draft agenda - university of the fraser valley (ufv.ca) › media › assets › trades ›...

Draft

AGENDA

Applied & Technical Studies Faculty Council Thursday, January 14, 2016

2:00 – 3:30 pm, Rivers Dining Room

Agenda Package Page #

1. Welcome from the Chair John

2. Presentation: Agriculture Centre of Excellence

Garry Fehr, Director, ACE

3. Items for Approval John

3.1. Agenda, January 14, 2016 Pg. 1

3.2. Minutes, November 12, 2015 Pg. 2-5

3.3. Minutes, December 3, 2015 Pg. 6-8

4. Review of Action Items Outstanding from Minutes of November 12, 2015 John Pg. 9

5. Unfinished Business

5.1. Faculty Standards – Rank and Tenure Criteria Nancy

6. Dean’s Report

7. Reports from Other Faculty Council Representatives

8. New Business

8.1. Curriculum Committee Membership John Pg. 10-11

8.2. OHS Report Mark

8.3. Terms of Reference – Two year review John Pg. 12-14

8.4. UFV 2025 Goals John Pg. 15-30

8.5. Grading System Policy (101) John Pg. 31-39

8.6. Academic Program and Unit Reviews Policy (189) John Pg. 40-58

8.7. Annual Pro D Day Rod/ Daniel

9. Information Items

9.1. UFV Counselling Department events/workshops Pg. 59-63

Next Meeting, February 11, 2016

A&TS Faculty Council Agenda Package - January 14, 2016 1

November 12, 2015 Applied & Technical Studies Faculty Council Minutes, DRAFT 1 of 5

DRAFT MINUTES APPLIED & TECHNICAL STUDIES FACULTY COUNCIL

Thursday, November 12, 2015 2:00 pm, Rivers Dining Room

CEP Campus

Chair: John English Present: Allan Arndt* Avner Bachar Brenda Fredrick* Bruce Corbeil Daniel Smythe Heather Compeau* Jamie Ubell Jeremy Abbott Jim Carson Joel Feenstra Justin Payne Mark Ryan Mehtab Rai Nancy Barker Nick Penner Paul Gumprich Renee Prasad Rod McLeod Rodney Smith Rolf Arnold* Shannon Draney Tricia Thomson Regrets: Al Behmer Dean Key Greg St. Hilaire Myles Andrew Pat McGurk Sandy Hill* Ted Zak Tom Baumann Wally Gallinger Guests: Pierce Stoeckly* Recorder: Kelli Graham*

*non-voting member 1. WELCOME FROM THE CHAIR

John English, Chair, called the meeting to order at 2:00 pm. The Chair welcomed the two student representatives for the 2015-16 year:

Justin Payne, Heavy Mechanical Program Mehtab Rai, Culinary Arts Program

2. ITEMS FOR APPROVAL

2.1. Agenda, November 12, 2015

MOTION T. Thomson/D. Smythe

THAT the agenda be adopted as presented. CARRIED

2.2. Minutes, September 10, 2015

MOTION B. Corbeil/J. Ubell

THAT the minutes of 2015-09-10 be approved with the following amendment: 8.7 Curriculum Committee Report Additions to the motion: “….approve, in principle, the proposed

changes to the Plumbing and Piping Program….as presented by the Curriculum Committee and to be forwarded to UEC with the Dean’s final approval.”

CARRIED



3. REVIEW OF ACTION ITEMS OUTSTANDING FROM MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 12

3.1. Inter-faculty collaboration

Allan will work on a date for a tour of the TTC building in December. 3.2. Access to Man Gates

Facilities are unable to circulate keys to faculty for the ‘man’ gates.

3.3. Alumni Relations

A former student from the Electrical CTC program will be honoured at the Town and Gown fundraising event on the evening of November 12, 2015. This shows improvement in the concerns expressed regarding Applied & Technical students being recognized for their achievements.

3.4. Program Changes

The Dean and Associate Dean have met with Sylvie Murray and a process is in place for approval of changes to ITA programs.

4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS

4.1. Faculty Standards – Rank and Tenure Criteria

The Faculty Standards document on Rank and Tenure was approved by an online vote on June 12, 2015. This document was submitted to the Faculty Standards Committee for review on November 4, 2015. Nancy brought forward minor changes to the document based on recommendations from the Faculty Standards Committee. MOTION N. Barker/B. Corbeil

THAT the Applied and Technical Studies faculty council approve the revisions to the Faculty Standards document on rank and tenure as presented. CARRIED

A committee will be created to work on the procedures for advancing rank and tenure at a later date.

5. DEAN’S REPORT

5.1. Enrolment Update

The Dean reported on the updated enrolments showing some reductions to a few programs. As our budget is based on a tuition revenue sharing model, it is important to meet are target enrolments and promote and fill our classes.

5.2. Parking

The Dean reminded all faculty and staff to park in the designated employee parking areas. The compound at the back of the TTC building is off limits to parking personal vehicles.

6. REPORTS FROM OTHER FACULTY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES

Brenda commented on declining enrolment in the College of Arts and the risk of losing certain photography programs. She also reported on her attendance at the Digital Technologies Forum, which she found very informative and exciting. Ted Zak also attended the forum on behalf of the Applied & Technical Studies faculty.



Allan reported that the Faculty of Science is currently hiring for chemistry and math. Outstanding alumni from Science will be acknowledged at the Town and Gown event in Abbotsford this evening. All is also working on a date for the science faculty to tour Agriculture and the Trades & Technology Centre.

Heather Compeau reminded the group to contact her if they would like to order any library resources, as there is still a small amount in the budget for this year.

Sandy Hill was unable to attend this meeting but the committee requested an update at the next scheduled meeting.

7. NEW BUSINESS

7.1. Trades Entrance Requirements

The Chair of the Curriculum Committee provided information on proposed changes to the Trades entrance requirements submitted by staff, but did not bring forward a recommendation at this time.

The committee indicated that they needed time to consult more broadly and the Dean requested that they meet with Deborah Hawkes and Melissa Bukta, all faculty and staff, the Dean, Associate Dean and the UEC chair.

A few faculty members spoke in favour of the current proposal as presented.

The Chair requested that the Curriculum Committee report back to the Dean in one week with a recommendation and that a special extraordinary meeting be held to discuss this proposal.

ACTION: Curriculum Committee

MOTION M. Rai/R. McLeod

THAT, the Applied & Technical Studies recommend that the Dean strike a committee to aide and increase enrolments. CARRIED

7.2. OHS Report

Defer to future meeting

7.3. BC Open Textbook Project


7.4. Terms of Reference – Two year review


7.5. Student Safety Card – Reward System (Carpentry)


7.6. Percentage Numbers to Grades for Trades Programs


7.7. Annual Pro D Day




8. INFORMATION ITEMS

8.1. Award – Best Support by an Educational Institute

The Associate Dean announced that the faculty of Applied & Technical studies received an award from Air Care for Best Support by an Educational Institute. This award is due to the great work done by Dean Key and Bernie Duncan in the Automotive Apprenticeship program. MOTION The meeting adjourned at 3:50 pm. M. Ryan Next meeting: Extraordinary meeting to be scheduled in December Agenda item: Trades Entrance Requirements Next regular meeting: January 14, 2016


December 3, 2015 Applied & Technical Studies Faculty Council Extraordinary Meeting Minutes, DRAFT 1 of 3

DRAFT MINUTES APPLIED & TECHNICAL STUDIES FACULTY COUNCIL

EXTRAORDINARY MEETING

Thursday, December 3, 2015 2:00 pm, Room 1053

CEP Campus

Chair: John English Present: Al Behmer Avner Bachar Brenda Fredrick* Bruce Corbeil Daniel Smythe Greg St. Hilaire Jamie Ubell Jeremy Abbott Jim Carson Joel Feenstra Justin Payne Mark Ryan Myles Andrew Nancy Barker Nick Penner Pat McGurk Paul Gumprich Renee Prasad Rod McLeod Rodney Smith Sandy Hill* Shannon Draney Ted Zak Tom Baumann Tricia Thomson Regrets: Allan Arndt* Dean Key Heather Compeau* Mehtab Rai Rolf Arnold* Wally Gallinger Recorder: Kelli Graham*

*non-voting member 1. WELCOME FROM THE CHAIR

John English, Chair, called the meeting to order at 2:00 pm.

2. ITEMS FOR APPROVAL

2.1. Agenda, December 3, 2015

MOTION B. Corbeil/P. Gumprich

THAT the agenda be adopted as presented. CARRIED

3. UNFINISHED BUSINESS

3.1. Trades Entrance Requirements

The Chair of the Curriculum Committee provided an update on the proposed changes to the Trades entrance requirements. Several meetings have taken place to consult with the various groups regarding entrance requirements for trades programs.

The following motion was brought forward:

MOTION N. Penner/M. Ryan

THAT, the Applied & Technical Studies faculty council approve the prerequisites, as noted below:



Prerequisite recommendation:

1. B.C. secondary school graduation or equivalent or mature student status (age 19 years +); and

2. Successful completion of a grade 11 math or equivalent with a ‘C’ grade or better or successful completion of a math entrance exam; and

3. Successful completion of grade 12 English or Communications or equivalent with a ‘C’ grade or better or successful completion of an English comprehension entrance exam.

Note: Students who have not been in any schooling for more than 3 years are strongly advised to take the recommended mathematics assessment tests to determine level of preparedness. The assessment test will identify specific areas that require strengthening to maximize the opportunities for program success. In most cases, the upgrading can be taken simultaneously with the program.

Further, The Curriculum Committee strongly recommends that a comprehensive and real-time intervention system be put in place so that students who experience challenges with mathematics concepts can receive fast and thorough extra support required to be successful in the program.

The committee discussed the math requirement in more detail and it was noted that several institutions in the area do not have this high level of math and that this could be a barrier for our students. As enrolments are becoming an issue, it was suggested that we decrease the boundaries and barriers to accept students, but increase the support that we provide to students in order for them to be successful. A suggestion was made to lower the math requirement to grade 10 as the grade 11 curriculum focused mainly on Algebra, which is not required for trades programs. Suggestions were made to use the Academic Success centre, Kahn Academy and other resources when determining assessments and supports for students. This will be looked at in more detail as the next step. As a result of these discussions, the committee brought forward an amendment to the motion: AMENDMENT TO MOTION N. Barker/J. Carson

THAT, the Applied & Technical Studies faculty council amend the motion as follows:

CARRIED Change the wording of the pre-requisites for all programs (with the exception of Drafting and Electrical). Drafting will remain as is and Electrical will require a Math 10 ‘B’ grade or better. Revised wording:

“Successful completion of grade 11 10 math or UFV equivalent with a ‘C’ grade or better or successful completion of a math entrance UFV trades math entrance exam; and



Successful completion of grade 12 English or Communications or equivalent with a ‘C’ grade or better or successful completion of an English Reading comprehension entrance exam.

Note: Students who have not been in any schooling for more than 3 years are strongly advised to take the recommended mathematics assessment tests to determine level of preparedness. The assessment test will may identify specific areas that require strengthening to maximize optimize the opportunities for program success. In most cases, the upgrading can be taken simultaneously with the program.

MOTION The meeting adjourned at 3:26 pm. B. Corbeil Next regular meeting: January 14, 2016

ORIGINAL MOTION AS AMENDED: N. Penner/M. Ryan

THAT, the Applied & Technical Studies faculty council approve changes to prerequisites of all programs (except as noted) as follows:

1. B.C. secondary school graduation or equivalent or mature student status (age 19 years +); and

2. Successful completion of grade 10 math or UFV equivalent with a ‘C’ grade or better or successful completion of a UFV trades math entrance exam; and

3. Successful completion of grade 12 English or Communications or equivalent with a ‘C’ grade or better or successful completion of a Reading comprehension entrance exam.

Note: Students who have not been in any schooling for more than 3 years are strongly advised to take the recommended mathematics assessment test to determine level of preparedness. The assessment test may identify specific areas that require strengthening to optimize the opportunities for program success. In most cases, upgrading can be taken simultaneously with the program.

These changes to the wording of the pre-requisites are for all programs (with the exception of Drafting and Electrical). Drafting will remain as is and Electrical will require a Math 10 ‘B’ grade or better.

CARRIED



REVIEW OF ACTION ITEMS OUTSTANDING FROM MINUTES of November 12, 2015

1.

Inter-faculty Collaboration – Biology department is interested in attending a tour of TTC.

ACTION: John E. /Allan A.

John and Allan to set date in December.

2.

