SENATE AGENDA - Your KPU · Program Development Guide. Moved by Dana Cserepes; seconded by Chris Tryanor: ... KPU’s oard of Governors’ thanks the Senate and the Senate Standing

SENATE AGENDA

Regular Meeting

Monday, June 22, 2015 4 - 7 pm

Surrey Campus, Cedar 2110

1. Call to Order ........................................................................................................................... Alan Davis

2. Approval of Agenda

3. Approval of Minutes (May 25, 2015)

4. Chair's Report

4.1. Board Response to Senate Budget Recommendations ......................................... Harpreet Bhatti

4.2. President's Report to Senate ......................................................................................... Alan Davis

4.3. Provost's Report to Senate .......................................................................................... Sal Ferreras

5. Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum .................................................................... Dana Cserepes

5.1. Program Revision: Bachelor of Music in Musical Arts Continuance Requirements

5.2. Revision: Course Outline Template

6. Senate Executive Committee ................................................................................................. Alan Davis

6.1. Empowering the Senate Executive for July and August, 2015

7. Senate Standing Committee on University Budget ......................................................... Tom Westgate

7.1. Budget Development and Management Principles and Criteria

8. Board / Senate Task Force on Bi-Cameral Governance ....................................... Task Force Member(s)

9. Senate Governance Committee ....................................................................................... Steven Button

9.1. Mandate/Membership Revision: Senate Standing Committee on Program Review

9.2. Mandate Revision: Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum and Senate Subcommittee on Course Curriculum

9.3. Membership Revision: Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum

9.4. Membership Revision: Senate Standing Committee on Policy Review

9.5. Membership Revision: Senate Governance Committee

10. Senate Nominating Committee ..................................................................................... Don McGonigal

10.1. Search Advisory Committee: University Registrar

11. Senate Standing Committee on Academic Planning and Priorities (No Report) ............... Robert Wood

12. Senate Standing Committee on Policy Review (No Report) ...................................................... Kim Rose

13. Senate Standing Committee on Program Review ....................................................... Stan Kazymerchyk

14. Senate Standing Committee on Tributes (No Report)....................................................... Shawn Mason

15. Approval of Graduates ....................................................................................................... Zena Mitchell

16. Items for Discussion ................................................................................................................ Alan Davis

17. Next Meeting: September 28, 2015 4:00 pm - 7:00 pm, Surrey Campus

18. Adjournment

SENATE

MEETING DATE: June 22, 2015

AGENDA #: 3

PREPARED BY: Lori Scanlan

Issue: Approval of the Minutes of the May 25, 2015 Regular Senate Meeting

For Approval THAT Senate approve the Minutes of the May 25, 2015 Regular Senate Meeting.

MINUTES

Senate Meeting

Monday, May 25, 2015 4:00 pm

Surrey Campus Boardroom (2110)

Present: Jennifer Au / Vice Chair Harpreet Bains Amandeep Cheema Dana Cserepes Alan Davis / Chair Patrick Donahoe Kayla England Sal Ferreras Tru Freeman

Brian Haugen Marc Kampschuur Stan Kazymerchyk Connie Klimek Shawn Mason Kari Michaels Zena Mitchell Todd Mundle Jerry Murphy

Carolyn Robertson Kim Rose Carol Stewart Wayne Tebb Chris Traynor Tally Wade Tom Westgate Robert Wood Betty Worobec

1. Call to Order The Chair called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm.

2. Approval of Agenda

Moved by Shawn Mason; seconded by Kim Rose: THAT Senate approve the agenda. MOTION CARRIED

3. Approval of

Minutes April 27, 2015

Moved by Kim Rose; seconded by Dana Cserepes: Amendments: 5.5 revise “Culture” to “Cultures” 9 revise “Senate governance” to “Senate Governance” THAT Senate approve the minutes of the April 27, 2015 Regular Senate meeting as amended. MOTION CARRIED

4. Chair’s Report 4.1 President’s Report to Senate The President’s Report to Senate was received.

4.2 Provost Report to Senate The Provost shared how watching 950 students walk across the stage at last week’s convocation ceremonies to receive their credentials serves as a reminder of why KPU exists. Dr. Ferreras informed Senate that the Academic Plan Implementation Teams have expanded, particularly the Learning Outcomes Team. The Provost and Implementation Team continue to meet with Mr. Tim Carey from the University of Guelph regarding the KPU Open Studies Component of the Academic Plan. A full report on the Academic Plan implementation will be shared at the June meeting. The Provost’s recent activities include:

Regrets: University Secretariat: Steven Button Romy Kozak Don McGonigal Mark Pritchard Diane Purvey Brenda Snaith

Sandi Klassen / University Secretary Lori Scanlan / Recorder Natalie Walker / Confidential Assistant, Office of the Provost

Senate Minutes May 25, 2015 Page 2

A walk through of the Health Innovation Space located across from Surrey Memorial Hospital. Arthur Fallick, Associate VP Research and the Deans also attended.

