistant Director (Knowledge Exchange) and support staff are based in this office and are responsible for:

• Maximizing access for policy makers, professionals and the public in BC to evidence and knowledge to support health promotion and harm reduction related to substance use and addiction

• Developing information products and policy documents that reflect the best available evidence and communicate them clearly to intended audiences

• Facilitating the multi-directional flow of information between research, policy and practice communities in BC

CARBC SITE DIRECTORS CARBC Site Directors are based at partner universities and research agencies. CARBC Site Directors are chosen on the basis of already being research leaders with significant interests in addiction research. They play a number of essential functions:

• Maintaining a profile for CARBC at their host institutions • Linking specialist and non-specialist researchers from their campus/workplace to the

CARBC network • Organizing occasional addiction research forums, seminars and public lectures at their

institutions • Advising on potential collaborators at their institutions for emerging research projects • Leading addiction research initiatives • Contributing to CARBC and jointly branded research reports • Supporting CARBC communication and resource development objectives

CARBC Site Directors not only represent CARBC at their university but also contribute a range of special expertise spanning different disciplines and research interests. At the present time, we are fortunate to have Dr. Cindy Hardy (UNBC, Psychology) and Dr. Reid Webster (TRU, Psychology).

CARBC SCIENTISTS CARBC Scientist status is granted to researchers who are actively engaged in relevant research that will contribute to CARBC’s core activities. Scientist status will be considered upon receipt of a completed application in writing to the Centre, and would be granted for a limited term with approval from the Director and a majority vote of the CARBC faculty. The application form will carry a statement regarding conflicts of interest, commercial and other, and exclude people who work for or are in receipt of research funds from tobacco, alcohol or gambling commercial enterprises. Opportunities for residency in the Centre may accompany status as a Scientist. Research and networking activities of a Scientist is regarded as part of CARBC’s outputs and Scientists are requested to note this affiliation in their published work.


CARBC COLLABORATING SCIENTISTS This category of membership of the Centre is designed to recognize strong collaborative relationships with researchers who may be located at the University of Victoria or on other Canadian campuses who are not in residence at the CARBC office. The process of acquiring CARBC Collaborating Scientist status involves nomination by a CARBC Scientist, completion of an application form, and a statement indicating support for the mission and values of the Centre. Applications are discussed and voted on at meetings of the CARBC faculty.

CARBC AFFILIATES This category of membership is open to individuals who are supportive of the Centre’s mission and values and who are actively engaged in applying knowledge in the field of addictions and substance use. This category is open to researchers, students, policy makers, treatment and prevention workers, as well as members of the general public. Membership will involve completion of an application form with a declaration that excludes people with financial interests in tobacco, alcohol, gambling or other addictive behaviours.

FINANCIAL RESOURCES

Endowment from BC Addiction Foundation An endowment of $10.55 million was provided to the University of Victoria for the purpose of initiating CARBC. Some core CARBC expenses are covered by annual interest payments, set at least at 4% in future years. The interest payments currently cover the salaries of the Director, Administrator, a part-time secretary, some office equipment, travel and research network expenses.

Policy research partnerships Additional funds are received from commissioned research and knowledge exchange contracts. These are partnerships that provide policy research capacity to inform and provide advice to national, provincial, municipal and local governments. They require CARBC to deliver various research and information products and services.

Funding competitions CARBC and its partners make submissions to provincial, national and international research funding agencies to conduct projects that are consistent with this Plan.

Private donations Finally, CARBC seeks additional funds from private donations to supplement Centre operations and ensure that the draw on endowment earning remains as low as possible.


REFERENCES British Columbia (2010). Healthy Minds, Healthy People - A Ten-Year Plan to Address Mental Health

and Substance Use in British Columbia. Available at: http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/library/publications/year/2010/healthy_minds_healthy_people.pdf

BC Ministry of Health (2004). Every Door is the Right Door: A British Columbia Planning Framework to Address Problematic Substance use and Addiction. Available at: http://www.healthservices.gov.bc.ca/mhd/pdf/framework for_substance_use_and_addiction.pdf

BC Ministry of Health (2006a). Evidence Review: Healthy Living - Tobacco Control. BC Population Health and Wellness, BC Ministry of Health. Available at: http://www.phabc.org/pdfcore/Healthy_Living_Tobacco_Control-Evidence_Review.pdf

BC Ministry of Health (2006b). Following the Evidence: Preventing Harm from Substance Use in British Columbia. Available at: http://www.carbc.ca/Portals/0/PropertyAgent/2111/Files/27/FollowingEvidence0603.pdf

BC Vital Statistics (2003). Annual Report 2003. Available at: http://www.vs.gov.bc.ca/stats/annual/2003/index.html

Benoit, C., Jansson, M., Hallgrimsdottir, H. & Roth, E. (2008). Street youth's life course transitions. Comparative Social Research, 25, 329-357.

Brache, K., & Stockwell, T. (In Press). Drinking Patterns and Risk Behaviors Associated with Combined Alcohol and Energy Drink Consumption in College Drinkers’ Addictive Behaviors. Addiction Research and Theory.

Buxton, J. (2003). Vancouver Drug Use Epidemiology, Vancouver Site Report for the Canadian Community Epidemiology Network on Drug Use. Available at: http://www.ccsa.ca/ccendu/pdf/report_vancouver_2003.pdf

Buxton, J. (2005). Vancouver Drug Epidemiology, Vancouver Site Report for the Canadian Community Epidemiology Network on Drug Use. Available at: http://www.vancouver.ca/fourpillars/pdf/report_vancouver_2005.pdf

Fischer, B., & Allard, C. (2007). Feasibility Study on "Supervised Drug Consumption" Options in the City of Victoria. Centre for Addictions Research of BC Policy Report, University of Victoria, BC.

Hawe, P., & Potvin, L. (2009). What is population health intervention research? Canadian Journal of Public Health, 100 (1), Supplement, 8-14.

Ivsins, A., Chow, C., Marsh, D., Macdonald, S., Stockwell, T., & Vallance, K. (2010). Drug use trends in Victoria and Vancouver, and changes in injection drug use after the closure of Victoria’s fixed site needle exchange. CARBC Statistical Bulletin. Victoria, BC: University of Victoria.


Kendall P. (2008). Public health approach to alcohol policy: An updated report from the Provincial Health Officer. Victoria, BC: Ministry of Healthy Living and Sport. Available at: http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/library/publications/year/2008/alcoholpolicyreview.pdf

MacDonald, S., DeSouza, S., Mann, R., & Chipman, M. (2004). Driving behavior of alcohol, cannabis, and cocaine abuse treatment clients and population controls. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 30(2), 429-444.

Macdonald, S., Hall, W., Roman, P., Stockwell, T., Coghlan, M., & Nesvaag, S. (2010). Testing for cannabis in the workplace: A review of the evidence. Addiction, 105(3), 408-416.

National Alcohol Strategy Working Group (2007). Reducing Alcohol-related Harm in Canada: Toward a Culture of Moderation. Recommendations for a National Alcohol Strategy. Available at: http://www.nationalframework-cadrenational.ca/uploads/files/FINAL_NAS_EN_April3_07.pdf

Pakula, B., Macdonald, S., & Stockwell, T. (2009). Settings and Functions Related to Simultaneous Use of Alcohol with Marijuana or Cocaine Among Clients Treated in Treatment. Substance Abuse, Substance Use and Misuse, 44(2), 212-226.

Pauly, B., Reist, D., & Shachtman, C. (2011). Housing and Harm Reduction: A Framework for Greater Victoria. Centre for Addictions Research of BC, University of Victoria, BC.

Rehm, J., Baliunas, D., Brochu, S., Fischer, B., Gnam, W., Patra, J., Popova, S., Sarnocinska-Hart, A., & Taylor, B. (2006). The costs of substance abuse in Canada 2002. Ottawa: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse.

Rehm, J., Mathers, C., Popova, S., et al. (2009). Global burden of disease and injury and economic cost attributable to alcohol use and alcohol-use disorders. Lancet, (373) 2223-2233.

Reist, D. (2010). Methadone Maintenance Treatment in British Columbia, 1996-2008: Analysis and Recommendations. CARBC and the Centre for Health Evaluation & Outcome Science (UBC) conducted reviews of MMT that were the foundation of this report released by the BC Ministry of Healthy Living and Sport. (29p)

Statistics Canada (2004). Canadian Community Health Survey. Ottawa, ON: Statistics Canada. Available at: http://www.cansim2.statcan.ca

Stewart, D., Vallance, K., Stockwell, T., Smith, A., & Saewyc, E. (2009). Adolescent Substance Use and Related Harms in British Columbia. CARBC Statistical Bulletin #5, University of Victoria, BC.

Stockwell, T., Gruenewald, P., Toumbourou, J., & Loxley, W. (2005). Preventing Harmful Substance Use: The evidence base for policy and practice. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.

Stockwell, T., Sturge, J., & Macdonald, S. (2005). Patterns of alcohol use in BC in excess of low risk guidelines. Centre for Addictions Research of BC, Statistical Bulletin #1, University of Victoria, BC.


Stockwell, T., Sturge, J., Jones, W., Fischer, B., & Carter, C. (2006). Cannabis Use in British Columbia: Patterns of use, perceptions and public opinion as assessed in the 2004 Canadian Addiction Survey. CARBC Statistical Bulletin #2, University of Victoria, BC.

Stockwell, T., Zhao, Z., & Thomas, G. (2009a). Should Alcohol Policies aim to Reduce Total Alcohol Consumption? New Analyses of Canadian Drinking Patterns. Addiction Research and Theory, 135-151.

Stockwell, T., & Chikritzhs, T. (2009b). Do Relaxed Trading Hours for Bars and Clubs Mean More Relaxed Drinking? A Review of International Research on the Impacts of Changes to Permitted Hours of Drinking. Crime Prevention and Community Safety, 11(3), 153-170.