Spring Break at TTC

ACTION: Rolf

Survey took place first week of May. Another survey to take place in the fall to get feedback from new students. Reading Break (February) or Spring Break (March)

3.

UFV Safety Policy – Committee (John English, Mark Ryan, Kevin Brennan and Bruce Corbeil.)

ACTION: John E.

4. Trilogy Locking System

ACTION: AllAll faculty and staff to obtain a new ID card for access to doors.

5.

Diplomas for Apprenticeship Graduates – Task force to begin work on this.

ACTION: Daniel, Jamie, Ted, Nick

6.

Compound Access – Signage to be placed on either end of south-side compound

ACTION: Faculty

“Authorized Personnel Only”


Curriculum Committee Membership

December 2015

..

..

..

September 2013

Pat McGurk

Rodney Smith

Nick Penner

September 2011

Tricia Thomson

Bernie Duncan

Nick Penner


Last update: December 2015

Applied & Technical Studies Faculty Council Curriculum Committee

Terms of Reference Responsibilities

The Applied & Technical Studies Faculty Council Curriculum Committee is responsible for reviewing the Applied & Technical Studies programs and/or courses in their present configurations and planning further development with a view to ensuring excellence as an educational attainment and responsiveness to the needs of the communities we serve. This committee must approve any changes that affect Applied & Technical Studies programs and/or courses before being sent to the Undergraduate Education Committee. Such changes include, but are not limited to:

1. New programs and/or courses in Applied & Technical Studies 2. Changes to programs and/or courses in Applied & Technical Studies 3. Changes to requirements of existing programs and/or courses

All members are responsible for consulting with and representing all constituents without bias.

Membership

Members of the Applied & Technical Studies Faculty Council Curriculum Committee will include:

1. Three full-time permanent faculty members from the Faculty of Applied &

Technical Studies for a two-year term.


- 1 -

UNIVERSITY OF THE FRASER VALLEY

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE STRUCTURE AND FUNCTION OF THE

FACULTY OF APPLIED AND TECHNICAL STUDIES FACULTY COUNCIL

Approved by Faculty Council – March 13, 2014

1. PREAMBLE

In accordance with the University Act of British Columbia, c. 468 RSBC (1996) faculties of universities are required to make rules for the governance, direction and management of their affairs and to ensure that such affairs are conducted with representation from their membership.

2. ESTABLISHMENT OF FACULTY COUNCILS

In accordance with the University Act and with the amended University Act, 2008, Faculty Councils are hereby established as the senior academic governance bodies of the Faculties at the University of the Fraser Valley and each Council shall be responsible for its Faculty’s respective governance and management of academic affairs.

3. MANDATE

Faculty Councils shall:

a. serve as the forum for sharing information and the discussion of academic matters;

b. receive recommendations related to academic programs, including but not limited to: development of new programs, program changes, new courses, discontinuation of courses;

c. vote on recommendations as related to the above;

d. transmit recommendations to Senate;

e. pass policies related to the functioning of the Faculty Council;

f. deal with matters assigned by the Board or Senate. 4. MEMBERSHIP

4.1. Voting Membership

Voting membership of each Faculty Council shall be comprised of the following from each Faculty:

a. faculty members

b. two student representatives elected by students in the Faculty for a one-year term

c. two support staff representatives employed within the Faculty, elected by support staff for a two-year term

d. two sessional/relief instructor representatives elected by sessional/relief instructors for a one-year term

e. Departments which offer a major(s) that may be taken as part of a degree program in another faculty will have two designated representatives in this faculty council with full voting rights in this faculty council, except that they may not stand for election to Senate or vote to elect a senator as a member of this faculty council.

f. Dean of the Faculty

g. President


- 2 -

4.2. Ex-Officio and Non-voting Members

Non-voting membership:

a. Registrar and Secretary to the Faculty Council

a.b. Associate Dean

b.c. Director, School of Trades of Trades & Technology Training

c.d. Vice-President Academic and Provost

d.e. One member of Senate

e.f. One representative each from other Faculty Councils

f.g. Those invited by the Dean in consultation with the Faculty Council

g.h. University Librarian or designate

5. FACULTY BUSINESS

Faculty business will normally be carried out at regularly scheduled Council meetings where there is a quorum. The Faculty Council has the right to delegate business to Standing Committees and Ad Hoc Committees, which may make recommendations to the Council for consideration. The Dean of the Faculty will assume the role of Chair on these committees, until such time as a Chair may be elected by the committee.

Standing Committees: Standing Committees will report to the Faculty Council. Standing Committees will consist of Faculty Council members elected by the Council and members appointed by the Dean to a maximum of 50% of the committee members. Members appointed by the Dean need not be members of the Faculty Council. The Dean is a non-voting ex-officio member of all Standing Committees.

Ad Hoc Committees: may be struck by the Faculty Council for specific purposes and dissolved upon completion of task.

6. QUORUM

A quorum will consist of at least twenty percent (20%) of the voting members of Council.

7. VOTING

Under normal circumstances, voting takes place during council meetings, and decisions are made by a simple majority of voters. In the event of extenuating circumstances or unforeseen events which cause disruptions to regular meeting schedules, such as school closures due to weather or urgent business that requires a decision prior to the next scheduled meeting, voting may be conducted by email or other electronic technologies, at the discretion of the chair and vice-chair. In this case, all council members must be polled for a minimum of three business days, and the number of votes cast must be equivalent to or exceed the council’s quorum in order for the decision to be valid. The results of electronic votes shall be reported via email, as well as at the next council meeting, and recorded in its minutes.

8. CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR

The Dean of the Faculty shall serve as Chair of its Faculty Council. A Vice-Chair will be elected by the Council using the Faculty’s nomination and election procedure. The Vice-Chair will be elected for a two-year term.

9. AGENDA AND MINUTES

a. Council’s agenda will be set by the Dean (or Vice-Chair) in consultation with the Secretary (Registrar) and the members of the Faculty Council;


- 3 -

b. Minutes will be kept by a Secretary appointed by the Dean;

c. Agenda, minutes and written reports will be circulated to Council members at least twenty-four hours prior to meetings, though normally Council members will be given at least seven days advanced notice on voting matters.

10. MEETING TIMES

Meetings will be held at least three times per year. Notwithstanding, the Dean has the right to call a Council meeting at any time if there is urgent business that requires the attention of the Faculty Council.

11. REVIEW OF TERMS OF REFERENCE

The terms of reference shall be reviewed at least every three years.


To: Faculty/College Councils, Admin-Co, Academic Advising Council, Deans’ Caucus, SUS Executive, Human Resources, Library, Finance, O’Reg, Student Services

From: The UFV 2025 Visioning Committee Subject: Next Steps in UFV 2025 Process – Consultation on Education Plan Goals First of all, many thanks to all who have engaged in the process thus far. In response to suggestions from faculty we have made some changes to the planned next steps in the process. The process thus far has produced an institutional vision, UFV 2025: A Vision for our Future. The visioning process is complete and the final document, including two small revisions suggested by faculty,1 can be found on H:/TEMP/UFV 2025. This vision will inform the five goals that will constitute the core of our Education Plan, 2016-20. We are now moving towards completing the Education Plan which is due to APPC in March 2016. We recently conducted goal-setting charrettes that produced a wealth of suggested ideas and strategies for achieving goals, but very few actual goals. This fact, plus requests from faculty for another opportunity to engage in the goal-setting process—and this time within Faculty/College Councils—have led us to modify the next steps. With the aim of maximizing opportunities for everyone to be involved in the final goal-setting, we are asking all Faculty/College Councils, administrative groups, and support units to participate in a collective exercise of selecting the top five goals UFV needs to achieve by 2020. To this end, we have outlined the following steps in the process: • Drawing on themes expressed by students, staff, faculty, and administrators in the charrettes, as

well as what we have heard from you over the past year, the Visioning Committee has developed 9 goals for achieving our Vision and will circulate them to the institution in mid-December.

o It will be the responsibility of each unit/area Head or Director to ensure their members have an opportunity to contribute in some way prior to the end of January.

• In January, consultation on the goals will take place in Faculty/College Councils and various units and committees (e.g., Admin-Co, Academic Advising Council, Deans’ Caucus, SUS Executive, HR, the Library, Finance, OReg, Student Services, etc.).

o Each group will collectively rank the nine goals. o In addition, they will identify how strongly they support each goal. If more than five goals

can be strongly supported, the Visioning Committee would consider extending the number of goals in the Education Plan.

o If there is a goal that emerged from the Visioning document that the committee has missed, we encourage groups to submit them for possible inclusion in the Education Plan.

• At the end of January, the Visioning Committee will receive the selections and finalize the institutional goals.

• In February, the Visioning Committee will distribute the final goals to Faculty/College Councils and other units.

1 In the section that articulates the core of our vision (“What are we going to be in 2025?), we have changed the phrase “learner- and student-focused” to “learner- and student-centred” and, to be explicit about the consistency of the commitment expressed in the second-to-last paragraph with the bolded statement near the beginning of this section, we have inserted the word “global” before “citizenship.”


• The institutional goals will be accomplished by setting and achieving institutional strategies at the Faculty/College, unit, and administrative levels.

o Each Council, department and unit, therefore, will be responsible for developing the strategies each area will focus on over the next 5 years.

o These strategies will be sent to the Visioning Committee by the end of February. • In early March, the Visioning Committee will finalize UFV’s 2016-20 Education Plan. • The Education Plan will then be brought to the March meeting of APPC for approval and

recommendation to Senate. • In April, the Education Plan will be brought to Senate for approval and recommendation to the

Board. • In May, the Education Plan will proceed to the Board for final approval. Sending this memo out now will allow all units to place the Education Plan goal-prioritization exercise on their January agendas. We have attached the list of nine goals with a template for ranking and evaluating them, as well as UFV 2025: A Vision for our Future.


Submitted by Eric Davis, on behalf of the UFV 2025 Visioning Committee

UFV 2025: A Vision for our Future

by the UFV 2025 Visioning Committee

November 10, 2015 Edited: December 3, 2015


2 | P a g e

Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3

What we are doing well ................................................................................................................................ 4

What is changing? ......................................................................................................................................... 6

What did we hear from you? ........................................................................................................................ 9

What are we going to be in 2025? .............................................................................................................. 10

Next steps ................................................................................................................................................... 11


3 | P a g e

Introduction The current UFV Education Plan covers the period 2011 to 2015. Hence, we are now in need of a new 5-year plan covering the period 2016 to 2020. As indicated a year ago, we decided to approach this task a bit differently. Dramatic change is happening in both higher education and society in general. This is prompting universities to respond proactively by engaging in longer-term visioning exercises focused not on the minutia of courses and programs, but on the very nature and organization of universities. Responding to and anticipating change proactively means taking the time to think about where we want to be in the future; envisioning UFV ten years out—in 2025—so we can engage in the more immediate tasks of education planning guided by a clear and—one hopes—inspiring vision of our destination. The Education Plan, 2016-20 then becomes an exercise in planning concrete and measurable goals to get there. The UFV 2025 Visioning Committee was brought together with the purpose of imagining and articulating a broad vision of the future of universities, the future of learning, and, within this broader vision, the future of teaching- and regionally-focused institutions—more specifically, the future of the University for the Fraser Valley. The Committee is composed of students, members of every Faculty/College at UFV, administrators, and one community member.0F

1 It has met regularly since January 2015, read widely on the future of post-secondary education, and received and analyzed numerous presentations, submissions, and online comments from students, faculty, and staff. The Committee has now collectively distilled all of this into this document, a vision for UFV in 2025. It represents our first concrete step in moving towards our new Education Plan. It outlines what we do well at UFV, as well as the external changes that are influencing our programs, faculty, and students. It provides a summary of the feedback received from the community, the students, the staff, the faculty, and administrators regarding UFV in the future. These three pieces, put together, generate four vision statements that will guide the Education Plan for 2016 – 2020, as well as 2021 – 2025. These four vision statements will then lead us into the development of our Education Plan Goals. We outline the shape of this education planning process in the last section of the document. But visioning and planning also require a clear understanding of what should not change. Changing Lives, Building Community, the title of our Strategic Directions Statement and the unofficial motto of UFV, captures the core values and commitments that have endured through the first forty years of UFV’s existence. “Changing Lives” refers to our twin commitments to transformation and students, to putting students and their success first and enabling them to transform themselves. But it also refers to our transformative role as leaders of the development of the Fraser Valley. “Building Community” makes this civic and community service function even more explicit while underlining UFV’s integrative role in providing a physical and intellectual public space in which the diverse communities of the Valley

1The members of the UFV 2025 Visioning Committee are Adrienne Chan, Alisa Webb, Craig Toews, David Leis,

Derrick Swallow (student), Garry Fehr, Ian Affleck, Judy Larsen, Maureen Wideman, Rod McLeod, Shawn Neumann (CEO of Domain 7 and alum), Shelley Canning, Sheryl MacMath, Sierra Nickel (student, replacing Derrick Swallow), Sukhdeep Brar (student), Tracy Ryder Glass, and Eric Davis (Chair).