Attending the Indigenous Adult and Higher Learning Association Annual General Meeting and Workshop. A number of aboriginal programs were showcased and they are looking at developing more opportunities for trades training programs.

Participating in two visioning meetings with the Faculty of Design.

Participating in a presentation and dialogue regarding the change in high school graduation requirements and student transition to Post-Secondary Education at The Spring Fraser Valley Metro Superintendent Retreat.

Attending the Disability Resource Network Conference with Diane Naugler, Associate Dean, Faculty of Arts.

5. Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum

The report from the Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum was received.

5.1 Program Revision: Computer Aided Design and Drafting (CADD) Technologies

Moved by Dana Cserepes; seconded by Brian Haugen: THAT Senate approve the Program Revision: Computer Aided Design and Drafting (CADD) Technologies. MOTION CARRIED

5.2 Program Revision: Foundations in Design (FIND) Certificate

Moved by Dana Cserepes; seconded by Carolyn Robertson: THAT Senate approve the Program Revision: Foundations in Design (FIND) Certificate. MOTION CARRIED

5.3 Document Revision: Library Impact Assessment Support

Dana Cserepes explained that program proposals and program revision submissions with substantive costs would require the inclusion of the Library Impact Assessment Support document and suggested that such criteria should be added to the Program Development Guide. Moved by Dana Cserepes; seconded by Chris Tryanor: THAT Senate approve the Document Revision: Library Impact Assessment Support. MOTION CARRIED

6 Senate

Executive Committee

No report.


7. Senate

Standing Committee on University Budget

The report from the Senate Standing Committee on University Budget was received.

7.1 Five-Year Capital Plan (2016/17 – 2020/21) Karen Hearn, Executive Director of Facilities, explained the Ministry of Advanced Education (AVED) criteria for approving capital request submissions. Moved by Tom Westgate; seconded by Wayne Tebb: THAT Senate endorse the Five-Year Capital Plan (2016/17 – 2020/21) and recommend it to the Board of Governors. MOTION CARRIED

8. Board/Senate

Task Force on Bi-cameral Governance

No Report

9. Senate

Governance Committee

No Report

10. Senate

Nominating Committee

10.1 Senate Nominating Committee Moved by Robert Wood; seconded by Connie Klimek: THAT Senate approve the following as members of Senate Standing Committees effective September 1, 2015:

Senate Governance Committee Faculty member – Chamkaur Cheema, Senator, School of Business Senate Standing Committee on Academic Planning and Priorities Faculty member – Chamkaur Cheema, Senator, School of Business Senate Standing Committee on Policy Review Professional Support Staff member – Jim Murray, Senator, Bookstore

MOTION CARRIED 11. Senate

Standing Committee on Academic Planning & Priorities

The report from the Senate Standing Committee on Academic Planning and Priorities was received.


11.1 KPU Internationalization Plan

It was agreed that the wording on page 3 “ensuring accessibility for all members of the stakeholder communities. Independent of their financial, physical, and/or personal circumstances” would be revised to reflect that KPU Internationalization will, “to the greatest extent possible”, “ensure accessibility for all members…etc”. Moved by Robert Wood; seconded by Wayne Tebb: THAT Senate endorse the KPU Internationalization Plan and recommend it to the Board of Governors. MOTION CARRIED

11.1 Strategic Enrollment Management (SEM) Plan

The Provost presented the SEM Plan and stressed that the plan’s focus is not just about finances and full time equivalent numbers but rather KPU’s goal to produce professionals who can work in the vast fields within our Mandate. Moved by Robert Wood; seconded by Betty Worobec: THAT Senate approve the Strategic Enrollment Management (SEM) Plan.

MOTION CARRIED 12. Senate

Standing Committee on Policy Review

The Report from the Senate Standing Committee on Policy Review was received.

12.1 Report on Policy Activities

Kim Rose, Chair of the Senate Standing Committee on Policy Review, presented the Status / Progress Update – Academic Policies and the Master List of Policies for Senate’s information.

12.2 Approval of Committee Chair

Moved by Kim Rose; seconded by Brian Haugen: THAT Connie Klimek be appointed as Chair of the Senate Standing Committee on Policy Review for the term of office from September 1, 2015 to August 31, 2017.

MOTION CARRIED

13. Senate

Standing Committee on Tributes

No Report


14. Approval of

Graduates As approved by Senate on April 27, 2010: "In those circumstances when Senate cannot meet in a timely fashion, the Registrar is granted the authority to approve graduates after first consulting with the Chair of Senate. The Registrar will report such approval to Senate at the next Senate meeting." The University Registrar confirmed that the students were in compliance with the requirements for their graduation, and as such were able to participate in the Spring 2015 Convocation ceremonies.