Stockwell, T., Zhao, J., Macdonald, S., Vallance, K., Gruenewald, P., Ponick, W., Holder, H., & Treno, A. (2011). Impact on alcohol-related mortality of a rapid rise in the density of private liquor outlets in British Columbia: A local area multi-level analysis. Addiction, 106(4), 768-776.


MEMO

As you may know, the University Secretary’s Office is conducting a Policy Renewal Project, which is a targeted review of all institutional policies that are out of date or due for review. This project encompasses 94 policies and has been ongoing since March, 2016. One such policy is AC1210 – Accommodation for Students on Days of Religious Observance, for which the Senate is the approving authority. This policy was last reviewed in May, 1997. Per the Policy on University Policies and Procedures (GV0100), university policies must be reviewed at least once every seven years; this puts AC1210 well past its mandated review date. The Accommodation for Students on Days of Religious Observance policy also appears in the Calendar, as Accommodation of Religious Observance (AC1210).1 The text of the Calendar policy is slightly different from the text that appears in the policy manual – the Calendar text is more up to date. There are advantages to locating this policy in the Calendar. It is more visible to students, more engaging for faculty, and is easier to keep up to date. Therefore, after consultation with the Equity and Human Rights office, we propose to:

1) rescind the outdated policy AC1210 from the policy manual; and

2) move the policy as it appears in the Calendar from the “General University Policies” section to its own heading, “Accommodation of Religious Observance”, to be located immediately preceding the “Academic Concessions” heading.2

Relocating this policy from the policy manual to the Calendar will not change Senate’s jurisdiction over it. The Calendar is a de facto policy manual 1 Page 17 of the Undergraduate Calendar; page 9 of the Graduate Calendar. 2 Page 59 of the Undergraduate Calendar; page 44 of the Graduate Calendar.

Date:

October 19, 2016

To:

Senate

From:

Valerie Kuehne Vice-President Academic & Provost

Re: Policy AC1210 – Accommodation for Students on Days of Religious Observance


applying to students. Senate will retain its jurisdiction to revise and approve this policy. We also propose a minor wording change to the policy to highlight the role of the Equity and Human Rights office. Please see the attached text of AC1210 – Accommodation for Students on Days of Religious Observance as it appears in the policy manual and in the Calendar (with proposed changes tracked). Recommended Motions: That Senate approve the minor wording change to the “Accommodation of Religious Observance” section of the undergraduate and graduate Calendars, effective May 2017. AND That Senate approve the relocation of the “Accommodation of Religious Observance” section of the undergraduate and graduate Calendars from “General University Policies” to a new heading titled “Accommodation of Religious Observance” immediately preceding “Academic Concessions”, effective May 2017. AND That Senate rescind the university policy AC1210 “Accommodation for Students on Days of Religious Observance”.


ACCOMMODATION OF RELIGIOUS OBSERVANCE (AC1210) The University recognizes its obligation to make reasonable accommodation for students whose observance of holy days might conflict with the academic requirements of a course or program. Students are permitted to absent themselves from classes, seminars or workshops for the purposes of religious or spiritual observance. In the case of compulsory classes or course events, students will normally be required to provide reasonable notice to their instructors of their intended absence from the class or event for reasons of religious or spiritual observance. In consultation with the student, the instructor will determine an appropriate means of accommodation. The instructor may choose to reschedule classes or provide individual assistance. Where a student’s participation in a class event is subject to grading, every reasonable effort will be made to allow the student to make up for the missed class through alternative assignments or in subsequent classes. Students who require a rescheduled examination must give reasonable notice to their instructors. If a final exam cannot be rescheduled within the regular exam period, students may request an academic concession. To avoid scheduling conflicts, instructors are encouraged to consider the timing of holy days when scheduling class events. A For further information, including a list of days of religious observances, please contact the Equity and Human Rights Office or visit their website: <web.uvic.ca/eqhr>. is available at the following website: <web.uvic.ca/eqhr>.


University Policy No.: AC1210

Classification: Academic and Students ACCOMMODATION FOR STUDENTS Approving Authority: Senate ON DAYS FOR RELIGIOUS Effective Date: May/97 OBSERVANCE Supersedes: May/96 Last Editorial Change: Mandated Review: The University recognizes its obligation to make reasonable accommodation for students whose observance of holy days of their religious or spiritual faiths would otherwise prevent them from satisfying academic requirements of a course or programme. Students are permitted to absent themselves from classes, seminars or workshops for the purposes of religious or spiritual observance. In the case of "compulsory" classes or course events a student will normally be required to provide reasonable notice to the instructor of her or his intended absence from the class or event for reasons of religious or spiritual observance. In consultation with the student, the instructor will determine an appropriate means of accommodation. The instructor may choose to reschedule classes or provide individual assistance as she or he deems necessary. In class events where participation of the student is subject to grading, every reasonable opportunity shall be afforded to the student missing classes for the purposes of religious or spiritual observance to demonstrate competence in such a course requirement by way of alternative assignments or in subsequent lectures. Students requiring the rescheduling of an examination must advise the instructor concerned in a timely and reasonable manner. Notwithstanding the above, the Senate requests all instructors to inform themselves about holy days and to make proactive measures to avoid potential conflict when scheduling class events.


OfficeoftheVice-President,ResearchAdministrativeServicesBuilding RoomA110 POBox1700STNCSC VictoriaBC V8W2Y2CanadaT250-472-5416 | F250-472-5477 | uvic.ca/research

MEMORANDUM

DATE: November4,2016

TO: Senate

FROM:DavidCastle,Vice-PresidentResearch

RE: ImplementationoftheUVicStrategicResearchPlanFOR: InformationandadviceTheUniversityofVictoriapublishedtheStrategicResearchPlan(2016-2021)inJanuary2016.TheStrategicResearchPlan(SRP)developedfivepriorities,35associatedobjectivesand67implementationstrategiesforUVic.InthefinalsectionoftheSRP,acommitmenttoongoingmonitoringandreportingoftheimplementationprocessismade.Thisbriefingnote,andtheattacheddocuments,describetheimplementationprocess,howprogressisbeingtracked,andhowinformationabouttheimplementationprocessisbeingmadeavailable.ImplementationstrategyThemaincomponentsoftheimplementationprocessinclude:annualimplementationplans,annualprogressreports,ascorecardandtheStrategicResearchInitiativesPlanningTemplateforfacultiesandcentres(attached).SRP2016-17ImplementationPlanForeachacademicyear,aforward-lookingimplementationplanwillbedevelopedduringthesummer,andreviewedwithstakeholdergroupsinthefall.DevelopmentofannualplanswillensureimplementationoftheSRPiscarried-outinacoordinatedandcollaborativemanner.TheattachedSRP2016-17ImplementationPlansummarizesthepriorities,objectives,strategiesandplannedactionsforthisacademicyear,andhasbeendiscussedwithanumberofgroupsoutlinedintheengagementsectionbelow.SRP2016ProgressReportTheattachedSRP2016ProgressReportpresentsimplementationactivityundertakeninthefirsthalfofcalendaryear2016.Thisfirst,half-yearreportbringsreportingofactivitiesintoalignmentwiththecurrentacademicyear.Generally,thesereportswillreflectactivityfromanentireacademicyear(July1toJune30),andwillbereviewed,finalizedandmadeavailableinthefall.SRPScorecardTheattachedscorecardisaquickreferenceprogressreport.StrategicResearchInitiativesPlanningTemplateforFacultiesandCentresTheStrategicResearchInitiativesPlanningTemplatesforFacultiesandResearchCentresarebeinglaunchedasapilotprojectthisyear,andalignwithseveraloftheobjectivesoftheSRPImplementation


2

Plan.FacultiesandResearchCentresarebeingaskedtocompletethesetemplatesinorderto:• highlightresearchprioritiesandinvitestakeholdersacrosscampustothinkprospectivelyabout

researchplanning;and• createopportunitiestoexplorecross-disciplineandcross-facultysynergieswithregardto

researchinitiatives.Duringthepilotphase,thisplanningprocessisnotanticipatedtohaveanyimpactonresourceallocation;itsmainpurposeistohighlightkeyareasofresearchexcellenceatUVicandisanexerciseinmappingmajorresearchinitiativesataninstitutionallevel.Inthefuture,however,FacultiesandCentrescouldoptforprogressivelygreateralignmentoftheirannualacademicandresearchplanningprocesseswithEnhancedPlanningprocesses.EngagementOverthepast6weeks,the2016-17SRPImplementationPlan,the2016SRPProgressReportandtheSRPScorecardwerediscussedwiththefollowingindividualsandgroups:

• A/AssociateVice-PresidentResearch• AssociateVice-PresidentResearchOperations• AssociateVicePresidentAcademicPlanning• CouncilofCentreDirectors• Dean’sCouncil• Dean,FacultyofGraduateStudies• OfficeoftheVicePresidentResearchstaff,includingtheAwardsFacilitatorandStrategic

ResearchInitiativesOfficer• ORSManagement,includingtheDirectorsofRPKMandInstitutionalProgramsaswellasthe

SeniorGrantsOfficer• ResearchAdvisoryCommittee• UniversityLibrarianandAssociateUniversityLibrarian,DigitalScholarship&Strategy• UVicExecutiveCouncil

NextstepsOncefeedbackfromSenatehasbeenreceivedandincorporated,the2016-17SRPImplementationPlanwillbeconsideredfinal,andthe2016SRPProgressReportandtheSRPScorecardwillbepostedto:www.uvic.ca/researchplan.ThecampuscommunitywillbenotifiedoftheProgressReportandScorecard’savailabilityintheNovember15,2016issueoftheUVicCampusChecklistandviaotherregularinternalcommunicationschannels.TheOVPRwillcontinuetocollaborateandengagewiththeexecutiveportfolios,facultiesandresearchcentresastheStrategicResearchPlancontinuestobeimplemented.