4 | P a g e

can express and explain their identities for themselves and to each other. And it refers to our commitment to the building of community within UFV among faculty, staff, students, and administrators. The UFV 2025 Visioning Committee believes that no matter how much we change over the next ten years, no matter which challenges we must overcome and opportunities we must seize, we will and must remain true to these values. They have enabled an identity and mission to endure through our evolution from Fraser Valley College to University College of the Fraser Valley to University of the Fraser Valley. We collectively chose to make profound organizational and mandate changes not to depart from these values, but to preserve them in a rapidly changing educational, political, social, and economic environment. All predictions are that the changes required in the next ten years are even more profound. As we navigate our way forward, our commitment to the values of transformation, students, and community must continue to guide us.

What we are doing well As UFV works towards a vision of what it will be in 2025, it is important to recognize the things we are currently doing well. Guided by a vision to provide the best undergraduate education in Canada and to act as leaders in the Fraser Valley, by a mission to serve the diverse needs of our region, and by values and goals which prioritize students and student learning, UFV is doing many things well. These provide a solid foundation on which to build. Examining various surveys and reports, it is clear that UFV provides quality education. According to the BC Outcomes Surveys, our two-year out graduates are satisfied with the education they received, with 90% students stating they are satisfied or very satisfied with the education they received. For many programs, more than 95% of students note they are satisfied or very satisfied. Beyond the BC Outcome Survey, first-year and senior-year UFV students who responded to the 2013 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) rated UFV very highly in effective teaching. More recently, the 2015 Canadian University Survey Consortium (CUSC) surveyed both graduating UFV students and UFV students in their “middle years” – those in their second and third years of study. 96% of graduating students and 90% of middle-years students were satisfied with the overall quality of their education at UFV. Within the same surveys, the students were asked to rate their professors. They rated them very highly in several areas, including knowledge of subject, accessibility outside of class, encouraging participation, and treating students as individuals rather than as numbers. Graduating student respondents rated their professors higher in all categories than other respondents across Canada. Middle-years students also rated their faculty very highly and were at least as satisfied and, in some cases, more satisfied than others across Canada. These findings are often echoed in program reviews, with students regularly praising their faculty and the quality of education at UFV. When identifying the features of quality education, NSSE and CUSC respondents also pointed to the quality of interactions they have at UFV, whether with faculty, staff, or one another. NSSE respondents rated quality of interactions very highly; 75% of CUSC respondents felt that the university showed concern for them as students. The Faculty Survey of Student Engagement (FSSE) also supports quality interactions at UFV. Faculty, too, feel that they enjoy positive interactions with their students both in and beyond the classroom. Often, students and faculty point to small class sizes as facilitating such positive interactions. UFV respondents to the Canadian Satisfaction Survey further support that small class sizes have a positive effect on the overall quality of education provided at UFV.


5 | P a g e

It is apparent, also, that many faculty are providing excellent opportunities for students beyond the classroom. FSSE respondents, for example, pointed to their work supervising undergraduate research, internships, practicums, and field activities. Departmental and institutional reports highlight faculty who hire student researchers, who engage students in applied learning, and who encourage their students to cross the boundary between school and community in order to engage in social learning and civic engagement. Some do this by partnering with community groups. Many work to support UFV’s indigenization goals as UFV strives to be a place of learning that recognizes, respects and includes Indigenous ways of knowing. Other faculty work to provide international experiences for students, whether through internships, practicums, study abroad, or study tours. Finally, some also engage students in producing publications, portfolios, productions, and exhibits for internal and external audiences. Students regularly note how valuable such experiences are and identify the need for more support and more opportunities across all programs. Faculty research also contributes to the overall quality of education at UFV. Not only does faculty research enhance classroom learning and provide opportunities for students, researchers also build connections between UFV, the community, and beyond. They contribute to knowledge building, transfer of knowledge, and innovation. They explore the big challenges facing our community and our world, engaging students in the process. Learning beyond the classroom is a growing trend at UFV. There is increasing recognition that student learning which takes place outside of the classroom and which is not for academic credit is also important and should be recognized, as evidenced by the creation of the co-curricular record (CCR). The CCR is an official transcript of students’ out-of-classroom learning, measured against the institutional learning outcomes. Students can receive CCR credit for activities such as paid and unpaid work on campus, participation in campus activities, taking on roles in the Student Union or in UFV clubs, planning departmental or institutional events, athletics, or acting as peer mentors, tutors, or new student orientation leaders. To date, 5000 students have created a CCR and 1000 of those students have validated activities on their records. The number of validated activities is at 500 and growing. Students are drawing on their records to apply for graduate studies, professional programs, and employment. UFV also provides significant support for students on campus. Students appreciate access to counsellors, librarians, educational technologists, Aboriginal Elders-in-Residence, and a wide range of advisors: academic, career, disability, international, and financial aid. PASS – Priority Access for Student Success – provides early intervention for students in need of support. Students also have access to a new Academic Success Centre and to various mentoring programs, whether program specific or institutional-wide, and to a growing range of workshops on student success and student leadership. Faculty respondents to the FSSE also note their role in supporting and advising students outside of the classroom. All of this contributes to student success, as evidenced in a range of UFV Today posts, departmental updates, Board reports, and local news stories. UFV students do well in their classes and in their programs, engage in undergraduate research, represent UFV at domestic and international conferences, and win prestigious awards and honours at UFV and at the local, national, and international level. Some of our undergraduate student researchers receive awards typically given to graduate students. Our students also go on to professional programs and graduate studies, earn high marks on a variety of accreditation and entrance examinations, and make meaningful contributions to our communities. They participate in faculty- and/or community-based research projects and participate actively in UFV-led


6 | P a g e

initiatives. They perform well in a range of athletic programs and they represent UFV well as ambassadors, leaders, and entrepreneurs. We are proud of our students. Faculty, staff, and administrative support, engagement, and commitment are all possible because UFV is a great place to work. In 2015, UFV was named one of BC’s Top Employers. As noted in the press release, “UFV was selected for the list because of the overall employee experience it offers, including competitive salaries, an excellent benefits package, professional development support, commitment to employment equity and workplace diversity, campus amenities, family-support initiatives such as maternity and paternity top-up, and employee assistance programs. It was also chosen for fostering a work climate that encourages and enables its employees to do meaningful work contributing to the positive development of surrounding communities.” This supportive environment allows all to develop and foster their passions, enhancing the educational and overall experience at UFV. UFV students, faculty, staff, and administration regularly point to the things that UFV is doing well. The UFV 2025 Visioning Committee is committed to retaining and building on our strong foundation.

What is changing? The “strong foundation” of strengths identified in the previous section, as well as the core values of “students, community, and transformation” acknowledged in the “Introduction,” will be invaluable as we navigate our way through a period of dramatic change and unprecedented pressures to change.

What is changing?

1. Learners: The digitization of everything and changing demographics are transforming the nature of both learning and learners. While there are fewer full-time students, there are many more non-traditional students, including first-generation students, working adults, Indigenous students, immigrant and international students, students with disabilities, and female students. Students are becoming older and more diverse. At the same time, the traditional student has become a digital native who, since a very early age, has regularly engaged in collaborative, participatory, social, and networked learning—the exact opposite of learning in a traditional lecture format.

2. Learning: We are in the midst of a paradigm shift from teaching to learning, from students as passive consumers of knowledge to active agents in their own learning, from universities organized around instruction by faculty in the classroom, to universities organized around learning by students—everywhere. This is driven partly by the changing nature and expectations of learners and partly by our more sophisticated understanding of student learning thanks to cognitive science research and the scholarship of teaching and learning. Increasingly, there are research-supported calls to adopt “learner-centred teaching”: teaching focused on the development of skilled, autonomous learners. There is a growing emphasis on peer-to-peer rather than teacher to student relationships, and on personalized learning, adapting education to the distinct learning needs and styles of each learner while giving them greater control over the learning process.


7 | P a g e

The expectations of business and industry are changing and this affects learning and what learners want. According to numerous surveys, employers say they want employees who have graduated from universities that integrate applied and liberal learning, stress cross-disciplinary breadth over specialization, provide students with collaborative and community-engaged learning and research opportunities, as well as internships and co-op experiences, and enable them to develop transferable life skills like reliability and resilience, as well as transferable cognitive skills like problem-solving and communication. They value learning outcomes and e-portfolios because they want graduates who can demonstrate and apply their learning. Above all, perhaps, they want employees who want and have learned how to learn and re-learn, who can adapt to the constant change that characterizes the 21st-century working experience. Learning in K-12 is changing. These changes not only echo the changes outlined for post-secondary education; in many cases, they are much further developed. The changes include the shift from a content-based to a competency-based system; personalized, self-paced learning (each student is designing their own educational path and is accountable for their own learning success; they get help from mentors, peers, and study groups to achieve their goals); flexible learning spaces; student-driven, teacher-facilitated learning; and interdisciplinary/cross-curricular communication. The expectations of K-12 graduates with these experiences will be another factor driving change in post-secondary education.

3. Faculty: As the hierarchical model of pedagogy, where the teacher is broadcaster, is replaced by an

increasingly horizontal and interactive model, faculty are more often playing the role of coaches, mentors, and facilitators. Their focus is less on content delivery and more on inquiry-based learning and mentoring undergraduate research. Faculty are increasingly required to collaborate with others. Within institutions, they are working with librarians, learning technologists, advisors, career centre and faculty development staff to design the optimal learning conditions for students. They are also developing collaborative relationships with other institutions (post-secondary, K-12, and industry).

4. The discipline-based organization of universities: Building the university around the student

learning journey and an educational model that is learner-centered and increasingly learner-controlled means that the student’s learning journey is becoming the key organizing principle of universities. This requires systematic collaboration across institutions, leading to a blurring of boundaries among departments, disciplines, Faculties, and support units. Hence, interdisciplinary collaboration is becoming a norm (both inside and outside the university, as off-campus learning requires collaboration with a variety of organizations, industries, and individuals).

5. Funding and the university business model: When public funding over a three-decade span drops from about 80% to below 50%, and in many cases, well below 50% (while the costs of running a post-secondary institution grow ever larger), the traditional business model of public universities becomes unsustainable. This decline is an international phenomenon and shows no signs of reversing or even slowing. Government also controls a university’s other major source of funding—tuition—and significantly raising tuition is now politically impossible. Rising tuition rates and levels of student debt, combined with increasing pressures on family finances, are weighing heavily on student/family post-secondary education choices.


8 | P a g e

There is a trend towards performance-based funding: funding institutions based on outcomes like graduation rates, rather than inputs like applications or enrolments. This is most noticeable in 35 states in the U.S., but it is also beginning in Ontario and Alberta. In British Columbia, the Province ties 25% of our funding to programs deemed relevant to the labour market, which is perhaps one step shy of linking it to actual student employability outcomes. In Canada, provincial governments, including B.C., are also using the squeeze on financial resources to drive system differentiation (for example, distinguishing between teaching-focused and research-focused universities).

6. The impact of information technology: The application of computers to education is also changing the economics of post-secondary education, but the changes are larger than this. They encompass everything from the digitization of all aspects of university life and business, to the internet and universities’ lost monopoly on knowledge and credentialing, to the role of social media and mobile devices in education, to ever-important and dramatically changing educational technology. Technology is breaking the barriers of time and geography, enabling learning and the acquisition of almost every credential anytime, anywhere, and sometimes at little cost to the student. Computers will provide a more mobile and personalized educational experience. Unlike previous technology (like the printing press or television), computers can not only store or move information; they can process, analyze, and act on it. They can analyze the unique strengths, weaknesses, learning history, and learning styles of each student and respond differently for each student. They can change the very design of a course to fit each learner. We have only begun to see the revolutionary implications of computers on individualized learning. Of course, all of the above are placing greater demands on campus IT infrastructure and a university’s budget.