15. Items for

Discussion The Chair provided an update on:

upcoming KPU days (June 16, 17 and 18)

progress with the VP Finance and Administration search

KPU’s financial position

Stan Kazymerchyk showed a PowerPoint presentation called “Teachers and Turf Team to Train Teens” where young people with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome have an opportunity to learn turf management skills. The Senate Vice Chair presented outgoing Senators with a thank-you gift and presented Sandi Klassen, University Secretary with a special thank you/retirement gift for all her hard work in supporting Senate. Kari Michaels, Student Senator, provided information about an upcoming event on academic dishonesty and plagiarism. When a date is decided she will inform Senate members.

16. Next Meeting June 22, 2015, from 4pm to 7pm, Surrey Campus Cedar 2110

17. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 5:02 pm.

SENATE


AGENDA #: 4.1

PRESENTED BY: Harpreet Bhatti

Issue: Board Response to Senate Budget Recommendations

For Information The Board of Governors approved the attached response to Senate's budget recommendations at its June 3, 2015 meeting. Harpreet Bhatti, Chair of the Board Finance & Audit Committee, will join Senate to discuss the response. Attached: Board Response to Senate Budget Recommendations

KWANTLEN POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY

12666 – 72ND Ave.

Surrey, BC Canada V3W 2M8

MEMORANDUM

TO:

SENATE

CC:

Senate Standing Committee on University Budget (SSCUB)

FROM: Harprett Bhatti, Chair, Board Finance Committee DATE:

June 3 , 2015

SUBJECT:

SSCUB’s Recommendations to Senate for Transmittal to the Board of Governors

KPU’s Board of Governors’ thanks the Senate and the Senate Standing Committee on the University Budget for their work in reviewing the university’s draft 2015-16 budget, and for the advice they provided to the President. The Governors understand that SSCUB worked hard on the task and appreciates receiving the Committee’s comments through Senate. The Governors support the more positive and collaborative process that was present this budget cycle.

The Board has asked administration to continue the work that has begun this year and to move forward and proceed with year two of the Task Force Budget Allocation Sub-Committee (BASC) Plan. With the advent of greater fiscal uncertainty in post-secondary education the movement towards a more strategic approach to budgeting is essential. It is important that the university continues to move to a more strategic budget model and to work collaboratively with the Senate.

Observation: 2015/2016 Budget Development Process and Consultations Recommendation: SSCUB recommends that going forward, KPU continues with the more open and transparent budget development process and consultations with stakeholder groups. Board Response: The Board has asked administration to continue with the more open and transparent budget development process and consultations with stakeholder groups and continue to work collaboratively with SSCUB.

Observation: Incremental Budgeting Recommendation: SSCUB recommends that the Budget Allocation Subcommittee’s (BASC) report and recommendations be implemented following the timelines as presented and that SSCUB receive regular updates of its progress. SSCUB also recommends that the BASC include at least two members from SSCUB.


12666 – 72ND Ave.


MEMORANDUM

2

Board Response: The Board has asked administration to continue the work that has begun this year, to move forward and proceed with year two of the BASC’s Budget Allocation Plan. The Board supports the recommendation for at least two SSCUB members to be part of the BASC.

Observation: Balancing the Budget Recommendation: SSCUB recommends that work continue on the development of KPU’s Strategic Enrolment Management Plan and that SSCUB be updated on its progress. Board Response: The Board has asked administration to continue the development of KPU’s Strategic Enrolment Management Plan and that SSCUB be updated on its progress.

Observation: Current Focus on Finding Savings Rather Than Generating Revenue Recommendation: SSCUB recommends that KPU continue to invest in long and short-term revenue generating activities, courses and programs to properly resource and sustain its diverse range of educational offerings and fulfill its polytechnic mandate. Board Response: The Board has asked administration to continue to invest in long and short term revenue generating activities, courses and programs to properly resource and sustain its diverse range of educational offerings and fulfill its polytechnic mandate.

Observation: FY14/15 and FY15/16 Skills Gap Plan Development Process Recommendation: SSCUB recommends that regular updates of KPU’s Skills Gap Plan and the ongoing development of enrolment targets and budgetary reporting implications be provided to the University community. Board Response: The Board has asked administration to provide regular updates of KPU’s Skills Gap Plan and the ongoing development of enrolment targets and budgetary reporting implications be provided to the University community.


12666 – 72ND Ave.


MEMORANDUM

3

TO:

SENATE

FROM:

Senate Standing Committee on University Budget (SSCUB)

DATE:

February 23, 2015

SUBJECT:

SSCUB’s Recommendations to Senate for Transmittal to the Board of Governors

This report summarizes the discussions at several meetings of the SSCUB from September 19th, 2014 until February 13th. 2015. Before continuing with the detailed observations and recommendations the committee would like to communicate certain over arching beliefs and recommendations:

1. This year’s budget cycle has been a more positive and collaborative process than in previous years and SSCUB looks forward to this continuing;

2. With the advent of greater fiscal uncertainty in post secondary education the movement towards a more strategic approach to budgeting is essential. The re-engineered process will continue for at least four years. SSCUB looks forward to working collaboratively with University Administration and the Board towards this end;

3. As the University moves towards a new budget process, and without moving away from a concern for being efficient in our spending to deliver the polytechnic mandate, there needs to be an equal focus on introducing new approaches to content delivery as well as on the introduction of new revenue streams.