Office of the Vice-President, Research Administrative Services Building Room A110 PO Box 1700 STN CSC Victoria BC V8W 2Y2 Canada T 250-472-5416 | F 250-472-5477 | uvic.ca/research

MEMORANDUM

DATE: November 2016

FROM: David Castle, VP Research

RE: 2016-17 Strategic Research Plan Implementation Plan FOR: Information

UVic’s Strategic Research Plan (SRP), published in January 2016, is a five-year plan that identifies several of the university’s research strengths, priorities, and our commitment to ensuring that research excellence benefits our local, national, and international communities. The plan sets out five broad priorities, 35 associated objectives and 67 implementation strategies for UVic. Always intended to be a working document that would inform priority setting and decision making, the plan reflects the university community’s interest in an ‘actionable and measurable’ plan. The SRP goes further to commit to an annual implementation, monitoring and reporting process to ensure that the priorities, objectives and strategies are met or accomplished over the life of the plan. The plan will inform, guide and provide the framework for assessing the impact of adopting a multi-year research strategy at UVic. What follows is the 2016-17 implementation plan, which will be carried-out between July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017, in alignment with the faculty academic planning and Enhanced Planning reporting cycles. In the 2016-17 implementation year, initiatives are continuing or will begin to be rolled-out for 64 of the 67 strategies. Initiatives are being led and collaborated-on across all of UVic’s executive portfolios. Some key activities planned include: Strategic Research Plan Priority 1: Defining and Achieving Research Excellence

• The Office of the Vice-President Research (OVPR) to work with Development on fundraising priorities for research, including seeking funds for research chairs and graduate student scholarships.

• The OVPR and UC+M to finalize and implement its strategic research communications plan. • The Library to champion open access, including through its publications and by trialing an open access data

platform. Strategic Research Plan Priority 2: Enhancing the Integration of Research and Education

• The OVPR to implement an annual Strategic Research Initiative Planning Template for completion by Faculties and Research Centres.

• FGS to review and amend its supervisory policy to include an emphasis on regularizing supervision. • The library to establish a Digital Scholarship Commons that will provide both community and highly

transferable skills to graduate students. Strategic Research Plan Priority 3: Expanding Partnerships, Innovation and Entrepreneurship

• The Office of Research Services’ (ORS) new International grants facilitator to support new and ongoing international research.

• A working group has been established to explore indigenous research protocols. • The Library to develop a grants services package that addresses data storage, organization, sharing and

discovery.


Strategic Research Plan Priority 4: Improving Research Competitiveness through Differentiation and Specialization

• Institutional Programs to continue to work with Internal Audit to undertake a 'management assessment' of key research infrastructure.

• The OVPR to develop a research chairs forum focused on research leadership for UVic • UVic’s research related policies are to be renewed by 2017 and a review process is underway.

Strategic Research Plan Priority 5: Enhancing and Optimizing the Provision of Research Service

• A research administration system is being developed by UVic Systems and information gathering on potential research information systems is underway.

• ORS to continue to build its research facilitators network. • ORS to host workshops to provide information on its services to ensure UVic researchers are connected to

the services they need. The OVPR will continue to collaborate and engage with the executive portfolios, faculties and research centres as the plan is implemented. Guidance from key UVic governance groups, including Deans’ Council, the President’s Advisory Committee, the Research Advisory Committee, the Council of Centre Directors and Senate will be sought as appropriate. A report describing the outcomes and outputs realized during the 2016-17 implementation year will be published in Fall 2017.


FINAL DRAFT – 2016-17 STRATEGIC RESEARCH PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

October 20, 2016 FINAL DRAFT NOT FOR CIRCULATION 1

Strategic Research Plan Priority 1: Defining and Achieving Research Excellence Define research excellence and achieve it by aligning resources, supports and incentives to ensure that the pursuit of research excellence remains at the forefront of UVic’s academic mission.

Objectives Strategies Planned actions and comments 1.1 Adopt the definition of research excellence in the Plan to guide strategic decision-making

1.1.1 Communicate with academic units and integrate the definition into Enhanced Planning Tool (EPT) processes

• Work with VPAC to consider integrating the SRP’s definition of research excellence into the EPT process.

1.2 Provide and sustain a high-quality research environment

1.2.1 Integrate EPT quality indicators for research into annual priorities of the Office of the Vice-President Research (OVPR) and implementation plans

• Annually review EPT quality indicators and integrate this information into the annual priorities of the Office of the Vice-President Research (OVPR) and implementation plans.

1.2.2 Align submissions to Integrated Planning with Strategic Research Plan priorities

• Continuously align any requests to Integrated Planning by the research portfolio with the research plan.

1.2.3 Work with the Office of the Vice-President Academic (VPAC) and the Dean of Graduate Studies to consider increasing the proportion of graduate students among the total student population

• VPAC to implement a strategic enrolment management model in 2016-17, which will include graduate student targets.

• Note: any rebalancing of UVic’s proportion of undergraduate and graduate students would require approval from Advanced Education.

1.2.4 Work with VPAC to foster a culture of recognition of research excellence through reporting and acknowledgement of research funding success

• From 2016-17, the President’s Office will formally recognize researchers for significant grants.

• ORS will also send email communications to Deans, Associate Deans Research and Department Chairs, notifying on research grant success.

1.3 Promote research that engages with partners and communities to maximize opportunities for impact

1.3.1 RPKM to coordinate and facilitate research partnerships with the Office of the Vice-President External Relations (VPER) and the Office of Community- University Engagement (OCUE)

• OCUE to champion UVic’s excellence in community engaged research in conjunction with ORS’ RPKM and the OVPR.

• OCUE holding ‘community-engaged researchers’ monthly meetings.

1.4 Recognize and reward high-quality, fundamental and problem-focused research, nationally and internationally

1.4.1 Increase the annual number of award nominations

• Strengthen relationships with Deans, Associate Deans of Research and Department Chairs to identify faculty eligible for awards.

• President’s Advisory Committee on External Awards has built a ‘watch list’ of faculty who should be considered for awards in the short and long term.

• Enlarge list of awards reviewed by the President’s Advisory Committee on External Awards, especially international awards.




1.4.2 Work with academic units to define Enhanced Planning Tool indicators of research quality to support research award nominations

• Encourage faculty to review their research quality indicators to identify possible award nominees.

• Examine EPT reports to review for potential award nomination candidates.

1.5 Increase research funding for research chairs and graduate student scholarships and sponsorships via endowments

1.5.1 Work with VPER to use fundraising priority-setting process to increase donations

• Work annually with Development on fundraising priorities, including funds for research chairs and graduate student scholarships.

1.6 Focus knowledge mobilization initiatives to derive greater impact and social benefit from research

1.6.1 Align EPT quality and demand indicators for research with mandate and activities of RPKM and OCUE

• RPKM to explore aligning its mandate and activities with EPT’s quality and demand indicators.

• A number of current RPKM initiatives will support this process including: o Implementing Inteum for use in managing and analyzing RPKM’s IP and

licensing operations. o Upgrading RPKM’s contracts database to enhance reporting.

1.7 Support research communications to increase access to publicly funded research

1.7.1 Work with University Communications and Marketing (UC+M) to enhance and implement strategic research communications about UVic research excellence

• Finalize and implement the OVPR and UC+M strategic research communications plan.

• Finalizing the remaining research banners and handout that highlights UVic’s research excellence.

• UC+M and OVPR to develop and implement a targeted advertising campaign, highlighting UVic’s research strengths and priorities.

• Continue to showcase UVic’s research excellence through Ideafest, UVic’s annual festival of research.

1.7.2 Work with UC+M to create tools and training for research communications, including social media

• Annual research event management training for Ideafest organizers. • Piloting of the Hootsuite Enterprise account. • OVPR and UC+M to implement the social media strategy to enhance campus-

wide collaboration and university positioning. • OVPR to work with UC+M on social media training for research

centres/interested academic units. • OVPR and UC+M to review and revise current engagement activities for federal

funding agency communications. 1.7.3 Support the organization of conferences, workshops, colloquia, and reporting meetings with stakeholders

• ORS to continue to provide some funding for the organization of conferences, workshops, colloquia, and reporting meetings with stakeholders.

1.7.4 Work with libraries to support open-access initiatives

• The Library is ready and able to support UVic’s open access publication needs. • They will be trialing their capacity to provide a platform for open access data. • They will be communicating about their open access services at faculty and

department meetings and the OVPR will provide support by sending out a one-pager the Library has developed on open access.

• The Senate committee on libraries is also planning to develop and bring forward a statement on open access.




1.8 Enhance supports for graduate student research

1.8.3 Work with other research universities in BC to improve competitiveness in graduate student funding, relative to other provinces

• The Research Universities’ Council of British Columbia (RUCBC) to continue to advocate to the province to improved graduate student funding.

• RUCBC to present to the Province’s Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services during its 2016 pre-budget consultations.

1.8.4 Improve competitiveness in recruiting graduate students by enhancing financial packages and enhancing campus space allocations for graduate student use

• Continue to look for innovative solutions (e.g. the Library study carrels) in order to enhance campus space allocations for graduate students.

1.9 Enhance supports for post-doctoral research

1.9.1 Work with VPAC and FGS to consolidate administrative supports for post-doctoral fellows

• ORS and FGS to explore improving its supports for post-doctoral fellow. • VPAC has established a point of contact to support international post-doctoral

fellows with immigration queries.

Strategic Research Plan Priority 2: Enhancing the Integration of Research and Education Promote and support, in alignment with the UVic Edge, the integration of research and educational programs to create dynamic learning reflective of UVic’s extraordinary environment and which contributes to the vital impact of research

Objectives Strategies Planned actions and comments 2.1 Recruit and retain the best researchers

2.1.1 Work collaboratively with VPAC on hiring processes

• Work underway to ensure coordination between VPAC and ORS’ Institutional Programs.