7. Competition: This is increasing and intensifying. Universities used to know their competitors; for the most part they were local and physical. Now they are ubiquitous, increasingly private, and increasingly online. At the same time, globalization is dramatically increasing the competitive environment while creating more access and learning opportunities. Maximum student mobility, requiring the recognition of all kinds of learning—formal and informal—is becoming an international norm and an absolute requirement if universities are to remain competitive. Hence, universities are streamlining requirements and prerequisites, ramping up prior learning assessment and recognition capacity, partnering with school districts to create a seamless K-16 system in the regions they serve, and much more. Lastly, it is unclear how far the “unbundling” of higher education will go: already much of the content, services and experiences of a university are offered by—and sometimes contracted out to—private companies and industries.

8. Accountability and Quality Assurance: Against a backdrop of public and media questioning of the value and quality (and cost) of postsecondary education and, more specifically, a national discourse on the deterioration of the quality of undergraduate education, universities are being pressured to be more “accountable” to taxpayers, governments, parents, and students, and to provide assurances as to the quality of the education and services they provide. In response, universities are focusing more on quality and trying to demonstrate it—especially, for teaching-focused institutions, teaching quality. This is complicated by the political hegemony of a neo-liberal or managerialist perspective that understands teaching as performance and assesses its quality solely in terms of its relevance to the labour market and industry. Universities need to assess, measure, and demonstrate quality in their own educational terms (including learning outcomes) if they are to avoid having a


9 | P a g e

narrower understanding imposed on them. At the same time, universities are wrestling with the challenge of increasing quality without increasing costs.

As the following section indicates, students, faculty, staff, and administrators at UFV have recognized the changes outlined here.

What did we hear from you? Over the past year the UFV 2025 Visioning Committee solicited feedback from numerous sources. To gather faculty voices we solicited department feedback from all Faculties and also received submissions from staff and support units. To gather student, staff, and community voices we conducted a number of forums, an on-line “have your say,” a number of comment walls throughout UFV, a few student focus groups, a submission and presentation from the Student Union, and an EDUC/PHIL 362 student submission. To engage our administrative bodies we solicited presentations and written submissions from Advising through to University Relations and everything in-between. Even though we were gathering a variety of perspectives, there was a great deal of consistency across these different voices. The key themes that persisted throughout these diverse groups are detailed below and represent what we heard from you.2 It is important to note that these descriptions are not comparative in nature. Some of what is listed below, we do well already; some require some work on our part to accomplish. This feedback describes a UFV for 2025; it does not compare it to UFV today. 1. We want a strong and vibrant UFV community: UFV will not be somewhere we just attend classes.

It will be a community that supports diverse students, learners, and faculty by providing more than just academic content: it will provide the university experience. UFV will be fully indigenized with Indigenous worldviews permeating classwork, recreation, ceremonies, and programs. There will be more community and gathering spaces, more food and library options and access, more recreation opportunities, and more events that engage and develop school spirit. It will support diverse transportation needs including bike lanes, affordable parking, and a comprehensive shuttle service. There will be a strong and accessible wi-fi service that connects students, faculty, and the surrounding U-district. It will engage the local Fraser Valley businesses and services on campus, supporting connections between community, students, and faculty. Faculty will be involved in student activities both inside and outside of the classroom. UFV will recognize that a university is responsible for more than academics.

2. We want to be connected to the field: University will not just be about preparing for work; it will be

about bringing the workplace into the university. Faculty will be engaged and connected with the field, not just academia. Students, no matter what their discipline, will have opportunities to complete work and field experiences, co-ops, and/or service learning while enrolled in their program. Research in our local community will involve faculty and students, with students having the opportunity to drive that research. The administrative units at UFV will be quick and nimble, able to respond to the emerging needs of local businesses and services in the Fraser Valley, BC, Canada, and the world. Partnerships with the local community, including the Stó:lō Nation, will be fostered and supported at every level. Departments will be involved in partnerships with trades, job markets, and alumni working in the field. UFV will be a part of the field, not separate from it.

2 Those who would like to consult the data analysis summaries created by the UFV 2025 Visioning Committee see H:/Temp/UFV 2025.


10 | P a g e

3. We want flexibility and accessibility: UFV will support a diverse group of students, learners, and faculty which means that programming and administration will need to be responsive. We recognize the changing demographics of age, race, culture, ethnicity, and ability are factors to consider in our population. Programs will need to be flexible enabling different entry points; personalized advising, learning, and assessments; blended, on-line, and flipped classrooms; increased course offerings, including certificates, diplomas, and graduate programs; and the ability to evaluate more than just credits and hours. This will require that more information is available in a variety of formats, from a variety of locations. So, whether a student is meeting with someone in person at the UFV campus or is connecting on-line, they will be able to get the information and support they need. This includes registration, academic content, research support, digital library collections, and advising. To accomplish this, technology and IT support will be critical. They will be reliable, user-friendly, and comprehensive. In addition, administrative units like the registrar’s office, finance, program development, ITS, ETS, etc. will need to be nimble and accommodating. The development of flexible programs, delivery methods, and supports means that all UFV services will figure out how to make things possible, rather than put up roadblocks that halt innovation.

4. We want to support lifelong learning: UFV will support the lifelong learning of its students, faculty,

staff, and alumni. The scholarship of teaching and learning will be a priority. Faculty will engage in continual professional development to ensure that classes are relevant, engaging, and active. Students will recognize faculty for their roles as coaches, facilitators, and guides, their implementation of active learning, and their effective use of technology. Students will be involved in research, both at UFV and in the community. Co-curricular records, e-portfolios, and capstone projects will be recognized as part of the learning journey. Faculty and students will learn from each other through engagement in interdisciplinary projects, programming, and research. Quality teaching will remain a priority, with small classes, involved faculty, and a strong academic community.

Whether faculty, students, community member, or staff, your voices were clear regarding a vision for UFV in 2025.

What are we going to be in 2025? The UFV 2025 Visioning Committee has reviewed the literature on the future of post-secondary education in North America, listened to student, staff, and faculty voices describe their concerns and dreams for the university, and engaged the surrounding communities to understand how they view the role of UFV in the region. We heard from UFV that we want a strong and vibrant UFV community; we want to be connected to the field; we want flexibility and accessibility; and we want to support lifelong learning. All of the information and data was integrated with the strengths and mandate of the institution to envision what UFV will and can be in 2025:

UFV in 2025 will be a community- and regionally-based university that is learner- and student-centred, whereby the learning drives the system and structure of the institution. Students and local communities will view UFV as a centre for intellectual and social development throughout their lifetimes, and as a place to learn how they can be better global citizens.


11 | P a g e

A community and regionally based university builds new relationships, and builds from existing relationships linking students, communities, and industry to be able to provide learning opportunities throughout the lifetime of our students. We use the word “community” because we have strong relationships with the communities around UFV. Furthermore, UFV will engage with our region through internal and public events, projects, and programs that resonate with the needs and interests of our UFV community (faculty, staff, administrators). Partnerships with business, industry, health, social services, and government will provide basic and applied research opportunities for students and results that will help grow the economy, strengthen our cultural capital, and maintain environmental sustainability. The university will easily respond and adapt to the changing needs of students and external pressures facing our region, and still provide a high quality education. To accomplish this UFV will be a learner- and student-centred university where faculty engage students with interdisciplinary problem-based learning that brings the community inside the classroom and concurrently expands the classroom outside the walls of the university. Learning will include traditional face-to-face classroom and lab-based formats, a spectrum of technology-enhanced options, and applied opportunities that match learning outcomes. Learning will also be adaptable to the needs of an increasingly diverse student population that reflects the age, ethnicity, ability, and cultural characteristics of our growing communities. Faculty will want to be at UFV because they can be engaged in applied research, and they can work with students on a variety of learning projects. UFV will be a leader in the professional development of teaching and research skills matched with work-place principles that encourages the mentoring of students through teaching, research, and projects. UFV will continue to be recognized as a good place to work. UFV will be a university of social and intellectual development that supports lifelong learning and engaged global citizenship. The campus will be more than a space for commuter students to consume education components. Instead, UFV students will possess a sense of identity and belonging through the creation of spaces that encourage collaboration, provide places and opportunity for social activities and collaborative learning experiences. Students will come back to campus to participate in activities outside of formal learning and class requirements, while alumni and community members will engage in public events and activities because UFV is a part of their community and regional identity. UFV will provide education and services that meet more than just the education needs of students, but prepare them for sustainable, fulfilling livelihoods that also contribute to the social, economic and environmental well-being of the region. However, this will only be possible if learning drives the system and structure of the university, rather than the structure shaping the learning. Programming and services will be relevant, flexible, timely, and accessible by all that comprise the broad spectrum of students. Programs will be flexible, interdisciplinary, and recognized by other universities as meeting the highest standards. Programming will be designed to meet the needs of the learner rather than prioritizing the needs of administration, faculty, and organizational structure.

Next steps

The visioning exercise began with the question, What should UFV look like in 2025? The next step, creating the Education Plan, 2016-20 begins with the question:

What are the five goals that UFV must achieve from 2016-20 to set ourselves up for 2025?


12 | P a g e

The entire UFV community must address this question. Consider this a call to action…help create our next Education Plan! Your involvement in developing the UFV 2025 Vision was essential. It is a first of its kind for UFV and it could not have happened without the support, creativity, and involvement of staff, students, faculty, and the local Fraser Valley community. We heard from you through presentations, department submissions, forum discussions, an on-line “have your say,” a blog, comment walls, student focus groups, and student papers for a philosophy of education course. We listened to what you had to say. Thank you. We now need to turn the four vision statements that comprise the UFV 2025 Vision into a set of 5 Education Goals for 2016–2020. Continuing in the same spirit, we want to build these goals on your voices. On November 20, 2015, “Collaborative Goal Planning” opportunities occurred and you were encouraged to collaborate, converse, and brainstorm implementable, observable, measurable, and powerful Education Goals for UFV. All goals from the brainstorming were taken back to the UFV 2025 Visioning Committee to consolidate into our five Educational Goals for 2016–2020. Your participation was vital to making our next Education Plan a document that represents all of our voices.


UFV 2025 ‐ CONSULTATION ON EDUCATION PLAN GOALS

Collective submission from: Click here to enter text.

With the aim of maximizing opportunities for everyone to be involved in the final goal‐setting, we are asking all

Faculty/College Councils, administrative groups, and support units to participate in a collective exercise of

selecting the top five goals UFV needs to achieve by 2020.

Using the rating drop down box in the Rating column, please rank all the goals from most preferred (first) to

least preferred (ninth), and identify how strongly each goal is supported (very strongly supported, strongly

supported, or not supported).

The Committee will consider all group submissions that are submitted by January 29, 2016. Please submit

responses to [email protected].

GOALS RATING

1. UFV will increase opportunities to encourage, support, and recognize the learning of students, faculty, staff, administrators, and others in the community.

Rating Drop Down Box

☐ Very strong support

☐ Strong support

☐ Not supported

2. UFV will streamline procedures, processes, supports, and structures to ensure flexibility and responsiveness to program, student, faculty, and learning needs.



☐ Strong support

☐ Not supported

3. UFV will ensure opportunities for community placement, involvement, connection, and/or experiences in every program.



☐ Strong support

☐ Not supported

4. UFV will become a centre for learning about, understanding, and appreciating place, community, and indigenization.



☐ Strong support

☐ Not supported

5. UFV will develop local and global citizenship that encourages civic engagement and social responsibility.



☐ Strong support

☐ Not supported


GOALS RATING

6. UFV will develop learning opportunities to meet the needs of a diverse community of students, faculty, and staff.



☐ Strong support

☐ Not supported

7. UFV will support and develop opportunities for collaborative and interdisciplinary work and research among students, faculty, staff, programs, community members, and alumni.



☐ Strong support

☐ Not supported

8. UFV will ensure that administrative and academic decisions, at both the university and program levels, will prioritize the learning journey of students.



☐ Strong support

☐ Not supported

9. UFV will increase student, alumni, and community member engagement on campus.



☐ Strong support

☐ Not supported

OPTIONAL: If you would like to explain the reasons why your group preferred the goals they did or the reasons they did not like some others, please provide a brief explanation. (Maximum 200 words.) Click here to enter text.

OPTIONAL: Did the Visioning Committee miss anything that is in the Vision document? (Maximum 200 words.) Click here to enter text.

Deadline for submissions is January 29, 2016. Please submit responses to [email protected].


Grading System (101) Page 1 of 1

GRADING SYSTEM

NUMBER 101

APPROVAL DATE 03-03-1992

LAST AMENDMENT 12-11-2009

LAST REVIEWED

NEXT REVIEW DATE 12-2014

Approval Authority Senate

Responsible Executive Provost and Vice-President, Academic Related Policies / Legislation Course Withdrawal (81)

Incomplete Grades (103) University Act, s. 35.2 (5)(h)

POLICY The University’s grading system reflects a commitment to high academic standards while encouraging students to experiment in course selection.