The remainder of this communication presents SSCUB’s observations of the 2015/2016 budget development process with the intent to assist the Board of Governors and the Finance and Audit Committee in their budget approval deliberations.

Observation: 2015/2016 Budget Development Process and Consultations The 2015/2016 budget development process is much more open and transparent than in previous years. University Administration presented a Financial Update in September 2014 at campus forums, Faculty Councils and other forums. This was repeated with another Financial Update and a presentation of the draft FY15/16 University operating budget in January 2015. The University community was encouraged to submit comments and feedback on the Finance SharePoint site. Recommendation: SSCUB recommends that going forward, KPU continues with the more open and transparent budget development process and consultations with stakeholder groups.


12666 – 72ND Ave.


MEMORANDUM

4

Observation: Incremental Budgeting KPU prepares budgets on an incremental basis of evaluating and prioritizing new budget asks. There is continued concern from SSCUB that this ignores what’s in the base budget, as funding allocations may not reflect environmental changes. The FY15/16 draft ongoing allocation of $1.141M represents less than one percent of KPU’s consolidated budget. To address this concern, in January 2014, President Alan Davis constituted the Resources Planning Task Force to examine and make recommendations on processes that assure KPU’s resources are deployed as efficiently and effectively as possible to enable the realization of Vision 2018: http://www.kpu.ca/resources-planning-project In June 2014, the Task Force presented the President and the Senate with 11 recommendations and accompanying reports: http://www.kpu.ca/resources-planning-project-reports-and-recommendations These included the report and recommendations from the Task Force’s Budget Allocation Subcommittee, which is available at this link. The subcommittee recommended that KPU transitions to a new budget model, in which definitions, formulae and metrics are used to develop the University budget. It provided a timeline, starting with the President appointing a Budget Model Steering Committee (BMSC) in FY14/15 to draft these metrics, consult with University stakeholders and update SSCUB on its progress. Update on the Task Force Budget Allocation Sub-Committee Plan The budget development process timeline for 2015-16 was established from the recommendations of the committee. In addition, in the current year the project costing model and data collection has been occurring. The instructional FTEs across the Faculties have been analyzed, given the current instructional support to faculty. The number of students in each course and the amount of revenue that is generated is being determined on a course by course basis. This has been collected to assist the committee going forward to set the metrics and develop key performance indicators. Going into next year, the BMSC will be established to work on year 2 of the plan. Recommendation: SSCUB recommends that the Budget Allocation Subcommittee’s report and recommendations be implemented following the timelines as presented and that SSCUB receives regular updates of its progress. SSCUB also recommends that the BMSC includes at least two members from SSCUB.

http://www.kpu.ca/resources-planning-project

http://www.kpu.ca/resources-planning-project

http://www.kpu.ca/resources-planning-project-reports-and-recommendations

http://www.kpu.ca/sites/default/files/President/Budget%20Allocation%20Report%20to%20RPTF%2012JuneFINAL.pdf


12666 – 72ND Ave.


MEMORANDUM

5

Observation: Balancing the Budget There is a $1.3M gap in the proposed FY15/16 University operating budget, however by legislation, KPU is required to balance its budget. The University Administration is expecting that savings and reallocations of $1.3M will be achieved through recruitment lag (up to $742K) and targeted savings from programming, services and retirements (up to $1.1M). Hiring lags, a common practice in the post-secondary sector, provide institutions an opportunity to re-evaluate positions and to look at more efficient operational practices that can ensure balanced budgets and sustainable development of educational offerings. A parallel strategy to savings and reallocations is that of instituting an effective Strategic Enrolment Management (SEM) plan that allows an institution to ensure a regular and balanced flow of incoming students and tuition revenue matched by an equally strong drive to retain and graduate learners. The changing pressures and priorities of external funding need to be attenuated through a concerted effort to maximize revenue generation through prudent fiscal management to ensure KPU continues to thrive and serve the diverse learner population of our mandated region and beyond. The Provost’s Office has provided assurances that the SEM process will entail ample consultations and dialog with our diverse stakeholders. A robust SEM planning process will help inform and enable SSCUB to provide sound recommendations on strategic and budget matters to Senate and the Board of Governors. Recommendation: SSCUB recommends that work continue on the development of KPU’s Strategic Enrolment Management Plan and that SSCUB be updated on its progress.