2.2 Ensure that educational programs are predicated on research excellence and reciprocally, that research excellence is reflected in educational programs

2.2.1 Coordinate academic and research planning processes with VPAC

• The OVPR has developed and piloted an annual Strategic Research Initiative Planning Template for completion by Faculties and Research Centres, which will be implemented in 2016-17.

• Annually, the completion of this process will be aligned with academic planning processes.

2.2.2 Work with VPAC to review awards related to the integration of research and educational programs consistent with UVic learning outcomes

• Awarding of the newly established Award for Excellence in Research-Inspired Teaching.

• Additionally, the Awards Facilitator is exploring potential external awards that might recognize UVic’s excellence in this area.

2.3 Provide every student with the opportunity to become engaged in the culture and activities of a research-intensive university

2.3.1 Work with academic units to expand opportunities for student engagement in research

• UVic to continue engaging students in research with its successful Jamie Cassels Undergraduate Research Awards (JCURA) program.

• Awards of $1,500 each are available for undergraduate students to undertake research under the mentorship and guidance of a faculty member.




2.4 Support graduate student success while optimizing existing resources

2.4.1 Work with FGS to monitor program completion rates for graduate students

• FGS’ new allocation strategy will incentivize completion times. • FGS is reviewing its supervisory practice policy, which will be amended to include

an emphasis on regularizing supervisor/committee progress meetings and reports.

• FGS is also interested to enhance completion rates (as opposed to times). Improving rates is likely also highly dependent on access to sustainable funding and active supervision.

2.5 Draw on library expertise in research-related education and training

2.5.1 Promote digital information fluency training throughout UVic

• The library is establishing a Digital Scholarship (DS) Commons in 2016-17. • The DS Commons will provide both community and highly transferable skills to

graduate students. • The library is offering workshops on digital information fluency including research

data management. Strategic Research Plan Priority 3: Expanding Partnerships, Innovation and Entrepreneurship Expand UVic’s focus on partnerships as mechanisms to enhance innovation; generate new research opportunities; engage with community partners; mobilize knowledge in society, policy and professional practice; and support entrepreneurship on campus

Objectives Strategies Planned actions and comments 3.1 Promote internationalization of UVic research

3.1.1 Implement international working group recommendations

• The International Research and Academic Planning (IRAP) group refreshed the International plan in 2016 and launched a committee to lead its implementation.

• The International Plan is structured around the five following categories: o Creating a Culture of exchange through Student Mobility o Enhancing the International Student Experience o Ensuring Curricula for a Global Ready Institution o Making a Vital Impact through International Research and Engagement o Establishing an Extraordinary Environment for Internationalization.

3.1.2 Identify supports for ongoing and new international research partnerships

• The new position of International grants facilitator has been established in ORS for 2016-17.

3.2 Improve institutional responsiveness to new opportunities for research partnerships and community engagement with regional, national and international partners

3.2.1 Engage partners and potential partners to identify key priorities for enhancing responsiveness

• Establishment of the Coast Capital Savings Innovation Centre (CCSIC) to support and mentor entrepreneurs to take business concepts from idea to incubator-ready.

3.2.2 Contribute to the review of a revised intellectual property policy

• RPKM in conjunction with the OVPR has updated UVic’s IP policy. • A fully updated policy is expected to be available by end 2016-17.

3.2.3 Foster greater collaboration between UVic researchers and companies at the Vancouver Island Technology Park (VITP)

• Encourage UVic researchers to collaborate with enterprises operating out of the VITP.

• VITP and its occupants will continue to be invited to Coast Capital Savings Innovation Centre and RPKM events.




3.2.4 Work with the VPER, OCUE and regional economic development leadership to create the conditions and opportunities for economic and social development that improve wellbeing of citizens

• UVic will be working with the South Island Prosperity Project in 2016-17 whose mission is to facilitate and promote development of a strong, diversified economy in South Vancouver Island.

• The Prosperity Project intends to work with the University of Victoria and other strategic partners to develop a single mentor network to service the needs of entrepreneurs in the region,

3.2.5 Foster collaborative approaches to designing, conducting and implementing research and educational programs with partners

• UVic is highly receptive to collaborative approaches to research and educational programs with partners. Some example include:

o The working group established to discuss indigenous research protocols co-chaired by Charlotte Reading Director of CIRCLE and Rachael Scarth AVPRO with membership from OCUE, OIA and ORS RPKM.

o The continued development of the partnership between Island Health and UVic to operate the BC Support Unit Vancouver Island Centre, a regional hub for patient-oriented research projects.

o The establishment of an Academic Health Science Network to provide governance and oversight for the BC Support Unit Vancouver Island Centre.

o The exploration of the possibility of establishing a Vancouver Island wide health research node.

3.3 Streamline contracts management to improve service on- and off-campus

3.3.1 Establish electronic workflows and refine approval process

• A research administration system is currently being developed by UVic Systems. • Information gathering on potential research information systems is underway

prior to the development of an acquisition process. 3.4 Enhance supports for innovation and entrepreneurial activity

3.4.1 Work with Office of the Vice-President Finance and Operations (VPFO) to explore the potential for the university to gain access to venture capital

• Explore if there is potential to gain venture capital.

3.5 Increase UVic’s research profile regionally, nationally and internationally

3.5.1 Work with UC+M and RPKM to enhance and implement strategic research communications about research partnerships

• Finalize and implement the OVPR and UC+M strategic research communications plan.

• OVPR+UC+M to develop and implement a targeted advertising campaign, highlighting UVic’s research strengths and priorities.

• RPKM has regular meeting with UC+M’s edge team on partnerships communications.

• RPKM to participate in the annual BC Tech Summit. 3.6 Enhance community-engaged research

3.6.1 RPKM to develop cultural protocols and best practices for initiating, continuing and expanding research partnerships in collaboration with other units including OCUE and the Office of Indigenous Affairs (OIA)

• A working group has been established to discuss indigenous research protocols co-chaired by Charlotte Reading Director of CIRCLE and Rachael Scarth AVPRO with membership from OCUE, OIA and ORS RPKM.


http://www.southislandprosperity.ca/



3.7 0 Further integrate university libraries into UVic research processes

3.7.1 identify opportunities for librarians to collaborate on research projects

• The Library is developing a grants services package. This package will address data storage, organization, sharing and discovery.

• The Library’s grants librarian also facilitates direct participation in grants, for example in a SSHRC partnership and NSERC Create grants.

• The VPR has been appointed Chair. Research Data Canada Steering Committee. Strategic Research Plan Priority 4: Improving Research Competitiveness through Differentiation and Specialization Concentrate resources in areas with demonstrated or strong potential for research excellence.

Objectives Strategies Planned actions and comments 4.1 Provide and sustain a high-quality research environment that enables and nurtures the expertise and aspirations of researchers

4.1.1 Develop and implement annual priority-setting process with the Research Advisory Committee and the Council of Centre Directors

• The OVPR has developed and piloted an annual Strategic Research Initiative Planning Template for completion by Faculties and Research Centres, which will continue to be implemented in 2016-17.

• RAC’s terms of reference to be updated in 2016-17.

4.2 Enable existing and emerging dynamic research capabilities

4.2.1 Promote clustering of resources where strategically advantageous

• Internal Audit have suggested the OVPR undertake a 'management assessment' of key research infrastructure in 2016-17.

• Institutional Programs will continue working with Internal Audit on this assessment. Initial meetings have already taken place and background documents and information has been provided.

4.2.2 Ensure that the allocation of space, infrastructure and research chairs aligns with Strategic Research Plan priorities

• The OVPR to implement new resource allocation processes for CFI and CRC to ensure alignment with the SRP priorities.

• This work is currently in progress and is targeted for completion in 2016-17.

4.2.3 Identify opportunities for increasing and improving space for researchers and students

• Investigate innovative solutions and opportunities for increasing and improving space for researchers and students.

4.2.4 Explore ways to provide seed-funding for interdisciplinary conferences and workshops

• Explore ways to provide seed funding for interdisciplinary conferences and workshops.

4.3 Fully engage the expertise and leadership of research chairs

4.3.1 Develop a research chairs forum focused on research leadership for UVic

• A research chairs forum to be developed in 2016-17.

4.4 Continue to ensure that UVic meets the use and reporting requirements of the Research Support Fund

4.4.1 Work with VPFO to review Research Support Fund use to ensure consistency with evolving reporting requirements

• 2016 saw the development of performance measures, outcomes and outputs by VPFO and VPR for the use of Research Support Funds to ensure compliance with federal policy.

• The outcomes report from this review is available at www.uvic.ca/research/learnabout/home/federalrsp/index.php.

• The VPFO and ORS will continue to ensure UVic research is compliant with reporting requirements as they evolve.


https://www.uvic.ca/research/learnabout/home/federalrsp/index.php



4.5 Optimize the collection of indirect costs of research

4.5.1 Engage internal community and external funders to optimize the collection of indirect costs of research

• ORS continually monitors indirect funds for eligibility and compliance.

4.5.2 Collaborate with other universities and organizations regarding related (SRP) initiatives

• In 2016-17 the VPR will continue to works closely with RUCBC and its members.

4.6 Enable and support research centres to respond to emerging research opportunities, promote collaborative and interdisciplinary research

4.6.1 Develop standardized annual reporting templates

• The OVPR has developed and piloted an annual Strategic Research Initiative Planning Template for completion by Faculties and Research Centres, which will be implemented in 2016-17.

4.6.2 Increase research networking capacity and infrastructure

• Explore methods for increasing networking capacity. • OVPR and UC+M to implement the social media strategy to enhance campus-

wide collaboration and university positioning. • Additionally, information gathering on potential research information systems is

underway prior to the development of an acquisition process. 4.7 Provide the best possible governance of research

4.7.1 Support, or lead, research-related policy and procedure reviews

• The majority of UVic’s research policies are due for renewal in 2017 and a review process is now underway.