Grade Grade Points Interpretation A+ 4.33 A 4.0 --- Excellent A- 3.67 B+ 3.33 B 3.0 --- Above Average B- 2.67 C+ 2.33 C 2.0 --- Average C- 1.67 P 1.0 --- Pass (below average) NC 0.0 --- No Credit (Fail) ------------------------------------------------------------------ I* -- Incomplete or in progress WD -- Course withdrawal prior to 40% duration of course. Not shown on official transcript W* -- Course withdrawal on or after 40% duration of course AU* -- Audit AN* -- Audit expectations not met *Not included in calculation of the GPA

Some courses may be offered on a credit or no credit basis. In such cases, students achieving a level equivalent to C- or better will be assigned a CR (credit) grade. Students achieving below the C- level will be assigned an NCR grade. Credit/No Credit courses will be given no Grade Point consideration, nor will any letter grade consideration be given to these courses. Grading for these courses will be: CR -- the student achieved a C- or better level NCR -- the student achieved below a C- level

REGULATIONS

A "P" grade does not, unless otherwise stated, permit the student to pursue another course for which the graded course was a pre-requisite. A student may find it difficult to obtain transfer credit for a "P" grade.



GRADING SYSTEM

NUMBER 101



LAST REVIEWED



Responsible Executive Provost and Vice-President, Academic

Related Policies / Legislation Course Withdrawal (81) Course Repeat (86) Grade Reporting (109) Undergraduate Continuance (92) University Act, s. 35.2 (5)(h)

PURPOSE

This policy establishes a consistent and fair grading system to measure and articulate students’ performance at the University of the Fraser Valley (UFV).

SCOPE

This policy governs grading for all UFV courses and programs.

DEFINITIONS

Cumulative grade point average (CGPA): A numerical average of grades based on all courses taken at UFV within a particular level of study, e.g. preparatory, undergraduate, graduate, etc.

Grade point average (GPA): Academic performance expressed as a numerical average of grades in UFV courses.

Grade point value: A numeric value for each letter grade that is used to calculate the grade point average.

Graduate level: Post-secondary education beyond the bachelor degree

Preparatory: Pre-undergraduate or developmental education designed to upgrade or enhance academic skills in preparation for undergraduate studies

Semester grade point average: A numerical average of grades based on all UFV courses taken in a single semester.

Undergraduate level: Post-secondary education that is considered university or college level, up to and including the level of the bachelor degree.



POLICY Grades are a measure of the academic performance of a student. The university’s grading system reflects a commitment to high academic standards and provides a consistent and defined system to articulate students’ academic achievement.

A grade point average (GPA) is calculated as a measure of students’ academic performance in credit courses. The GPA is used to determine a student’s academic standing and eligibility to continue in a program, to receive awards, and to graduate. Final grades, semester GPA, and cumulative GPA are recorded on the student’s permanent record.

REGULATIONS

Grading systems

There are two grading systems at UFV, the letter grading system and the credit/no credit grading system, outlined in sections A and B, below. The grading system for a course is established through the undergraduate or graduate course approval process.

Other grades and notations are listed in section C. A. Letter grading system (grades applicable to the GPA)

Letter grades are used for most academic, technical, and career oriented courses. Letter grades also may be used for non-credit courses, in which case the grades do not apply to the GPA.

Standard percentage equivalencies are used to determine the final letter grade. The final percentage will be rounded to an the nearest using standard mathematical practice (i.e. if the first digit after the decimal place is 5 or higher, rounding is to the next higher integer) before converting to a letter grade.

Undergraduate and preparatory level grading scale

Grade Percentage

equivalency Grade point value

Description – performance in relation to the expected learning outcomes for the course

A+ A A-

90-100 95-100 85-89 90-94 80-84 85-89

4.33 4.0 3.67

Excellent performance achievement

B+ B B-

77-79 80-84 73-76 75-79 70-72 70-74

3.33 3.0 2.67

Good performance achievement

C+ C C-

67-69 65-69 63-66 60-64 60-62 55-59

2.33 2.0 1.67

SatisfactoryModerate performance (or fair) achievement*

D 50-59 50-54 1.0 Marginal Minimal performanceachieeivement*. This grade does not, unless otherwise stated, meet course prerequisites.

F <50 0.0 Fail**



*Some programs may require that courses be completed with a specified letter grade higher than a D; ; this requirement will be specified in the UFV academic calendar. In these cases, courses graded D or higher that do not meet the , but lower than theminimum program requirementsam minimum, will not meet the requirements for these programs but may be accepted as elective credits in other programs. * **A D is the lowest grade that is considered a pass. Some programs, Tto meet external accreditation and/or certification standards, some programs require a higher minimum percentage to pass program courses. In such cases a fail (F) grade may be assigned at a higher percentage. or the pPrograms also may require that courses be completed with a specified letter grade higher than a D and if so. Some programs require a higher minimum grade in all courses., this will be specified in the UFV academic calendar. When ccourses are graded D or higher, but are lower than the program minimum, they will not meet the requirements for these programs but may be accepted as elective credits in other programs.credits Graduate level grading scale

Grade Percentage

equivalent** Grade point value


A+ A A-

90- 100 95- 100 85-8990-94 80-84 85-89

4.33 4.0 3.67

Excellent achievementperformance

B+ B B-

77-79 80-84 73-76 75-79 70-72 70-74

3.33 3.0 2.67

Good achievementperformance

C+ C C- D

67-69 65-69 63-66 60-64 60-62 55-59 50-59 50-54

2.33 2.0 1.67 1.0

Unacceptable performance. A minimum grade of B- is required for all courses in graduate programs.

F <50 0.0 Fail

B. Credit/no credit grading system (grades not applicable to the GPA)

Credit/no credit grading may be used in courses where students are is typically used for preparatory, undergraduate, and graduate level courses graded on the basis of broad performance evaluation or acquisition of defined skills, such as for practicaum performance, work placements, internships, or non-credit courses.

Grade Description CR Credit granted. Achievement at a C- level or higher. NCR No credit granted. Achievement below a C- level.

C. Other grades and notations (not applicable to the GPA)

The grades in this section are used for particular purposes and may be used with either letter grading or credit/no credit grading, as required. Permanent grades

Grade Description



AEG Aegrotat standing. A compassionate pass, approved by the dean, based on satisfactory term marks when a student is unable to complete a course due to serious, documented extenuating circumstances.

AU* Audit AN* Audit expectations not met W* Withdrawn TRF Transfer credit granted. Successful completion of course(s) when a grade equivalent

cannot be determined.

*No credit is granted for the course.

Temporary notations

Temporary notations are used in specific circumstances when a final grade is not available. They will be replaced by a permanent grade, when available.

Grade Description

I Incomplete. Course requirements to be completed at a pre-determined time. IP In progress. Course or thesis work continues into the next semester. NGR No grade reported

Grade Point Average

A semester GPA and cumulative GPA is calculated after each semester and is recorded on the student’s official transcript. The GPA is calculated as follows:

• Multiply the number of credits for each course by the grade point value for the course grade to obtain grade points;

• Add all the grade points; and • Divide the total grade points by the number of credits taken.

When a course or an equivalent course is repeated, only the higher grade is included in the GPA calculation (see Course Repeat policy for further details).

Grades which are not included in the GPA calculation are listed in sections B and C, above, and include but are not limited to withdrawals, audit grades, temporary grades, and courses graded on a Credit/No credit basis.

Grades assigned for assessments, including course challenges and portfolio assessments, are not included in the GPA calculation.



GRADING SYSTEM

NUMBER 101



LAST REVIEWED




Related Policies / Legislation Course Withdrawal (81) Course Repeat (86) Grade Reporting (109) Undergraduate Continuance (92) University Act, s. 35.2 (5)(h)

PURPOSE

This policy establishes a consistent and fair grading system to measure and articulate students’ performance at the University of the Fraser Valley (UFV).

SCOPE

This policy governs grading for all UFV courses and programs.

DEFINITIONS

Cumulative grade point average (CGPA): A numerical average of grades based on all courses taken at UFV within a particular level of study, e.g. preparatory, undergraduate, graduate, etc.

Grade point average (GPA): Academic performance expressed as a numerical average of grades in UFV courses.

Grade point value: A numeric value for each letter grade that is used to calculate the grade point average.

Graduate level: Post-secondary education beyond the bachelor degree

Preparatory: Pre-undergraduate or developmental education designed to upgrade or enhance academic skills in preparation for undergraduate studies

Semester grade point average: A numerical average of grades based on all UFV courses taken in a single semester. Undergraduate level: Post-secondary education that is considered university or college level, up to and including the level of the bachelor degree.

POLICY



Grades are a measure of the academic performance of a student. The university’s grading system reflects a commitment to high academic standards and provides a consistent and defined system to articulate students’ academic achievement.

A grade point average (GPA) is calculated as a measure of students’ academic performance in credit courses. The GPA is used to determine a student’s academic standing and eligibility to continue in a program, to receive awards, and to graduate. Final grades, semester GPA, and cumulative GPA are recorded on the student’s permanent record.

REGULATIONS

Grading systems

There are two grading systems at UFV, the letter grading system and the credit/no credit grading system, outlined in sections A and B, below. The grading system for a course is established through the undergraduate or graduate course approval process.

Other grades and notations are listed in section C. A. Letter grading system (grades applicable to the GPA)

Letter grades are used for most academic, technical, and career oriented courses. Letter grades also may be used for non-credit courses, in which case the grades do not apply to the GPA.

Standard percentage equivalencies are used to determine the final letter grade. The final percentage will be rounded using standard mathematical practice (i.e. if the first digit after the decimal place is 5 or higher, rounding is to the next higher integer) before converting to a letter grade.

Undergraduate and preparatory level grading scale

Grade Percentage

equivalency Grade point value


A+ A A-

95-100 90-94 85-89

4.33 4.0 3.67

Excellent performance

B+ B B-

80-84 75-79 70-74

3.33 3.0 2.67

Good performance

C+ C C-

65-69 60-64 55-59

2.33 2.0 1.67

Moderate performance

D 50-54 1.0 Minimal performance*. This grade does not, unless otherwise stated, meet course prerequisites.

F <50 0.0 Fail** *Some programs require that courses be completed with a letter grade higher than a D; courses graded D or higher that do not meet the minimum program requirements may be accepted as elective credits in other programs. **To meet external accreditation and/or certification standards, some programs require a higher



minimum percentage to pass program courses. In such cases a fail (F) grade may be assigned at a higher percentage. Graduate level grading scale

Grade Percentage

equivalent** Grade point value


A+ A A-

95- 100 90-94 85-89

4.33 4.0 3.67

Excellent performance

B+ B B-

80-84 75-79 70-74

3.33 3.0 2.67

Good performance

C+ C C- D

65-69 60-64 55-59 50-54

2.33 2.0 1.67 1.0

Unacceptable performance. A minimum grade of B- is required for all courses in graduate programs.

F <50 0.0 Fail

B. Credit/no credit grading system (grades not applicable to the GPA)

Credit/no credit grading may be used in courses where students are graded on the basis of broad performance evaluation or acquisition of defined skills, such as for practica, work placements, internships, or non-credit courses.

Grade Description CR Credit granted NCR No credit granted

C. Other grades and notations (not applicable to the GPA)

The grades in this section are used for particular purposes and may be used with either letter grading or credit/no credit grading, as required. Permanent grades

Grade Description

AEG Aegrotat standing. A compassionate pass, approved by the dean, based on satisfactory term marks when a student is unable to complete a course due to serious, documented extenuating circumstances.

AU* Audit AN* Audit expectations not met W* Withdrawn TRF Transfer credit granted. Successful completion of course(s) when a grade equivalent

cannot be determined.



*No credit is granted for the course.

Temporary notations

Temporary notations are used in specific circumstances when a final grade is not available. They will be replaced by a permanent grade, when available.

Grade Description

I Incomplete. Course requirements to be completed at a pre-determined time. IP In progress. Course or thesis work continues into the next semester. NGR No grade reported

Grade Point Average

A semester GPA and cumulative GPA is calculated after each semester and is recorded on the student’s official transcript. The GPA is calculated as follows:

• Multiply the number of credits for each course by the grade point value for the course grade to obtain grade points;

• Add all the grade points; and • Divide the total grade points by the number of credits taken.

When a course or an equivalent course is repeated, only the higher grade is included in the GPA calculation (see Course Repeat policy for further details).

Grades which are not included in the GPA calculation are listed in sections B and C, above, and include but are not limited to withdrawals, audit grades, temporary grades, and courses graded on a Credit/No credit basis.