Observation: Current Focus on Finding Savings Rather Than Generating Revenue Given that government funding is not expected to increase, KPU cannot solely rely on spending freezes and cost-cutting measures. Recommendation: SSCUB recommends that KPU continue to invest in long and short-term revenue generating activities, courses and programs to properly resource and sustain its diverse range of educational offerings and fulfill its polytechnic mandate.

Observation: FY14/15 and FY15/16 Skills Gap Plan Development Process The Ministry of Advanced Education (AVED) and Ministry of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training (JTST)-mandated development of the Skills Gap Plans for FY14/15 to FY17/18 requires a shift from our present base budget program allocations and student-FTE targets to a more focused formula. This ensures post-secondary institutions align a percentage of their program FTEs with high demand career areas as represented in the National Occupation Classification’s (NOCs) top sixty occupations. The Skills Gap Plan process is essentially a reporting exercise prepared by Institutional Analysis and Planning much like a variety of other regular reports to Government. While this operational reporting function takes place outside the scope of the budget


12666 – 72ND Ave.


MEMORANDUM

6

planning process, keeping our internal governance bodies such as SSCUB informed of progress and ongoing developments will go a long ways toward ensuring institutional transparency. Recommendation: SSCUB recommends that regular updates of KPU’s Skills Gap Plans and the ongoing development of enrolment targets and budgetary reporting implications be provided to the University community.

SENATE


AGENDA #: 4.2

PRESENTED BY: Alan Davis

Issue: President's Report to Senate

For Information I am pleased to announce the appointment of Jon Harding as VP Finance and Administration, starting on July 20th. Jon comes to us from his role as Director of Financial Services at the BC Legislature. As well as being a Chartered Accountant (with a diploma of Technology in Advanced Accounting from BCIT), he has a BA in Classical Studies and an MA in Classical Archeology from UBC.

We are finalizing arrangements with ClearView Strategic Partners to adopt their protected disclosure system, which was referred to in the new KPU Protected Disclosure Policy HR-24. This will allow anyone in the university to anonymously file a report on a perceived violation of KPU’s bylaws and policies. All reports will be vetted by independent reviewers before being forwarded to the appropriate executive or to the Board Chair for investigation. Communication plans and instructions will be developed to guide employees and students who wish to use this opportunity.

From May 30th to June 2nd, I attended the Canadian Society for the Study of Higher Education in Ottawa, which included sessions related to hacker Education, the Future of Higher Education in Canada, and on how the language we use for higher education can shape attitudes and policy.

On June 4th, I attended the BC Association of Institutes and Universities (BCAIU) presidents’ meeting at the Emily Carr University of Art and Design (ECUAD), and on June 9th I attended the KPU Foundation board meeting. On June 12th I met with representatives of the Ontario College Quality Assurance Service, with the leaders at ClearView Strategic Partners, and with colleagues at Ryerson University.

KPU Days were successfully held at each of the 4 campuses from June 16th to 18th, and I attended the Family Orientation session at KPU Surrey on June 16th.

I met with Mayer Heppner on June 18th to discuss the future of the City of Surrey and KPU’s role, and on June 22nd I participated in the National Aboriginal Day event hosted by KPU.

Over the summer, I will be working with my executive colleagues on land and property opportunities for KPU, on a quality assurance framework, on executive performance reviews, on the development of a new budget model and on mapping out a more effective external strategy for each of our campuses and communities.

http://www.clearviewpartners.com/

http://www.kpu.ca/sites/default/files/Policies/HR24%20Protected%20Disclosure%20Policy%20%2014%2011%2019.pdf

SENATE


AGENDA #: 4.3

PRESENTED BY: Sal Ferreras

Issue: Provost's Report to Senate

For Information Attached: KPU Academic Plan 2018 Year One

KPU Academic Plan 2018Year One

Dr. Salvador Ferreras, Provost & Vice President, Academic

forKPU Board of Governors

June 3, 2015

Four Academic Goals

To Offer Exceptional Learning Environments Attuned to Learners

To increase experiential learning opportunities

To define learning outcomes and methods of demonstrating student capability

To ensure student success and well-being

How do we measure up to our stated goals?

Goal One, Strategy One

“To support our educators in their pursuit of the emergent knowledge base for teaching and

learning”

We have invested in professional development of faculty, staff and administrators to nurture our unique special purpose teaching university focus

Goal One, Strategy Two

“Targeted enrolment growth of 5% per year”

Strategic enrolment management plan proposed

University Transitions Project underway with full implementation in September, 2015

Enrolment holding steady, international growth, attrition rates in decline

Goal One, Strategy Three

“INSTL will recognize, nurture and promote exemplary teaching practices”

Rebuilding Teaching and Learning portfolio

Extensive consultations with faculty, students and academic leaders

New integrated framework proposed

New pedagogies and assessment under review

Goal One, Strategy Four

“INSTL will work with ORS to encourage and promote the integration of research and scholarship with teaching and learning”

The Research Plan proposes important partnerships and collaborations to merge

scholarly activity with teaching and learning.