• To date the IP policy review has been completed and the new Responsible Funding Management and Financial Accountability policy is in the final stages of approval.

4.8 Continue to build the visibility and reputation of UVic as a research-intensive university

4.8.1 Develop and implement a strategic research communications plan with UC+M and align Strategic Research Plan priorities with the UVic Edge

• UC+M launched the Edge DU-IT (the Edge Department and Unit Implementation Team) program to help edgeify faculty and researcher’s publications.

• UC+M will help with the development of a general purpose introductory/impact brochure for each research centre at UVic in 2016-17.

• UC+M to roll-out the new Edge 2016-17 ad campaign as well as other targeted ad campaigns.

Strategic Research Plan Priority 5: Enhancing and Optimizing the Provision of Research Service Further the pursuit of research excellence for researchers and UVic as a whole by making strategic investments in systems, staff and staff training, and through the optimization of service delivery and asset management.

Objectives Strategies Planned actions and comments 5.1 Position the Office of Research Services for 2021

5.1.1 Ensure that the Office of Research Services (ORS) annual service plan reflects Strategic Research Plan priorities

• ORS’s annual service plans will continue to reflect the Strategic Research Plan’s priorities.

5.1.2 Implement enterprise-class research information and administration systems


prior to the development of an acquisition process.




5.2 Increase the quantity and improve the quality of research grant applications

5.2.1 Work with faculty to assess the needs of researchers for achieving, measuring and recognizing success

• ORS has met with all Faculties to explore the status of peer review on campus and to build strategic plans to improve uptake. Some Faculties and Departments have integrated peer review processes to improve the quality of grant submissions for specific funding opportunities.

• The use of peer review will be monitored via a declaration on the research application summary form in order to see if there is correlation with increased grants success.

• ORS regularly hosts capacity building workshops and grant information sessions to provide information on ORS’ services; build key skills for improving grant submissions; and provide information and resources to apply for specific funding opportunities.

5.2.2 Create a university-wide, robust system of grants facilitation and management distributed through the faculties

• UVic will continue to build its research facilitators network, with a number of faculties, departments and centres having designated Research and Scholarship Coordinators.

• ORS will continue to chair bi-monthly meetings with UVic research facilitators to build capacity and share key information on grants.


5.2.3 Monitor application success rates • ORS continually monitors its grants success rates, including comparing UVic success rates with national success rates for major funding competitions.

5.2.4 Optimize ORS workflow consistent with differentiated services

• Continue to work to optimize ORS’ workflow.

5.2.5 Develop pre-selection guidelines for institutional program opportunities

• New pre-selection guidelines to be implemented for the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) and Canada Research Chairs (CRC) programs.

5.2.6 Work with Faculty of Graduate Studies to develop grants facilitation supports for graduate students

• FGS currently contracts facilitators to assist students with their Tri-council grant applications.

• ORS and FGS to coordinate to ensure FGS is part of the research facilitators’ network being developed.

5.3 Support the development of annual research plans by academic units

5.3.1 Conduct a review of asset management models at other institutions

• Internal Audit has suggested the OVPR undertake a 'management assessment' of key research infrastructure in 2016-17.

• Institutional Programs will continue working with Internal Audit on this assessment. Initial meetings have already taken place and background documents and information has been provided.

5.3.2 Develop an asset management process for major UVic research infrastructure

As above

5.3.3 Seek advice from Internal Audit As above




5.4 Improve the management of major research infrastructure


• Development of performance measures, outcomes and outputs by VPFO and VPR for the use of Research Support Funds to ensure compliance with federal policy.


• The VPFO and ORS will continue to ensure UVic research is compliant with reporting requirements as they evolve.

5.6 Support new collaborative research initiatives in response to emerging opportunities

5.6.1 Explore sources of funds to increase discretionary activity.

• Work with Development to establish research fundraising priorities. • Explore the identification of other sources of funds.



Office of the Vice-President, Research Administrative Services Building Room A110 PO Box 1700 STN CSC Victoria BC V8W 2Y2 Canada T 250-472-5416 | F 250-472-5477 | uvic.ca/research

MEMORANDUM

DATE: November 4, 2016

TO: The UVic campus community and partners

FROM: David Castle, VP Research

RE: 2016 Strategic Research Plan Progress Report FOR: Information

UVic’s Strategic Research Plan (SRP), published in January 2016, is a five-year plan that identifies several of the university’s research strengths, priorities, and our commitment to ensuring that research excellence benefits our local, national, and international communities. The plan sets out five broad priorities, 35 associated objectives and 67 implementation strategies for UVic. Always intended to be a working document that would inform priority setting and decision making, the plan reflects the university community’s interest in an ‘actionable and measurable’ plan. The SRP goes further to commit to an annual implementation, monitoring and reporting process to ensure that the priorities, objectives and strategies are met or accomplished over the life of the plan. The plan will inform, guide and provide the framework for assessing the impact of adopting a multi-year research strategy at UVic. Because the plan was published at the start of the calendar year, this first report on SRP implementation activity reflects activity in the first half of calendar year 2016. The decision to proceed with a half-year report is based on the desire to get annual reporting on-cycle with the academic year. Henceforth, annual SRP implementation reports will reference activity from the previous academic year (July 1 to June 30), and will be made available in the fall. In the first six months of the plan’s implementation a number of its strategies have been accomplished or set in motion. Some early successes have been achieved in each of the priority area and include: Strategic Research Plan Priority 1: Defining and Achieving Research Excellence

• Collaborative work by the Office of the Vice President Research (OVPR) and University Communications and Marketing (UC+M) to enhance UVic’s strategic research communications.

• Development of a new allocation strategy by the Faculty of Graduate Studies (FGS) for distribution of fellowship and scholarship funds and incentives for improving completion times.

• The establishment of the Office of Community- University Engagement (OCUE) to champion community engaged research as one of OCUE’s priorities.

Strategic Research Plan Priority 2: Enhancing the Integration of Research and Education

• Establishment of new internal teaching awards, including an award for Excellence in Research-Inspired Teaching.


Strategic Research Plan Priority 3: Expanding Partnerships, Innovation and Entrepreneurship • Refreshing of the International Plan by the International Research and Academic Planning (IRAP) group. • An update of UVic’s Intellectual Property (IP) policy. A fully updated policy is expected to be available by

end 2016-17. • Establishment of the Coast Capital Savings Innovation Centre (CCSIC) to support and mentor entrepreneurs

to take business concepts from idea to incubator-ready. Strategic Research Plan Priority 4: Improving Research Competitiveness through Differentiation and Specialization

• Development of an annual Strategic Research Initiative Planning Template for completion by Faculties and Research Centres.

• Development of performance measures, outcomes and outputs by Office of the Vice President Finance and Operations (OVPFO) and the OVPR for the use of Research Support Funds to ensure compliance with federal policy and the research aspirations of its faculty in an increasingly competitive environment.

Strategic Research Plan Priority 5: Enhancing and Optimizing the Provision of Research Service

• Implementation of a new set of criteria and assessment committee structure for UVic’s internal Research / Creative Project Grants program.

• UVic Systems, in collaboration with the Office of Research Services (ORS), embarked on the development of a research administration system.

The OVPR will continue to collaborate and engage with the executive portfolios, faculties and research centres as the plan is implemented. Guidance from key UVic governance groups, including Deans’ Council, the President’s Advisory Committee, the Research Advisory Committee, the Council of Centre Directors and Senate will be sought as appropriate.


FINAL DRAFT - 2016 STRATEGIC RESEARCH PLAN PROGRESS REPORT


Strategic Research Plan Priority 1: Defining and Achieving Research Excellence Define research excellence and achieve it by aligning resources, supports and incentives to ensure that the pursuit of research excellence remains at the forefront of UVic’s academic mission.

Objectives Strategies Completed actions and comments 1.3 Promote research that engages with partners and communities to maximize opportunities for impact

1.3.1 RPKM to coordinate and facilitate research partnerships with the Office of the Vice-President External Relations (VPER) and the Office of Community- University Engagement (OCUE)

• UVic established OCUE to provides strategic oversight and vision to the University around:

o Community engaged learning o Community engaged research o Being a good neighbour o Knowledge mobilization.

• UVic has a reputation for excellence in community engaged research and OCUE will champion research activities in this area.

• OCUE has started its ‘community-engaged researchers’ monthly meetings. 1.4 Recognize and reward high-quality, fundamental and problem-focused research, nationally and internationally.

1.4.1 Increase the annual number of award nominations

• UVic’s success with external awards is increasing and in particular UVic recently realized significant success with its Royal Society of Canada nominations in 2015 with 3 new Fellows, 3 new College Members and 3 Medal Winners.

1.7 Support research communications to increase access to publicly funded research

1.7.1 Work with University Communications and Marketing (UC+M) to enhance and implement strategic research communications about UVic research excellence

• The OVPR and UC+M have been working collaboratively to enhance UVic’s strategic research communications.

• A strategic research communications plan has been developed and will be finalised and implemented in 2016-17.

• Additional communications accomplishments include: o Implementation of a successful communications strategy for the release

of the Strategic Research Plan. o Drafting research banners and handout that highlights UVic’s research

excellence which will be finalized in 2016-17. o Collaborative development and implementation of a communications

strategy to support UVic’s CFREF application. o One-year social media pilot that both engaged Tri-Council and CFI

funders in UVic content and tracked responses from UVic Twitter feeds. o Ideafest (attracted over 4800 audience members) and the UC+M-led

Walrus event. 1.7.2 Work with UC+M to create tools and training for research communications, including social media

• The OVPR annually offers research event management and communications training for Ideafest organizers.