Grades assigned for assessments, including course challenges and portfolio assessments, are not included in the GPA calculation.


MEMO

1

To: Secretariat Office

From: Peter Geller, Vice Provost and Associate Vice-President Academic

Date: December 14, 2015

Re: Revised Academic Program and Unit Reviews Policy (Policy 189)

A request to review Policy 189: Academic Program Reviews was submitted to the Secretariat in March 2014. A working group was formed to review and draft a revised policy, consisting of Sue Brigden, Heidi Cain, Peter Geller, and Sylvie Murray. The revised draft policy was subsequently reviewed by Deans Caucus, and is submitted to the SGC Policy Subcommittee for consultation.

The following were considered in revising the policy:

1. Initial discussion of the current policy at Deans Caucus identified the following key

points to consider: • Frequency of reviews • Need for incorporation of ILO’s

2. New policy format, which includes new sections on Purpose and Scope.

3. Incorporating results of a survey of Department Heads and Deans who have been

involved in program and unit review(s) in the last five years. The survey was conducted in January to February of 2014. Fifty percent of Heads from Professional Studies, Arts, Science, and Health Sciences responded to the survey (n=9) and 2 Deans. The results revealed general appreciation for the importance of program review and general satisfaction with our process (although it is acknowledged to be very demanding).

Recurring comments were made on the following points: • Review refers almost exclusively to “the program,” effectively equating purpose of

the department with the delivery of its own program (e.g., major) and neglecting its contribution to programming in other areas.

• External reviewers who assess a program from their disciplinary perspective pay less attention to program’s delivery of institutional outcomes; alignment with UFV goals is not considered in a significant way.

• Methods used for the assessment and evaluation of student progress toward attainment of educational goals needs more consideration.


• Greater clarity is needed about how the review serves professional programs, their strong affiliation to their fields of practice.

• Disciplinary isolation may be reinforced by typical focus on the major at the expense of general education (i.e., ILOs) and service courses.

• Degree programs (e.g., BSc, BA) are not included in the way we structure our reviews.

4. Review of policies and practices at other institutions, including:

• Kwantlen Polytechnic University • Thompson Rivers University • University of Lethbridge • University of Victoria • Wilfrid Laurier University • University of Northern British Columbia • Oregon State University • Boston University

The latter two are cited in the Education Advisory Board’s Revitalizing the Program Portfolio: Elevating Academic Program Performance and Strategic Alignment.

Some key points from this review of other policies and practices included:

• Authority of the policy • Need to streamline the policy (many of the current Procedures/Guidelines can be

separated out from the policy itself) • Working towards consistency across reviews • Relationship between accreditation and program review • Balancing disciplinary/professional standards with institutional priorities.

5. Revisions will need to be made to the Program and Unit Review Process Guide in accordance with the revised policy.


Academic Program and Unit Reviews (189) Page 1 of 6

ACADEMIC PROGRAM AND UNIT REVIEWS

NUMBER 189

APPROVAL DATE 01-2009

LAST AMENDMENT

LAST REVIEWED


Approval Authority President

Responsible Executive Provost and Vice-President, Academic Related Policies / Legislation Board policy direction University Educational Directions and Planning

(BPD-202) University Act, s 35.2 (6)(f)

DEFINITIONS In this policy, the following definitions apply: Program: For the purposes of this policy, a program is defined as a set of courses approved by Senate to constitute all or part of the requirements for an undergraduate or a graduate degree or certificate or diploma offered by UFV. Academic unit: An academic unit is an administrative grouping of faculty and staff and the organizational structure that delivers programs, such as a faculty, department, or school. Program goals: Program goals state for students, instructors and program/course evaluators of what the program expects to achieve. Learning objectives: Learning objectives are a statement of what the student should learn or accomplish at the end of the program or course. Learning outcomes: Learning outcomes demonstrate what the student actually learns or achieves.

POLICY Academic program and unit reviews shall be carried out under the general supervision of the Dean responsible for the program or unit and the Provost and Vice-President, Academic. All academic programs and units will normally undergo a review every five years, although a review may be undertaken at any time if it is requested by the Dean or Provost and Vice-President, Academic. The process involves the review of two components: the academic program to be reviewed and the unit in which the program is based. Many factors contribute to the academic quality of the program. The administrative setting, the research and scholarly activities of the faculty members, the material resources and physical infrastructure, and the governance mechanisms all affect the quality of academic programs and the educational experiences of students. Reviews are intended to ensure and improve quality of both the programs and the unit and to foster a culture of continuous improvement throughout the institution. For those programs which are subject to external accreditation reviews, those reviews will normally be considered as fulfilling the requirements of the present policy, unless a additional review is considered



necessary by the Dean responsible for the program or the Provost and Vice-President, Academic.

REGULATIONS The Purpose of Program Reviews Program reviews are designed to:

1. Determine the coherence of the program standards, design, and goals and review the alignment of the program’s standards, educational goals and learning objectives with the general goals of the institution, as well as external standards, as they apply.

2. Determine whether the program has been designed, structured and delivered so as to ensure that students have achieved their learning outcomes.

3. Determine the appropriateness of the admission requirements and practices of the method of delivery for achieving the learning outcomes.

4. Determine the appropriateness of the specific curricular and pedagogical policies and practices of the program in relation to the learning outcomes.

5. Determine the appropriateness of the methods used for the assessment and evaluation of student progress.

6. Determine that the number and expertise of the faculty and staff are sufficient to enable students’ success.

7. Evaluate the administrative policies and practices of the unit delivering the program, and its efficient and effective utilization of human/physical/financial resources and, where necessary, to suggest improvements for effectiveness and efficiency.

8. Suggest solutions to existing or anticipated problems and offer advice on how the program may be enhanced and its delivery be improved.

The Focus of Program and Unit Reviews The goals of a program and unit review will form the basis for defining the focus and scope of each review. The curricular content of a program, its admission requirements, its mode of delivery, and the basis of evaluation of student performance are all related to the overall quality of any academic program, as is the commitment of the necessary human and other resources for achieving the program goals and helping students achieve success. Program reviews will focus on:

1. Indicators that provide evidence of quality of faculty, students and learning outcomes in terms of accepted standards for academic, professional and/or occupational programs:

• Degree level standards; • Credential recognition; • Curriculum/program content; • Design and structure of the program; • Learning objectives and learning outcomes; • Pedagogic methodologies/program delivery; • Student admission, transfer and residency criteria; • Complement of faculty members; • Program resources; • Program advisory mechanisms; • Originality, particularly in relationship to academic programs offered by other post-secondary

institutions in British Columbia;



• Research opportunities for students; • Research productivity of faculty members; • Quality of research supervision (particularly for graduate programs); • Quality of supervision of field or clinical practica (where applicable); • International learning opportunities for students; • Relationship to university’s strategic directions and stated mission in teaching, learning and

research; • Alignment with faculty, school, and/or departmental priorities and stated goals in teaching,

research, and community service; • Alignment with existing academic strengths.

2. Program Administration:

• Administrative structure and support; • Technical support; • For graduate programs, research infrastructure; • Library and related support; • Teaching and learning assessment; • Utilization of resources, especially human resource.

3. Alignment with the needs of the community and/or industry:

• Labour market demand; • Post graduation experience/employment of students.

4. Enrolment, retention and student success: • Enrolments in the program (effectiveness of existing strategies for student recruitment and

projected; student numbers for the coming five years): trends over time; • FTE generated and other sources of program funding: trends over time; • Program completion and graduation rates; • Student demand: current and projected; • Potential of the program to attract new students (market); • Strategies for student retention and projected rates of retention and degree completion; • Availability of financial assistance and awards to students; • Specialized access programs, and associated costs, if required; • Access to academic advising.

The Review Process The goal is that reviews should be open, objective, critical, and constructive. The process for reviewing each program (or set of programs) shall consist of the following main elements:

1 The preparation of a self-assessment report by the academic unit delivering the program to be

reviewed; 2 The selection of a review committee, in consultation with the Dean of Provost and Vice-

President, Academic as appropriate. Normally, the committee would consist of one internal member, two external members, of which one external member is appointed chair;

3 A site visit by the review committee; 4 The preparation of a review report by the review committee; 5 An opportunity for the unit delivering the program and the Dean to respond to the review

report; A&TS Faculty Council Agenda Package - January 14, 2016 44


6 A review of the response prepared by the academic unit and the Dean by the Provost and Vice-President, Academic; and,

7 An action plan for addressing the conclusions and recommendations of the review report and response.

The review process will be supported by the Office of Institutional Research. A budget for academic reviews will reside in the Office of the Provost and Vice-President, Academic and funds will be transferred to respective Deans to cover the costs of the reviews. Normally, the review process is coordinated by the Office of the Dean in consultation with the unit under review. The order in which programs are reviewed will be determined by the Provost and Vice-President, Academic in consultation with the Deans of the respective Faculties and Faculty Councils, and will form part of an institutional multi-year program review plan. Under exceptional circumstances, a Dean may request a review of a particular program and/or academic unit. Program reviews are conducted by a review committee and guided by a self-study conducted by the academic unit responsible for a program or set of programs. Additional information may be requested by the committee before or during the site visit by the review committee. A self-study report is an opportunity for the unit to engage in self-reflection and an analysis of the strength and weaknesses of all aspects of a program or set of programs. Review committees are appointed by the Provost and Vice-President, Academic upon the recommendation of the Dean responsible for the program or unit under review. The review committee normally will consist of two reviewers external to UFV, and a third who is a UFV faculty member from outside the Faculty of the program under review. This faculty member should be someone familiar with the operation of the program under review and shall participate fully in the review. The chair of the review committee normally will be selected from the two external members. The self-study will be developed in cooperation with the Office of Institutional Research. The purpose of the external review is to:

• Provide an opportunity for the members of a unit to reflect on the quality and possibilities of their programs;

• Provide an external perspective on the program in terms of its comparability with similar programs elsewhere, its stature on a provincial and national scale, and its success in terms of its stated objectives;

• Make constructive recommendations and suggest actions that will improve the program. Stages in the Review Process

1 An overall multi-year institutional plan for program reviews is developed by the Provost and

Vice-President, Academic, in consultation with Deans and Faculty Councils, and is submitted and approved by the Senate.

2 The Provost and Vice-President, Academic, in consultation with the Deans of the respective Faculties, confirms annually the programs to be reviewed in the following year. The Dean then informs the academic unit(s) responsible for the program(s) to be reviewed.

3 An orientation session is organized for those responsible for self-studies in academic units and programs designated to conduct reviews in the subsequent academic year. This session will include an examination of the process, the required contents of the self-study document and the nature of the data to be provided by the Office of Institutional Research.

4 The academic unit establishes a committee to prepare its self-study of its program. This committee may also, where appropriate, seek the advice of others such as representatives of industry, professions and practical training programs.

5 The academic unit shall develop a list of at least four potential external and two potential



internal reviewers. The Dean, in consultation with the Provost and Vice-President, Academic, shall appoint the review committee, taking into consideration the recommendations from the department.

6 Selection of an external review committee and the Chair by the Dean, in consultation with the Provost and Vice-President, Academic.

7 The Office of Institutional Research provides academic units with survey outcomes and enrolment data and other relevant information.

8 The academic unit conducts the self-study. 9 The academic unit submits the self-study to the Dean, who either accepts or returns it to the

unit for further revisions. 10 The self-study report is reviewed and assessed by the external review committee. 11 The academic unit submits additional documentation if requested by the external committee. 12 Site visit. 13 The external review committee submits its confidential report to the Dean (within a set period

of time after the site visit). 14 The Dean forwards the reviewers’ report to the unit. 15 The academic unit develops its response, within a set period of time, after receiving the

reviewers' report, and submits it to the Dean. 16 After consultation with the Provost and Vice-President, Academic and the academic unit, the

Dean submits to the Senate: a) the self-study; b) the reviewers’ report; c) the academic unit’s response, and d) his/her executive summary (commenting on the outcomes, findings and conclusions of the review and providing recommendations arising from the review – including an “action plan” for implementing the recommendations emerging from the review).

17 When some of the recommendations arising from the review go beyond the purview of the Dean, the Provost and Vice-President, Academic provides a response to Senate.

18 The Provost and Vice-President, Academic reports annually to the Senate and the Board of Governors on the results of all program reviews, including copies of the “Dean’s Executive Summary” for each review concluded during the previous year.