KPU participating in diverse research projects in Health Innovation, Foresight Clean Technologies,

the Pan Am Games 2015, Science World, etc.

Goal One, Strategy Five

“KPU will allocate one-time funding to support and update classroom technology”

Implementation and outfitting of appropriate and current technologies into all classrooms in

process

Goal One, Strategy Six

“KPU will create the ‘Creative Capital’ fund to promote the cultivation of new ideas and

academic innovation”

The Academic Plan Implementation Task Force, in collaboration with the Provost Office, is

developing terms of reference to launch a call for proposals in Fall 2015.

Goal One, Strategy Seven

“The University will establish KPU Open Studies to house Prior Learning Assessment, Open Textbook

and Open Education Resource universitas”

E-text book projects showcased

International conference presentation at Open Education Consortium Conference 2015 in Banff

Dr. David Porter report on Open Education at KPUcommissioned and delivered

Exploring successful Prior Learning Assessment practices in the sector

Piloting Flexible Pathways Framework with other BCAIU partners

Goal Two, Strategy One

“Launch course-based, faculty-led, academic learning activities that are community-based”

Department of Student Life and Development and CIR:CLE engaged in a project to reflect all avenues of community learning in a website

launched in early May 2015

Goal Two, Strategy Two

“Encourage community-based scholarship”

The Experiential Learning website now hosts more than fifty experiential learning courses (courses having out-of-classroom elements).

More than half of these courses are directly community-engaged.

Goal Two, Strategy Three

“KPU’s community research will be increasingly focused on partnerships that yield experiential

learning opportunities and current practices for faculty”

KPU’s Research Plan primary focus on:

Healthy Communities

Design Thinking

Sustainability Thinking

Clean Technology

Goal Three, Strategy One

“Ensure KPU’s programs focus on cultivating core competencies”

Significant progress on developing cultural competencies as outlined in the

Internationalization PlanVisual Media Workshop leading media literacy

activityIndigenous world views explored through the

proposed Indigenous Community Justice minor in the Faculty of Arts

This strategy is in the early stages of development

Goal Three, Strategy Two

“Align courses and program offerings with well-defined learning outcomes through curriculum

and program review processes”

Learning Outcomes presentations and workshops with subject experts Dr. Maureen Wideman from

UFV and Liesel Knaack from VIU

Sharepoint site established as single point of contact for information and resources on Learning Outcomes

activities and events

Outcomes-based approaches initiatives in Wilson School of Design, Faculty of Science & Horticulture,

Faculty of Trades and Faculty of Arts.

Goal Three, Strategy Three

“Develop models to assess competencies and learning outcomes at the course, program and

institutional level”

Experiential Learning (Amazon Field School) and Wilson School of Design program assessment

template is developed

Ongoing work with Academic Plan Implementaion Task Force underway

Goal Three, Strategy Four

“Engage a representative university team to work with Faculties and Departments to

determine the most appropriate models of adapting of essential skills to diverse disciplines”

Preliminary discussions are taking place aimed at addressing essential skills at the program level

The Faculty of Academic and Career Advancement will be bringing forth recommendations in mid-Fall 2015

Goal Four, Strategy One

“VISION 2018 declares a commitment to Internationalization and developing successful

global citizens”

KPU Internationalization plan recommended by Senate to the Board of Governors, May 2015

Internationalization includes a comprehensive approach to a cultural competencies certificate

as a value-add to a KPU student’s credential

Goal Four, Strategy Two

“Promote increased participation by Aboriginal peoples in the Lower Mainland”

Elder in Residence installed January 2015

Indigenous Protocol approved by Aboriginal Advisory Committee May 2015

Minor in Indigenous Community Justice in governance approval process

Goal Four, Strategy Two

“Promote increased participation by Aboriginal peoples in the Lower Mainland”

Squamish Nation Trades Centre collaboration with KPU, ITA and North Vancouver School

District

Tsawwassen Farm School in collaboration with Tsawwassen First Nation

Successful Pow-Wow held September 2014

National Aboriginal Day celebrations

June 22, 2015

Goal Four, Strategy Three

“Provide an appropriate range of integrated and easily accessible support services to improve

retention and completion of studies”

Strategic Enrolment Management Plan will identify specific tactics to promote retention and

reduce attrition

‘First Year Experience’ project to launch Fall 2015

KPU retention data will guide student support initiatives

Goal Four, Strategy Four

“Ensure educational services provide accessibility to students with disabilities and incorporate

Universal Design principles”

Funding provided for adaptive software systems

Universal Design Plan is being developed and steered by President’s Council on Equity and

Diversity

Policy HR15 on Diversity and Inclusiveness being developed

Goal Four, Strategy Five

“Engage students in the development and establishment of co-curricular programs and

activities”