• Ideafest 2016 included a successful enhanced social media marketing strategy. • UC+M purchased a Hootsuite Enterprise account that will be piloted in 2016-17. • OVPR initiated a social media strategy that both engaged Tri-Council and CFI

funders in UVic content and tracked responses from UVic Twitter feed. • UC+M drafted a social media training strategy for interested academic units.


https://thewalrus.ca/the-walrus-talks-quality-of-life/



1.7.3 Support the organization of conferences, workshops, colloquia, and reporting meetings with stakeholders

• To date in 2016, UVic’s OVPR provided some financial support for: o Autism Research Meeting 2016 o BC Tech Summit o IUBMB 2016 Conference o MEICON (Middle East and Islamic Studies Consortium of BC) 2016 o Cultural, Social and Political Thought 2016 Graduate Student Conference o New Ways of Analyzing Variation 45 Conference o 2016 Digital Humanities Summer Institute o History of the Book Speakers Series.

1.8 Enhance supports for graduate student research

1.8.1 Undertake a review of graduate student support with VPAC and the Faculty of Graduate Studies (FGS)

• FGS’ review of supports has resulted in the development of a new allocation strategy for distribution of fellowship and scholarship funds and incentives for improving completion times.

• Establishment of a Graduate Studies Council to ensure effective governance. 1.8.3 Work with other research universities in BC to improve competitiveness in graduate student funding, relative to other provinces

• The Research Universities’ Council of British Columbia (RUCBC) continues to petition the province to improved graduate student funding.

• RUCBC’s position is outlined in its 2015 pre-budget consultation submission to the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services and is available at: www.tupc.bc.ca/images/2015-09-21-RUCBC-Presentation-to-Select-Standing-Committee.pdf.

1.8.4 Improve competitiveness in recruiting graduate students by enhancing financial packages and enhancing campus space allocations for graduate student use

• FGS has worked with the Library to establish graduate study carrels, which provide access to 94 desks with lockable drawers for graduate students without an office.

Strategic Research Plan Priority 2: Enhancing the Integration of Research and Education Promote and support, in alignment with the UVic Edge, the integration of research and educational programs to create dynamic learning reflective of UVic’s extraordinary environment and which contributes to the vital impact of research

Objectives Strategies Completed actions and comments 2.2 Ensure that educational programs are predicated on research excellence and reciprocally, that research excellence is reflected in educational programs

2.2.1 Coordinate academic and research planning processes with VPAC

• The OVPR has developed and piloted an annual Strategic Research Initiative Planning Template for completion by Faculties and Research Centres.

• Annually, the completion of this process will be aligned with academic planning processes.

2.2.2 Work with VPAC to review awards related to the integration of research and educational programs consistent with UVic learning outcomes

• UVic has established new internal teaching award, including: o Award for Excellence in Research-Inspired Teaching o Award for Excellence in Graduate Supervision and Mentorship.


http://www.tupc.bc.ca/images/2015-09-21-RUCBC-Presentation-to-Select-Standing-Committee.pdf

http://www.tupc.bc.ca/images/2015-09-21-RUCBC-Presentation-to-Select-Standing-Committee.pdf



2.3 Provide every student with the opportunity to become engaged in the culture and activities of a research-intensive university

2.3.1 Work with academic units to expand opportunities for student engagement in research

• UVic continues engaging students in research with its successful Jamie Cassels Undergraduate Research Awards (JCURA) program.

• Awards of $1,500 each are available for undergraduate students to undertake research under the mentorship and guidance of a faculty member.

Strategic Research Plan Priority 3: Expanding Partnerships, Innovation and Entrepreneurship Expand UVic’s focus on partnerships as mechanisms to enhance innovation; generate new research opportunities; engage with community partners; mobilize knowledge in society, policy and professional practice; and support entrepreneurship on campus.

Objectives Strategies Completed actions and comments 3.1 Promote internationalization of UVic research

3.1.1 Implement international working group recommendations

• The International Research and Academic Planning (IRAP) group refreshed the International plan.

• Their report has been reviewed and a committee launched to lead on its implementation.

3.2 Improve institutional responsiveness to new opportunities for research partnerships and community engagement with regional, national and international partners

3.2.1 Engage partners and potential partners to identify key priorities for enhancing responsiveness

• The OVPR established the new role of Executive Director, Strategic Research Initiatives.

3.2.2 Contribute to the review of a revised intellectual property policy

• The Research Partnerships and Knowledge Mobilization (RPKM) unit in conjunction with the OVPR have updated UVic’s IP policy.

• The draft-revised policy was then referred to the Faculty Association’s IP Review Joint Committee for consideration.

• IP Review Joint Committee has completed its assessment and a report on their findings has been presented to the President of university and the President of the Faculty Association.

• A fully updated policy is expected to be available by end 2016-17. 3.2.5 Foster collaborative approaches to designing, conducting and implementing research and educational programs with partners

• UVic is highly receptive to collaborative approaches to research and educational programs with partners. Some example include:

o The working group established to discuss indigenous research protocols co-chaired by Charlotte Reading Director of CIRCLE and Rachael Scarth AVPRO with membership from OCUE, OIA and ORS RPKM.

o Establishment of the Coast Capital Savings Innovation Centre (CCSIC) to support and mentor entrepreneurs to take business concepts from idea to incubator-ready.

o Development of a partnership between Island Health and UVic to operate the BC Support Unit Vancouver Island Centre, a regional hub for patient-oriented research projects.

3.3 Streamline contracts management to improve service on- and off-campus

3.3.1 Establish electronic workflows and refine approval process






3.5 Increase UVic’s research profile regionally, nationally and internationally

3.5.1 Work with UC+M and RPKM to enhance and implement strategic research communications about research partnerships

• The OVPR and UC+M have been working collaboratively to enhance UVic’s strategic research communications.

• A strategic research communications plan has been developed and will be finalized and implemented in 2016-17.

• RPKM has regular meeting with UC+M’s edge team on partnerships communications.

• RPKM to participate in the annual BC Tech Summit. 3.6 Enhance community-engaged research

3.6.1 RPKM to develop cultural protocols and best practices for initiating, continuing and expanding research partnerships in collaboration with other units including OCUE and the Office of Indigenous Affairs (OIA)

• A working group has been established to discuss indigenous research protocols co-chaired by Charlotte Reading Director of CIRCLE and Rachael Scarth AVPRO with membership from OCUE, OIA and ORS RPKM.

Strategic Research Plan Priority 4: Improving Research Competitiveness through Differentiation and Specialization Concentrate resources in areas with demonstrated or strong potential for research excellence.

Objectives Strategies Completed actions and comments 4.1 Provide and sustain a high-quality research environment that enables and nurtures the expertise and aspirations of researchers

4.1.1 Develop and implement annual priority-setting process with the Research Advisory Committee and the Council of Centre Directors

• The OVPR has developed and piloted an annual Strategic Research Initiative Planning Template for completion by Faculties and Research Centres, which will continue to be implemented in 2016-17.

4.2 Enable existing and emerging dynamic research capabilities

4.2.1 Promote clustering of resources where strategically advantageous

• Internal Audit have suggested the OVPR undertake a 'management assessment' of key research infrastructure in 2016-17.

• Institutional Programs is working with Internal Audit on this assessment. 4.2.2 Ensure that the allocation of space, infrastructure and research chairs aligns with Strategic Research Plan priorities

• The OVPR is developing new CRC and CFI allocation processes to ensure alignment with the SRP priorities.

4.4 Continue to ensure that UVic meets the use and reporting requirements of the Research Support Fund




4.5 Optimize the collection of indirect costs of research

4.5.1 Engage internal community and external funders to optimize the collection of indirect costs of research

• ORS continually monitors indirect funds for eligibility and compliance.





4.5.2 Collaborate with other universities and organizations regarding related (SRP) initiatives

• The OVPR works closely with RUCBC, for example on their appeal to the Province for additional funds for graduate students.

4.6 Enable and support research centres to respond to emerging research opportunities, promote collaborative and interdisciplinary research

4.6.2 Increase research networking capacity and infrastructure

• Information gathering on potential research information systems is underway prior to the development of an acquisition process.

4.7 Provide the best possible governance of research

4.7.1 Support, or lead, research-related policy and procedure reviews

• The majority of the research related policies are due for renewal in 2017. • The review process is underway. • The new Responsible Funding Management and Financial Accountability policy

was approved and will be implemented in 2016-17. 4.8 Continue to build the visibility and reputation of UVic as a research-intensive university

4.8.1 Develop and implement a strategic research communications plan with UC+M and align Strategic Research Plan priorities with the UVic Edge

• The strategic research communications plan, which has been developed and will be finalized and implemented in 2016-17, incorporates the use of UVic Edge branding and positioning.

• All communications activities and accomplishments carried out in the first year of the SRP used the Edge branding and positioning, including for example:

o The communications strategy for the release of the Strategic Research Plan.

o The draft research banners and handout, which will be finalized in 2016-17, which highlight UVic’s research excellence.

o The UVic research webpages o The OVPR’s Ideas in Action and Knowledge publications o All Ideafest promotions.

Strategic Research Plan Priority 5: Enhancing and Optimizing the Provision of Research Service Further the pursuit of research excellence for researchers and UVic as a whole by making strategic investments in systems, staff and staff training, and through the optimization of service delivery and asset management.

Objectives Strategies Completed actions and comments 5.1 Position the Office of Research Services for 2021

5.1.1 Ensure that the Office of Research Services (ORS) annual service plan reflects Strategic Research Plan priorities

• ORS’s annual service plan is being updated to reflect the Strategic Research Plan’s priorities.

5.1.2 Implement enterprise-class research information and administration systems






5.2 Increase the quantity and improve the quality of research grant applications

5.2.1 Work with faculty to assess the needs of researchers for achieving, measuring and recognizing success

• ORS has met with all Faculties to explore the status of peer review on campus and to build strategic plans to improve uptake. Some Faculties and Departments have integrated peer review processes to improve the quality of grant submissions for specific funding opportunities.