Program Self-Study by the Academic Unit The self-study conducted by the academic unit provides an opportunity to assess every dimension of the program’s academic quality. The background and history of the program and the academic unit responsible for the program shall be summarized as a context for the delivery of the program. The self-study produced by the academic unit should follow a recommended format, and should include:

• A statement of the goals and learning objectives of the program, changes in these since the last review or since the program was initially approved, and their consistency with the mandate and academic priorities of the university.

• The past, present and projected student enrolment in the program, including majors and number of full-time equivalents (FTEs).

• Admissions information, including: o admission requirements and qualifications of incoming students; o enrolment targets and numbers of students registered; and, o enrolment patterns with respect to entrants, transfer students, and/or other categories

relevant to the program. • The program, including:

o the curriculum as presented in the calendar, incorporating course titles and hours; o major options/streams within the program, if applicable; and, o the identification of any courses that are not offered on a regularly accessible basis.

• A summary of how each course contributes to achieving the goals and learning objectives of the



program. This may include: o subject matter, methods of delivery, especially approaches to pedagogy; o typical class sizes and trends in student enrolments; o all course outlines, as an appendix; and, o procedures used to evaluate and address course and instructional quality.

• Student retention and graduation rates. • The structure, content, and objectives/focus of the program relative to its comparators in

universities inside and outside of British Columbia (with an explanation of the rationale for the choice of comparators).

• An explanation of any variations from UFV standard policies on grading, promotion, and academic standing, if applicable.

• Faculty and staff, including:

o Full-time and part-time instructional resources; o Curricula vitae of all faculty members who have been teaching in the program in the last

three years; and, o A summary of faculty in the program indicating:

name highest earned degree and year tenure status teaching assignments summary of teaching evaluations scholarly activity, which could include a listing of peer-reviewed and other

journal articles (current and preceding five years), chapters, monographs, policy papers, reports, presentations, conferences

community service activities • Description of the resources available to the program (labs, student spaces, computing facilities,

library resources, equipment, and other categories as appropriate). • Information about collaborative arrangements (with other academic units or institutions) when

applicable. • The findings of representative surveys (conducted by the Office of Institutional Research) of

current students’ and recent graduates' perceptions of the program's effectiveness in preparing them for careers and graduate studies.

• The results of surveys/consultations with representatives of industry, professions or practical training programs, as appropriate.

• Details of the unit’s operating and capital budgets for the previous five years. • Assessment of program strengths and weaknesses and level of success in meeting its stated

objectives (with a description of the criteria, performance indicators, and evaluative tools employed by the program as a basis for its self-study), including:

consistency of the program with the university’s mission and strategic plan and the standards, goals and learning objectives for the degree;

appropriateness and effectiveness of the admission requirements; appropriateness of the program’s structure, curriculum, delivery modes and

evaluation methods to satisfy the learning objectives; appropriateness and effectiveness of the utilization of resources, especially

human resources; and, evidence of quality of faculty, students and overall program success.

A preliminary response by the academic unit to the program’s strengths and weaknesses identified through the self-study.




NUMBER 189


LAST AMENDMENT

LAST REVIEWED


Approval Authority PresidentSenate


Related Policies / Legislation Board policy direction University Educational Directions and Planning (BPD-202) University Act, s 35.2 (6) (f) Undergraduate Course and Program Approval policy (21) Graduate Course and Program Approval policy (209)

PURPOSE

This policy is to ensure accountability of academic programs and programming by:

providing regular and systematic reviews of the objectives and delivery of programs and programming at UFV;

fostering ongoing improvement of their quality;

enhancing their contribution to the university’s strategic goals, vision, mission, and values;

, and alignmentaligning with Institutional Learning Outcomes;

achieving and maintaining high standards of educational practices;

achieving and maintaining high professional standards, as recognized by the disciplinary and/or accrediting bodies; and

ensuring an adequate and effective utilization of resources.

SCOPE

This policy applies to all programs and programming at UFV, and to academic units that are responsible for, or contribute to, their delivery.

DEFINITIONS



In this policy, the following definitions apply: Academic unit: An administrative grouping that delivers or contributes to the delivery of programs and programming, such as a Faculty, department, or school or centre. Institutional Learning Outcomes (ILOs): Set of abilities, skills or competencies that each UFV graduate possessescan demonstrate. Program: For the purposes of this policy, a program is defined as a setA collection of courses and associated requirements offered as a credential or an option within a credential. This includes, but is not limited to, a certificate, diploma, minor, extended minor, major, honours, degree, specialization, option, or concentration. approved by Senate to constitute all or part of the requirements for an undergraduate or a graduate degree or certificate or diploma offered by UFV. Programming: a set of related measures, events, activities, service courses or programs in support of a particular institutional priority or attainment of competencies (numerical, communications) across programs. Academic unit: An academic unit is an administrative grouping of faculty and staff and the organizational structure that delivers programs, such as a faculty, department, or school. Program goals: Program goals state for students, instructors and program/course evaluators of what the program expects to achieve. Learning objectives: Learning objectives are a statement of what the student should learn or accomplish at the end of the program or course. Learning outcomes: Learning outcomes demonstrate what the student actually learns or achieves.

POLICY An aAcademic program and unit reviews is the administrative process that provides a systematic quantitative and qualitative review of the objectives and delivery of programs and programming. All academic programs and programming will normally undergo a review every seven to eight years, or at any time if it is requested by the Dean or Provost and Vice-President, Academic. Academic program reviews shall be carried out under the general supervision of the Dean responsible for the program or unit and the Provost and Vice-President, Academic. At the discretion of the Provost and Vice-President, Academic, the accreditation of professional school(s) or program(s) may serve as a component of an academic program review. The results of an academic program review are communicated to the university at large, through the Senate, its committees, and the Board of Governors, as relevant to these committees’ respective responsibilities. All academic programs and units will normally undergo a review every five years, although a review may be undertaken at any time if it is requested by the Dean or Provost and Vice-President, Academic.



The process involves the review of two components: the academic program to be reviewed and the unit in which the program is based. Many factors contribute to the academic quality of the program. The administrative setting, the research and scholarly activities of the faculty members, the material resources and physical infrastructure, and the governance mechanisms all affect the quality of academic programs and the educational experiences of students. Reviews are intended to ensure and improve quality of both the programs and the unit and to foster a culture of continuous improvement throughout the institution. For those programs which are subject to external accreditation reviews, those reviews will normally be considered as fulfilling the requirements of the present policy, unless a additional review is considered necessary by the Dean responsible for the program or the Provost and Vice-President, Academic.

REGULATIONS The review of programs or programming will include the relevant academic units that are responsible for, or contribute to, their delivery. The main elements of the review process are:

1 A scope letter; 2 A self-assessment of the program or programming by the unit(s) delivering the program; 3 A site visit and assessment report by the review committee; 4 A report and action plan prepared by the unit(s) and the Dean in response to the review within

three months of receipt of the review report; and 5 A progress report on the action plan submitted by the Dean to the Provost within 12-18 months

of the review. Certificates and diplomas that do not ladder into another credential will normally undergo a review every seven years or at any time if it is requested by the Dean or Provost and Vice-President, Academic. Such certificates and diplomas may be clustered for the purpose of review. The order in which programs and programming are reviewed will be determined by the Provost and Vice-President, Academic in consultation with the Deans of the respective Faculties/College, and will form part of an institutional multi-year program review plan. Under exceptional circumstances, a Dean may request a review of a particular program or programming. The Provost and Vice-President, Academic, in consultation with the Academic Planning and Priorities Committee, will authorize Procedures under this policy. These may include detailed criteria for the

review that are within the scope of this policy.REGULATIONS The Purpose of Program Reviews Program reviews are designed to:

1. Determine the coherence of the program standards, design, and goals and review the alignment of the program’s standards, educational goals and learning objectives with the general goals of the institution, as well as external standards, as they apply.

2. Determine whether the program has been designed, structured and delivered so as to ensure that students have achieved their learning outcomes.

3. Determine the appropriateness of the admission requirements and practices of the method of delivery for achieving the learning outcomes.

4. Determine the appropriateness of the specific curricular and pedagogical policies and practices of the program in relation to the learning outcomes.



5. Determine the appropriateness of the methods used for the assessment and evaluation of student progress.

6. Determine that the number and expertise of the faculty and staff are sufficient to enable students’ success.

7. Evaluate the administrative policies and practices of the unit delivering the program, and its efficient and effective utilization of human/physical/financial resources and, where necessary, to suggest improvements for effectiveness and efficiency.

8. Suggest solutions to existing or anticipated problems and offer advice on how the program may be enhanced and its delivery be improved.

The Focus of Program and Unit Reviews The goals of a program and unit review will form the basis for defining the focus and scope of each review. The curricular content of a program, its admission requirements, its mode of delivery, and the basis of evaluation of student performance are all related to the overall quality of any academic program, as is the commitment of the necessary human and other resources for achieving the program goals and helping students achieve success. Program reviews will focus on:

1. Indicators that provide evidence of quality of faculty, students and learning outcomes in terms of accepted standards for academic, professional and/or occupational programs:

Degree level standards;

Credential recognition;

Curriculum/program content;

Design and structure of the program;

Learning objectives and learning outcomes;

Pedagogic methodologies/program delivery;

Student admission, transfer and residency criteria;

Complement of faculty members;

Program resources;

Program advisory mechanisms;

Originality, particularly in relationship to academic programs offered by other post-secondary institutions in British Columbia;

Research opportunities for students;

Research productivity of faculty members;

Quality of research supervision (particularly for graduate programs);

Quality of supervision of field or clinical practica (where applicable);

International learning opportunities for students;

Relationship to university’s strategic directions and stated mission in teaching, learning and research;

Alignment with faculty, school, and/or departmental priorities and stated goals in teaching, research, and community service;

Alignment with existing academic strengths.

2. Program Administration:

Administrative structure and support;

Technical support;

For graduate programs, research infrastructure;



Library and related support;

Teaching and learning assessment;

Utilization of resources, especially human resource.

3. Alignment with the needs of the community and/or industry:

Labour market demand;

Post graduation experience/employment of students.

4. Enrolment, retention and student success:

Enrolments in the program (effectiveness of existing strategies for student recruitment and projected; student numbers for the coming five years): trends over time;

FTE generated and other sources of program funding: trends over time;

Program completion and graduation rates;

Student demand: current and projected;

Potential of the program to attract new students (market);

Strategies for student retention and projected rates of retention and degree completion;

Availability of financial assistance and awards to students;

Specialized access programs, and associated costs, if required;

Access to academic advising.

The Review Process The goal is that reviews should be open, objective, critical, and constructive. The process for reviewing each program (or set of programs) shall consist of the following main elements:

1 The preparation of a self-assessment report by the academic unit delivering the program to be

reviewed; 2 The selection of a review committee, in consultation with the Dean of Provost and Vice-

President, Academic as appropriate. Normally, the committee would consist of one internal member, two external members, of which one external member is appointed chair;

3 A site visit by the review committee; 4 The preparation of a review report by the review committee; 5 An opportunity for the unit delivering the program and the Dean to respond to the review

report; 6 A review of the response prepared by the academic unit and the Dean by the Provost and Vice-

President, Academic; and, 7 An action plan for addressing the conclusions and recommendations of the review report and

response.

The review process will be supported by the Office of Institutional Research. A budget for academic reviews will reside in the Office of the Provost and Vice-President, Academic and funds will be transferred to respective Deans to cover the costs of the reviews. Normally, the review process is coordinated by the Office of the Dean in consultation with the unit under review. The order in which programs are reviewed will be determined by the Provost and Vice-President, Academic in consultation with the Deans of the respective Faculties and Faculty Councils, and will form part of an institutional multi-year program review plan. Under exceptional circumstances, a Dean may request a review of a particular program and/or academic unit. Program reviews are conducted by a review committee and guided by a self-study conducted by the academic unit responsible for a program or set of programs. Additional information may be requested



by the committee before or during the site visit by the review committee. A self-study report is an opportunity for the unit to engage in self-reflection and an analysis of the strength and weaknesses of all aspects of a program or set of programs. Review committees are appointed by the Provost and Vice-President, Academic upon the recommendation of the Dean responsible for the program or unit under review. The review committee normally will consist of two reviewers external to UFV, and a third who is a UFV faculty member from outside the Faculty of the program under review. This faculty member should be someone familiar with the operation of the program under review and shall participate fully in the review. The chair of the review committee normally will be selected from the two external members. The self-study will be developed in cooperation with the Office of Institutional Research. The purpose of the external review is to:

Provide an opportunity for the members of a unit to reflect on the quality and possibilities of their programs;

Provide an external perspective on the program in terms of its comparability with similar programs elsewhere, its stature on a provincial and national scale, and its success in terms of its stated objectives;

Make constructive recommendations and suggest actions that will improve the program. Stages in the Review Process

1 An overall multi-year institutional plan for program reviews is developed by the Provost and

Vice-President, Academic, in consultation with Deans and Faculty Councils, and is submitted and approved by the Senate.