Co-curricular and extra-curricular opportunities surveyed and positioned on the experiential

learning website http://www.kpu.ca/experiential/

Next steps: to develop tracking, incentivizing, recognizing and assessing these programs and

activities

http://www.kpu.ca/experiential/

Goal Four, Strategy Six

“Work with students to develop student-initiated activities to reinforce a sense of belonging and

campus community”

Hosts and coordinates frequent student campus activities

‘First Year Experience’ project to initiate recommendations of the Foundations of

Excellence in Fall 2015

Adoption of new university-wide orientation model

Goal Four, Strategy Seven

“Promote active participation in recreational activities including accessible club programming

space”

Birch building renovations to provide additional public spaces for students and student club

activities

Active KPU/KSA dialog aimed at identifying and funding additional fitness and wellness facilities

across campuses

Goal Four, Strategy Eight

“KPU will develop a comprehensive Mental Health strategy for the full university

community”

Mental Health strategy underway

Facilitators in training

Webinars, workshops and conference attendance to inform and enhance KPU practices

HR Department leading this initiative in collaboration with Student Services and the KSA

ACADEMIC PLANANNUAL REPORT ‐ JUNE 2015

Strategy Narrative Status ImpactThe polytechnic university conception of our teaching and learning activity goes

beyond the transmission of knowledge to students. A core intent of the Academic Plan is to support our educators in their

pursuit of the emergent knowledge base for teaching and learning in their subject areas, in connection to their larger professional communities, in testing new pedagogies

and further developing their own identities as teachers: a way of knowing, doing, and being educators that is distinctly our own.

We continue to invest in the professional development of administration, faculty, and staff to inform KPU of the latest in new teaching and

learning strategies, current and emergent pedagogies, to continue to nurture our unique

special purpose teaching university focus

Progressing Its implementation will allow for the fullest development of our

educational delivery infused with current trends and emergent

methodologies.

VISION 2018 Strategic Plan outlines a targeted enrolment growth of 5% per year

that will be achieved through the implementation of a Strategic Enrolment

Management (SEM) plan and the University Transitions (UT) project. These initiatives

will enable focused recruitment and reduce attrition. We will attract and retain a broad

range of learners through our distinct programs, optional entry points, credential

variety, laddering opportunities, personalized and open learning options,

accessibility and preparatory programming and flexible delivery methods

The SEM process has engaged multiple stakeholders and incorporated significant internal

and external data to propose a two phase implementation process beginning summer 2015. The UT project engaged the full KPU community to devise positive solutions to enrolment challenges.

Progressing KPU will now have a framework for achieving its projected enrolment growth. The Fall launch of the UT project will

transform admissions processes and streamline admissions

systems that will be conducive to a positive enrolment outlook.

GOAL 1: To Offer Exceptional Learning Environment Attuned to Learners

Page 1


The Institute for Innovation and Scholarship in Teaching and Learning (INSTL) is KPU’s response to changing trends in educational practice. By responding to this dynamic

environment, INSTL will conduct workshops and seminars in research and curriculum development to mobilize knowledge;

encourage professional development; andfacilitate renewal across all disciplines.

INSTL will recognize, nurture and promoteexemplary teaching practices that

encompass:

KPU embarked on an exercise of consultations, some research and administrative discussion aimed at reframing the structure and intent of

INSTL

Progressing The conclusion of the findings from these consultations will

determine the precise nature of this academic support unit and will also define the role of the future administrative leader in

the unit.

INSTL will work closely with the Office of Research and Scholarship to encourage and promote the integration of research and

scholarly activity with teaching and learning to yield enriched learning experiences.

The draft Research plan proposes a number of important partnerships and collaborations that

merge scholarly activity with teaching and learning principles. As we develop the practical skills for our teaching we will encourage a full range of scholarly

activity.

Progressing KPU has established a variety of community and industry

partnerships that will allow for the full realization of our

faculty/student community engagement in research, scholarship, teaching and

learning.

KPU will encourage renewal and innovation in our approaches to teaching and learning, by allocating one‐time funding to support

and update classroom technology.

We continue to implement the installation of appropriate and current technologies into our

classroom inventory.

Operationalized Will allow faculty to deliver consistent educational

experiences to our students

Page 2


KPU will create the “Creative Capital” fund to promote and encourage the cultivation

of new ideas around social, cultural, economic, health, sustainability and

technologicalinnovation. Funded projects will reflect, sustain and accelerate the goals of the

Academic Plan and further KPU’spolytechnic university mandate.

The Academic Plan Implementation Task Force is developing terms of reference in collaboration with the Provost Office to launch a call for

proposals for Fall 2015.

Progressing The fund is intended to promote innovation in education delivery.