• ORS regularly hosts capacity building workshops and grant information sessions to provide information on ORS’ services; build key skills for improving grant submissions; and provide information and resources to apply for specific funding opportunities.

5.2.2 Create a university-wide, robust system of grants facilitation and management distributed through the faculties

• UVic is currently building its research facilitators network, with a number of faculties having designated Research and Scholarship Coordinators.

• ORS chairs bi-monthly meetings with UVic research facilitators to build capacity and share key information on grants.


5.2.3 Monitor application success rates • ORS continually monitors its grants success rates, including comparing UVic success rates with national success rates for major funding competitions.

5.2.5 Develop pre-selection guidelines for institutional program opportunities

• New pre-selection guidelines are being developed for the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) and Canada Research Chairs (CRC) programs.

5.3 Support the development of annual research plans by academic units

5.3.1 Conduct a review of asset management models at other institutions

• Internal Audit has suggested the OVPR undertake a 'management assessment' of key research infrastructure in 2016-17.

• Institutional Programs is working with Internal Audit on this assessment.

5.3.2 Develop an asset management process for major UVic research infrastructure

As above

5.3.3 Seek advice from Internal Audit As above 5.4 Improve the management of major research infrastructure




• The use of the Research Support Fund is continually monitored for compliance. 5.5 Improve UVic’s internal research grants program

5.5.1 Strike a review committee, develop recommendations and consult before implementation

• The committee has returned their recommendations and a new set of criteria and new assessment committee structure for UVic’s internal research / creative project grants has been implemented.

• Additional information is available here: www.uvic.ca/research////conduct/home/funding/internalgrants/index.php.



http://www.uvic.ca/research/conduct/home/funding/internalgrants/index.php

FINALDRAFTSCORECARD

October14,2016 FINALDRAFTNOTFORCIRCULATION 1

Strategies Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5

1.1.1CommunicatewithacademicunitsandintegratethedefinitionintoEnhancedPlanningTool(EPT)processes

1.2.1IntegrateEPTqualityindicatorsforresearchintoannualprioritiesoftheOfficeoftheVice-PresidentResearch(OVPR)andimplementationplans

1.2.2AlignsubmissionstoIntegratedPlanningwithStrategicResearchPlanpriorities

1.2.3WorkwiththeOfficeoftheVice-PresidentAcademic(VPAC)andtheDeanofGraduateStudiestoconsiderincreasingtheproportionofgraduatestudentsamongthetotalstudentpopulation

1.2.4WorkwithVPACtofosteracultureofrecognitionofresearchexcellencethroughreportingandacknowledgementofresearchfundingsuccess

1.3.1RPKMtocoordinateandfacilitateresearchpartnershipswiththeOfficeoftheVice-PresidentExternalRelations(VPER)andtheOfficeofCommunity-UniversityEngagement(OCUE)

1.4.1Increasetheannualnumberofawardnominations 1.4.2WorkwithacademicunitstodefineEnhancedPlanningToolindicatorsofresearchqualitytosupportresearchawardnominations

1.5.1WorkwithVPERtousefundraisingpriority-settingprocesstoincreasedonations

1.6.1AlignEPTqualityanddemandindicatorsforresearchwithmandateandactivitiesofRPKMandOCUE

1.7.1WorkwithUniversityCommunicationsandMarketing(UC+M)toenhanceandimplementstrategicresearchcommunicationsaboutUVicresearchexcellence

1.7.2WorkwithUC+Mtocreatetoolsandtrainingforresearchcommunications,includingsocialmedia

1.7.3Supporttheorganizationofconferences,workshops,colloquia,andreportingmeetingswithstakeholders

1.7.4Workwithlibrariestosupportopen-accessinitiatives 1.8.1UndertakeareviewofgraduatestudentsupportwithVPACandtheFacultyofGraduateStudies(FGS)

1.8.2WorkwithVPERtousefundraisingpriority-settingprocesstoincreasedonationsforgraduateresearch

1.8.3WorkwithotherresearchuniversitiesinBCtoimprovecompetitivenessingraduatestudentfunding,relativetootherprovinces

1.8.4Improvecompetitivenessinrecruitinggraduatestudentsbyenhancingfinancialpackagesandenhancingcampusspaceallocationsforgraduatestudentuse

1.9.1WorkwithVPACandFGStoconsolidateadministrativesupportsforpost-doctoralfellows

Legend

ImplementedinY1andcompleted

ImplementedinY1andongoing

ImplementationplannedforY2

ImplementationplannedforY2andongoing

ImplementationplannedforY3andongoing


FINALDRAFTSCORECARD


1.9.2WorkwithVPACandFGStoimprovetheprofileofandsupportsforpost-doctoralfellows

2.1.1WorkcollaborativelywithVPAConhiringprocesses 2.2.1CoordinateacademicandresearchplanningprocesseswithVPAC

2.2.2WorkwithVPACtoreviewawardsrelatedtotheintegrationofresearchandeducationalprogramsconsistentwithUViclearningoutcomes

2.3.1Workwithacademicunitstoexpandopportunitiesforstudentengagementinresearch 2.3.2Provideon-campusanddistance-learningresearchopportunities

2.4.1WorkwithFGStomonitorprogramcompletionratesforgraduatestudents 2.5.1PromotedigitalinformationfluencytrainingthroughoutUVic

3.1.1Implementinternationalworkinggrouprecommendations

3.1.2Identifysupportsforongoingandnewinternationalresearchpartnerships 3.2.1Engagepartnersandpotentialpartnerstoidentifykeyprioritiesforenhancingresponsiveness

3.2.2Contributetothereviewofarevisedintellectualpropertypolicy

3.2.3FostergreatercollaborationbetweenUVicresearchersandcompaniesattheVancouverIslandTechnologyPark

3.2.4WorkwiththeVPER,OCUEandregionaleconomicdevelopmentleadershiptocreatetheconditionsandopportunitiesforeconomicandsocialdevelopmentthatimprovewellbeingofcitizens

3.2.5Fostercollaborativeapproachestodesigning,conductingandimplementingresearchandeducationalprogramswithpartners

3.3.1Establishelectronicworkflowsandrefineapprovalprocess

3.4.1WorkwithOfficeoftheVice-PresidentFinanceandOperations(VPFO)toexplorethepotentialfortheuniversitytogainaccesstoventurecapital

3.5.1WorkwithUC+MandRPKMtoenhanceandimplementstrategicresearchcommunicationsaboutresearchpartnerships

3.6.1RPKMtodevelopculturalprotocolsandbestpracticesforinitiating,continuingandexpandingresearchpartnershipsincollaborationwithotherunitsincludingOCUEandtheOfficeofIndigenousAffairs(OIA)

3.7.1identifyopportunitiesforlibrarianstocollaborateonresearchprojects

3.7.2RaiseawarenessoftheabilityofUVicLibrariestoaccessothercollectionsandrepositories

4.1.1Developandimplementannualpriority-settingprocesswiththeResearchAdvisoryCommitteeandtheCouncilofCentreDirectors

4.2.1Promoteclusteringofresourceswherestrategicallyadvantageous

4.2.2Ensurethattheallocationofspace,infrastructureandresearchchairsalignswithStrategicResearchPlanpriorities

4.2.3Identifyopportunitiesforincreasingandimprovingspaceforresearchersandstudents 4.2.4Explorewaystoprovideseed-fundingforinterdisciplinaryconferencesandworkshops

4.3.1DeveloparesearchchairsforumfocusedonresearchleadershipforUVic 4.4.1WorkwithVPFOtoreviewResearchSupportFundusetoensureconsistencywithevolvingreportingrequirements

4.5.1Engageinternalcommunityandexternalfunderstooptimizethecollectionofindirectcostsofresearch

4.5.2Collaboratewithotheruniversitiesandorganizationsregardingrelated(SRP)initiatives

4.6.1Developstandardizedannualreportingtemplates 4.6.2Increaseresearchnetworkingcapacityandinfrastructure

4.7.1Support,orlead,research-relatedpolicyandprocedurereviews


FINALDRAFTSCORECARD


4.8.1DevelopandimplementastrategicresearchcommunicationsplanwithUC+MandalignStrategicResearchPlanprioritieswiththeUVicEdge

5.1.1EnsurethatORS’annualserviceplanreflectsStrategicResearchPlanpriorities 5.1.2Implemententerprise-classresearchinformationandadministrationsystems 5.2.1Workwithfacultytoassesstheneedsofresearchersforachieving,measuringandrecognizingsuccess

5.2.2Createauniversity-wide,robustsystemofgrantsfacilitationandmanagementdistributedthroughthefaculties

5.2.3Monitorapplicationsuccessrates 5.2.4OptimizeORSworkflowconsistentwithdifferentiatedservices

5.2.5Developpre-selectionguidelinesforinstitutionalprogramopportunities

5.2.6WorkwithFacultyofGraduateStudiestodevelopgrantsfacilitationsupportsforgraduatestudents

5.3.1Conductareviewofassetmanagementmodelsatotherinstitutions

5.3.2DevelopanassetmanagementprocessformajorUVicresearchinfrastructure

5.3.3SeekadvicefromInternalAudit 5.4.1WorkwithVPFOtoreviewResearchSupportFundusetoensureconsistencywithevolvingreportingrequirements

5.5.1Strikeareviewcommittee,developrecommendationsandconsultbeforeimplementation(toimproveUVic’sinternalresearchgrantsprogram)

5.6.1Exploresourcesoffundstoincreasediscretionaryactivity


VERSIONFORPILOTPROCESS October19,2016

STRATEGICRESEARCHINITIATIVESPLANTEMPLATEFORFACULTIES(Pleaseuseonetableperinitiativeforuptofiveinitiatives)1.STRATEGICRESEARCHINITIATIVEPleasegiveanoverviewoftheinitiativeincludingitsintendedduration(~350words).