2 The Provost and Vice-President, Academic, in consultation with the Deans of the respective Faculties, confirms annually the programs to be reviewed in the following year. The Dean then informs the academic unit(s) responsible for the program(s) to be reviewed.

3 An orientation session is organized for those responsible for self-studies in academic units and programs designated to conduct reviews in the subsequent academic year. This session will include an examination of the process, the required contents of the self-study document and the nature of the data to be provided by the Office of Institutional Research.

4 The academic unit establishes a committee to prepare its self-study of its program. This committee may also, where appropriate, seek the advice of others such as representatives of industry, professions and practical training programs.

5 The academic unit shall develop a list of at least four potential external and two potential internal reviewers. The Dean, in consultation with the Provost and Vice-President, Academic, shall appoint the review committee, taking into consideration the recommendations from the department.

6 Selection of an external review committee and the Chair by the Dean, in consultation with the Provost and Vice-President, Academic.

7 The Office of Institutional Research provides academic units with survey outcomes and enrolment data and other relevant information.

8 The academic unit conducts the self-study. 9 The academic unit submits the self-study to the Dean, who either accepts or returns it to the

unit for further revisions. 10 The self-study report is reviewed and assessed by the external review committee. 11 The academic unit submits additional documentation if requested by the external committee. 12 Site visit. 13 The external review committee submits its confidential report to the Dean (within a set period

of time after the site visit). 14 The Dean forwards the reviewers’ report to the unit.



15 The academic unit develops its response, within a set period of time, after receiving the reviewers' report, and submits it to the Dean.

16 After consultation with the Provost and Vice-President, Academic and the academic unit, the Dean submits to the Senate: a) the self-study; b) the reviewers’ report; c) the academic unit’s response, and d) his/her executive summary (commenting on the outcomes, findings and conclusions of the review and providing recommendations arising from the review – including an “action plan” for implementing the recommendations emerging from the review).

17 When some of the recommendations arising from the review go beyond the purview of the Dean, the Provost and Vice-President, Academic provides a response to Senate.

18 The Provost and Vice-President, Academic reports annually to the Senate and the Board of Governors on the results of all program reviews, including copies of the “Dean’s Executive Summary” for each review concluded during the previous year.

Program Self-Study by the Academic Unit The self-study conducted by the academic unit provides an opportunity to assess every dimension of the program’s academic quality. The background and history of the program and the academic unit responsible for the program shall be summarized as a context for the delivery of the program. The self-study produced by the academic unit should follow a recommended format, and should include:

A statement of the goals and learning objectives of the program, changes in these since the last review or since the program was initially approved, and their consistency with the mandate and academic priorities of the university.

The past, present and projected student enrolment in the program, including majors and number of full-time equivalents (FTEs).

Admissions information, including: o admission requirements and qualifications of incoming students; o enrolment targets and numbers of students registered; and, o enrolment patterns with respect to entrants, transfer students, and/or other categories

relevant to the program.

The program, including: o the curriculum as presented in the calendar, incorporating course titles and hours; o major options/streams within the program, if applicable; and, o the identification of any courses that are not offered on a regularly accessible basis.

A summary of how each course contributes to achieving the goals and learning objectives of the program. This may include:

o subject matter, methods of delivery, especially approaches to pedagogy; o typical class sizes and trends in student enrolments; o all course outlines, as an appendix; and, o procedures used to evaluate and address course and instructional quality.

Student retention and graduation rates.

The structure, content, and objectives/focus of the program relative to its comparators in universities inside and outside of British Columbia (with an explanation of the rationale for the choice of comparators).

An explanation of any variations from UFV standard policies on grading, promotion, and academic standing, if applicable.

Faculty and staff, including: o Full-time and part-time instructional resources; o Curricula vitae of all faculty members who have been teaching in the program in the last

three years; and,



o A summary of faculty in the program indicating: name highest earned degree and year tenure status teaching assignments summary of teaching evaluations scholarly activity, which could include a listing of peer-reviewed and other

journal articles (current and preceding five years), chapters, monographs, policy papers, reports, presentations, conferences

community service activities

Description of the resources available to the program (labs, student spaces, computing facilities, library resources, equipment, and other categories as appropriate).

Information about collaborative arrangements (with other academic units or institutions) when applicable.

The findings of representative surveys (conducted by the Office of Institutional Research) of current students’ and recent graduates' perceptions of the program's effectiveness in preparing them for careers and graduate studies.

The results of surveys/consultations with representatives of industry, professions or practical training programs, as appropriate.

Details of the unit’s operating and capital budgets for the previous five years.

Assessment of program strengths and weaknesses and level of success in meeting its stated objectives (with a description of the criteria, performance indicators, and evaluative tools employed by the program as a basis for its self-study), including:

consistency of the program with the university’s mission and strategic plan and the standards, goals and learning objectives for the degree;

appropriateness and effectiveness of the admission requirements; appropriateness of the program’s structure, curriculum, delivery modes and

evaluation methods to satisfy the learning objectives; appropriateness and effectiveness of the utilization of resources, especially

human resources; and, evidence of quality of faculty, students and overall program success.

A preliminary response by the academic unit to the program’s strengths and weaknesses identified through the self-study.

APPENDICES

N/A




NUMBER 189


LAST AMENDMENT

LAST REVIEWED



Responsible Executive Provost and Vice-President, Academic Related Policies / Legislation Board policy direction University Educational Directions and Planning

(BPD-202) University Act, s 35.2 (6) (f) Undergraduate Course and Program Approval policy (21) Graduate Course and Program Approval policy (209)

PURPOSE

This policy is to ensure accountability of academic programs and programming by:

• providing regular and systematic reviews of the objectives and delivery of programs and programming at UFV;

• fostering ongoing improvement of their quality;

• enhancing their contribution to the university’s strategic goals, vision, mission, and values;

• aligning with Institutional Learning Outcomes;

• achieving and maintaining high standards of educational practices;

• achieving and maintaining high professional standards, as recognized by the disciplinary and/or accrediting bodies; and

• ensuring an adequate and effective utilization of resources.

SCOPE

This policy applies to all programs and programming at UFV, and to academic units that are responsible for, or contribute to, their delivery.

DEFINITIONS

In this policy, the following definitions apply: Academic unit: An administrative grouping that delivers or contributes to the delivery of programs and programming, such as a Faculty, department, or school or centre.



Institutional Learning Outcomes (ILOs): Set of abilities, skills or competencies that each UFV graduate can demonstrate. Program: A collection of courses and associated requirements offered as a credential or an option within a credential. This includes, but is not limited to, a certificate, diploma, minor, extended minor, major, honours, degree, specialization, option, or concentration. Programming: a set of related measures, events, activities, service courses or programs in support of a particular institutional priority or attainment of competencies (numerical, communications) across programs.

POLICY An academic program review is the administrative process that provides a systematic quantitative and qualitative review of the objectives and delivery of programs and programming. All academic programs and programming will normally undergo a review every seven to eight years, or at any time if it is requested by the Dean or Provost and Vice-President, Academic. Academic program reviews shall be carried out under the general supervision of the Dean responsible for the program and the Provost and Vice-President, Academic. At the discretion of the Provost and Vice-President, Academic, the accreditation of professional school(s) or program(s) may serve as a component of an academic program review. The results of an academic program review are communicated to the university at large, through the Senate, its committees, and the Board of Governors, as relevant to these committees’ respective responsibilities. REGULATIONS The review of programs or programming will include the relevant academic units that are responsible for, or contribute to, their delivery. The main elements of the review process are:

1 A scope letter;

2 A self-assessment of the program or programming by the unit(s) delivering the program;

3 A site visit and assessment report by the review committee;

4 A report and action plan prepared by the unit(s) and the Dean in response to the review within three months of receipt of the review report; and

5 A progress report on the action plan submitted by the Dean to the Provost within 12-18 months of the review.

Certificates and diplomas that do not ladder into another credential will normally undergo a review every seven years or at any time if it is requested by the Dean or Provost and Vice-President, Academic. Such certificates and diplomas may be clustered for the purpose of review. The order in which programs and programming are reviewed will be determined by the Provost and Vice-President, Academic in consultation with the Deans of the respective Faculties/College, and will



form part of an institutional multi-year program review plan. Under exceptional circumstances, a Dean may request a review of a particular program or programming.

The Provost and Vice-President, Academic, in consultation with the Academic Planning and Priorities Committee, will authorize Procedures under this policy. These may include detailed criteria for the review that are within the scope of this policy.

APPENDICES

N/A


Participant No. _______

Welcome to Beyond the Blues, a non-profit screening and public education project. Our goal is to help you learn the signs of depression, anxiety disorders and risky drinking and help connect you to community supports. We also have a new screen to help you look at your mental well-being overall.

This event is free, anonymous, and confidential.

Please feel safe and welcome here.

Please note that this is an education event. You will not receive a diagnosis or counselling, but you’ll learn if you’d benefit from a more complete evaluation.

Today’s program will include the following:

A brief depression self-test, anxiety self-test, well-being self-test and risky drinking self-test for you to complete; we ask everyone to complete all four tools

a 10-20 minute, one-on-one interview with a clinician to discuss the results of your screens and next steps, learn about community resources and receive follow-up sheets summarizing your results

resource materials on mental health, mental illness and alcohol We appreciate your participation in this event and do hope it will be of help to you or someone you care about. If you have any questions, feel free to ask the program staff.

Next step:

Please fill out the attached screening forms and return it to our staff.

Sincerely,


When: 10:30am to 2:30pm on Thursday, February 4th, 2016 Where: Across from Tim Hortons in building A on CEP campus and in front of the bookstore at the Trades Centre. The UFV Counselling Department is holding a depression, anxiety, and risky drinking, and well-being education and screening day. UFV counsellors will be offering brief self-tests followed by a debriefing, and mental health resource materials for all students & staff.


ufv.ca

TOOLS FOR SUCCESS

In these 6 sessions, you will learn about: February 24: Time & Energy Management March 2: Enhancing Attention & Learning March 9: Study Skills & Memory March 16: Motivation & Reducing Procrastination March 23: Exam Prep & How to Beat Test Anxiety March 30: Stress Management

Register or Drop-in to any or all of

these FREE lunch sessions!

Wednesdays: Feb. 24, Mar. 2, 9, 16, 23, & 30 11:30am - 12:15pm

Trades & Technology Centre Room 2001

TO REGISTER: CALL 604-795-2808 (UFV Student Services, Chilliwack), or

EMAIL [email protected] (UFV Counsellor)

6-Part Series of FREE

Study Skills Sessions!

ufv.ca

QUICK STUDY TIPS SERIES By UFV Counselling Services


Dates and times: Chilliwack Campus, Wednesday, February 3

4:30-7:00pm

OR Abbotsford Campus, Wednesday, February 17

4:30-7:00pm

To register contact: Student Services, Abbotsford, Room B214, (604) 854-4528 Student Services, Chilliwack, Room A1318, (604) 795-2808

ufv.ca/counselling

ufv.ca

Career & Life Planning Workshop

Join this workshop and explore career options through:

Self-Assessment

Interests Values

Personality

World of Work Assessment Online Research

Career Assessments Labour Market Demands

Education and Career Paths

Decision Making &

Next Steps

Group Work One-on-one Assistance

Sign-up FREE

Career Exploration Workshop!

ufv.ca

Counselling Workshops

Winter Semester 2016


Workshop Time

Student Stress

& Managing Time

10:00am-Noon

Memory, Test Prep and Active Learning

Strategies

12:15-1:35pm

Exam Anxiety 1:45-3:00pm

ufv.ca

STUDY SMART Academic Skills = Real World Skills

Do you want to study more effectively? Manage time and stress efficiently? Learn how to prepare for your exams? Overcome test anxiety?

To learn these and so much more, join the FREE Study Skills

Workshops!

Attend the full day and enjoy a PIZZA lunch!

Study Smart Day

Thursday, February 11 Abbotsford Campus

Sign up at Student Services, Abbotsford, Room B214, or

(604)-854-4528

If you are unable to attend book a one-on-one study skills session with a UFV

Counsellor.

ufv.ca/counselling

Sign-up FREE

Study Skills Workshop!

ufv.ca

Counselling Workshops Winter Semester 2016


draft agenda - university of the fraser valley (ufv.ca) › media › assets › trades ›...

Documents