2.PRIORITYRATINGIfmorethanoneinitiativeisbeingadvancedinthiscycle,indicatepriority(1=highestpriority)

3.RESEARCHSTRENGTHDescribehowthisinitiativerelatestoanexistingoremergingresearchstrength.

4.STRATEGICRESEARCHPLANHowdoesthisinitiativealignwiththestrengths,priorities,objectivesandstrategiesintheStrategicResearchPlan?

5.ACADEMICPLANHowdoesthisinitiativealignwiththeAcademicPlanforthefaculty?

6.LINKAGESTOENHANCEDPLANNINGHowwillthisinitiativecontributetoEPTenhancementsinQUALITY,DEMAND,PRODUCTIVITY&EFFICIENCY,orIMPACT&CONTRIBUTION?IndicatespecificdesiredoutcomesforanyapplicableEPTcriteria.

7.COLLABORATIONIdentifyopportunitiesforexisting,plannedorprospectivecollaborationwithotherunits.HowwillthisinitiativecontributetoexistingcollaborationsasidentifiedinEPT(e.g.,meetingdemand,interdisciplinarity,successofyourandotherunits)?

8.PHYSICALRESOURCESPleasedescribeanyspecificinfrastructureorspacerequirementsforthisinitiativeandifthepersonnelneedsrequireVPACinvolvement.



Pleaseaddressthefollowingitemswhereapplicabletothestrategicresearchinitiative

9.INTERNATIONALRESEARCHHowdoestheinitiativealignwiththeInternationalizationPlan?

10.INDIGENOUSRESEARCHHowdoestheinitiativealignwiththeIndigenousPlan?

11.FUNDRAISINGIndicatewhethertheinitiativealignswiththefundraisingprioritiesalreadyidentifiedornewfundraisingpriorities.

12.INSTITUTIONALFUNDINGPROGRAMSIndicatewhetherthereisastrategytoapplyforfundingforthisinitiativefromexternalfundingprogramssuchasNCEorCFI?

13.FACULTYRECRUITMENTIftheinitiativecontemplatesrecruitingfacultyfromprogramslikeCRC,IRC,CERC,pleasedescribe.

14.RESEARCHCENTRESWhichofUVic’sresearchcentreswouldbeinvolvedintheinitiative?

15.RESEARCH-INSPIREDEDUCATIONALPROGRAMSHowwilltheintegrationoftheresearchinitiativeandeducationalprogramminghaveimpactonundergraduate,graduatestudentsandpostdocs?

16.RESEARCHPARTNERSHIPSIftheinitiativeinvolvesexisting,orthecreationofnewpartnershipswithcommunity,industry,government,describethepartnersandtheirinvolvementintheinitiative.

17.INTERNALCOMMUNICATIONWhatcommunicationstrategiesinternaltoUVicwouldberequiredtomaketheinitiativeasuccess?

18.KNOWLEDGEMOBILIZATIONDescribethespecificknowledgemobilizationstrategiesbeingcontemplatedthatwouldrequireadditionalresourcesorsupports.



STRATEGICRESEARCHINITIATIVESPLANTEMPLATEFORRESEARCHCENTRES(Pleaseuseonetableperinitiativeforuptofiveinitiatives)1.STRATEGICRESEARCHINITIATIVEPleasegiveanoverviewoftheinitiativeincludingitsintendedduration(~350words).

2.PRIORITYRATINGIfmorethanoneinitiativeisbeingadvancedinthiscycle,indicatepriority(1=highestpriority)

3.RESEARCHSTRENGTHDescribehowthisinitiativerelatestoanexistingoremergingresearchstrengthofthecentre.

4.STRATEGICRESEARCHPLANHowdoesthisinitiativealignwiththestrengths,priorities,objectivesandstrategiesintheStrategicResearchPlan?

5.LINKAGESTOENHANCEDPLANNINGHowwillthisinitiativecontributetoEPTenhancementsinQUALITY,DEMAND,PRODUCTIVITY&EFFICIENCY,orIMPACT&CONTRIBUTION?IndicatespecificdesiredoutcomesforanyapplicableEPTcriteria.

6.COLLABORATIONIdentifyopportunitiesforexisting,plannedorprospectivecollaborationwithotherunits.HowwillthisinitiativecontributetoexistingcollaborationsasidentifiedinEPT(e.g.,meetingdemand,interdisciplinarity,successofyourandotherunits)?

7.PHYSICALRESOURCESPleasedescribeanyspecificinfrastructureorspacerequirementsforthisinitiativeandifthepersonnelneedsrequireVPACinvolvement.



Pleaseaddressthefollowingitemswhereapplicabletothestrategicresearchinitiative8.INTERNATIONALRESEARCHHowdoestheinitiativealignwiththeInternationalizationPlan?

9.INDIGENOUSRESEARCHHowdoestheinitiativealignwiththeIndigenousPlan?

10.FUNDRAISINGIndicatewhethertheinitiativealignswiththefundraisingprioritiesalreadyidentifiedornewfundraisingpriorities.

11.INSTITUTIONALFUNDINGPROGRAMSIndicatewhetherthereisastrategytoapplyforfundingforthisinitiativefromexternalfundingprogramssuchasNCEorCFI?

12.FACULTYRECRUITMENTIftheinitiativecontemplatesrecruitingfacultyfromprogramslikeCRC,IRC,CERC,pleasedescribe.

13.DEPARTMENTS/FACULTYWhichofUVic’sdepartments/facultywouldbeinvolvedintheinitiative?

14.RESEARCH-INSPIREDEDUCATIONALPROGRAMSIfapplicable,howwilltheintegrationoftheresearchinitiativeandeducationalprogramminghaveimpactonundergraduate,graduatestudentsandpostdocs?

15.RESEARCHPARTNERSHIPSIftheinitiativeinvolvesexisting,orthecreationofnewpartnershipswithcommunity,industry,government,describethepartnersandtheirinvolvementintheinitiative.

16.INTERNALCOMMUNICATIONWhatcommunicationstrategiesinternaltoUVicwouldberequiredtomaketheinitiativeasuccess?

17.KNOWLEDGEMOBILIZATIONDescribethespecificknowledgemobilizationstrategiesbeingcontemplatedthatwouldrequireadditionalresourcesorsupports.


As you know, citations for the honorary graduands for whom the Senate approves degrees are written and read at convocation by the university’s orators. The citations convey to those attending convocation what the individuals have achieved and why we are recognizing them, as well as communicating to the honorands the university’s recognition and appreciation. The terms of reference for orators are attached. Over the past year, UVic’s orators have been led by Dr. John Archibald. As Dr. Archibald steps down as University Orator on December 31, 2016, I’m sure you’ll join me in thanking him for all his work in that role. Dr. Archibald has agreed to continue to serve the university as an orator. Dr. Lynne Van Luven has kindly agreed to serve as the University Orator beginning January 1, 2017, should Senate appoint her. I am pleased and excited to recommend her appointment to you.

MOTION: THAT the Senate appoint Dr. Lynne Van Luven as University Orator for a term from January 1, 2017 until December 31, 2019.

AND MOTION:

THAT the Senate appoint Dr. John Archibald as Orator for a term from January 1, 2017 until December 31, 2019.

/Attachment

Office of the President and Vice-Chancellor PO Box 1700 STN CSC Victoria British Columbia V8W 2Y2 Canada Tel 250-721-7002 Fax 250-721-8654 E-mail [email protected] web.uvic.ca/president

Date: September 21, 2016 To: Members of the Senate Copy: Dr. Susan Lewis, Chair, Convocation Committee From: Jamie Cassels, President and Vice-Chancellor Re: University Orator


Name: Orators

Approving Authority: Senate Effective Date: March 2008

Supersedes: March 1991 Last Editorial Change: N/A

TERMS OF REFERENCE The Senate of the University of Victoria recognizes and honours individuals for their outstanding achievements by awarding them honorary degrees. Such degrees are presented at Convocation. Orators play a vital role in recognizing and celebrating the recipients. They research, write and deliver citations that articulate for both a general and an academic audience, the reasons why the honorary degree is being granted. The University maintains a roster of orators, appointed by the Senate, that includes a University Orator, a Deputy University Orator and other orators.

I University Orator The University Orator will: 1. research and write citations for honorary graduands and read those citations at

Convocation; 2. provide instruction and advice to other orators; 3. assign orators to work on particular citations; 4. edit draft citations; and 5. assist in the recruitment and orientation of new orators.

II Deputy University Orator The Deputy University Orator will: 1. research and write citations for honorary graduands and read those citations at

Convocation; and 2. act for the University Orator when he or she is absent.

III Orators The Orators will: 1. research and write citations for honorary graduands and read their citations at

Convocation.


PROCEDURES 1. The University Orator, Deputy University Orator and other Orators will be appointed by the

Senate upon the recommendation of the President. The Chair and Vice-Chair of the Convocation Committee will advise the President on such appointments.

2. The Chair and Vice-Chair of the Convocation Committee will seek to appoint as orators

members of the university community who:

are excellent public speakers; are able to shape biographical materials into a portrait which explains the

achievements and qualities of the recipient of the honorary degree (ie: not a mere c.v.);

are available at the times of Convocation (spring, fall); and enjoy seeing students convocate and participating in Convocation.

3. The term of appointment will normally be three years, renewable, from July 1 to June 30.

NOTES 1. Service as an orator is deemed to be service to the university under the Framework

Agreement (Joint Committee on the Administration of the Framework Agreement Annual Report 2006).

2. An individual who has not yet been appointed as an orator by the Senate may be invited

by the University Orator to prepare and deliver a citation.


*please note change in room* - university of victoria · 2020-04-30 · university of victoria...

Documents

please note change in room - university of victoria · 2020-04-30 · university of victoria...