The University will establish KPU Open Studies as an innovative unit where learners can undertake competency based degree completion by building on their previous formal, informal and experiential learning; by designing a personalized degree plan

within broad criteria; and accessing a wide range of online and open educational resources and courses as they study. Learners will have access to a well‐developed advising and curriculum

framework to bolster career and credential mobility and ensure access for those seeking to advance within or between

program areas. KPU Open Studies will house our flexible Prior Learning Assessment and Recognition (PLAR) processes and engagewith a variety of open learning initiatives

such as the recognition of informal learning. KPU Open Studies will act as a liaison to key partnerships involving open educational resources such as the BC Campus Open

Textbook project, and the Open Education Resource universitas.

As post‐secondary institutions continue to develop new ways to engage a highly mobile and highly

diversified student population, KPU has embarked on a wide ranging approach to providing greater

access to more learners through innovative packaging of educational programs, prior learning assessment processes, free e‐textbook projects and participating in a transformation of open

education practices with universities and institutes around the world.

Progressing KPU’s Open Studies initiatives will allow us to engage learners from all demographics, and

geographies, as well as provide a greater number of students with viable means to complete their desired credential. By adopting these innovative practices KPU

will position itself in and amongst a number of

progressive and prestigious institutions contemplating the learner of today and of the next

generation.

Page 3


Strategy Narrative Status ImpactLaunch course‐based, faculty‐led academic learning activities that are community‐

based. These activities will build integrated, mutually beneficial, innovative initiatives

with our localschool districts, regional businesses, and

industry partners.

The Department for Student Life and Development and the faculty‐led CIR:CLE (Community Learning Engagement)

engaged in a project to reflect all avenues of community‐based learning in a website –

www.kpu.ca/experiential The website was launched in May and has been well received. The Strategic Planning Task Force has brought together a broad institutional group

(Deans, faculty, Co‐op, etc.) to coordinate community‐based activity.

Progressing Gathering a list of credit‐based and non‐credit based opportunities is a starting point for what is currently happening on campus and

who is involved. This will help KPU to improve future outreach, support,

development, tracking, and promotion of community‐

based learning.

Encourage community‐engaged scholarship that aims primarily to benefit community

life through teaching, discovery, integration and application of learning.

The Experiential Learning website www.kpu.ca/experiential currently hosts more than fifty experiential learning

courses—courses that have out‐of‐the‐classroom elements. More than half of these courses are directly community‐

engaged.

Progressing This summer the website will provide a tool for discussion

amongst community members and encourage a dialogue about ways to increase meaningful

collaboration.

GOAL 2: To Increase Experiential Learning Opportunities

Page 1


Encourage scholarly activity to advance teaching through expanded knowledge, content engagement and knowledge mobilization. Launch faculty/student

research projects embedded within existing programs through targeted research funding and administrative support to increase capacity and opportunity for

applied and academic scholarship activity. KPU’s community research will be

increasingly focused on partnerships that yield experiential learning opportunities, keep our faculty current within their professional practice domains, and

strengthen local career opportunities for our students.

Such partnerships will cement our contact with thriving local companies, off‐campus organizations and multiple community

agencies.

KPU is responding to research/scholarship opportunities as described in the draft Research Plan. The number of local industries and tech companies have approached KPU to

nurture entrepreneurial and technological incubators around clean technology and health especially. opportunities exist for direct faculty or student or combined faculty/student research project and community activity. Community‐

engaged research is not new to KPU as demonstrated by the work of CIR;CLE, AT‐CURA, ISH and ISFS. What is new is that

the draft Research Plan provides a focused approach integrating discovery, scholarship, innovation and teaching &

learning.

Progressing The community based resaerch activities will provide real career

opportunites for students, meaningful

reaseach/schoarship opportunities for faculyut and will help ingetrte KPUs activites into the economic

fabic of our region.

Page 2


Narrative Status ImpactEnsure KPU’s programs and courses focus

on the cultivation of specific core competencies as applicable to their areas that demonstrate: •

Creative and critical thinking• Media literacy

• Social intelligence• Scientific and technological

capacities • Global perspectives

• Broad understanding of Indigenousculture, history and world views• Environmental stewardship

• Social and economicentrepreneurship

There has been significant progress on developing cultural competencies as outlined in the

Internationalization Plan. The Department of Journalism's Visual Media Workshop is leading the way in developing media literacy projects and activities. Indigenous world views are being explored within the content of the proposed Indigenous Community Justice minor in the Faculty of Arts. Other core competenies are

in the early stages of development.

Progressing KPU's approach to compentency‐based programming will be informed by the full

development of these key core compentencies.

Align courses and program offerings with well‐defined and clearly communicated learning outcomes through curriculum development and program review

processes.

Faculty, staff and administrators have participated in learning outcomes presentations and workshops with subject experts Dr. Maureen Wideman from UFV and Liesel Knaack from VIU. A Sharepoint site has been established as single point of contact for information and resources on Learning Outcomes activities and

events. Outcomes‐based approaches initiatives in the Wilson School of Design, Faculty of Science &

Horticulture, Faculty of Trades & Technology and Faculty of Arts are addressing alignment of courses and programs with well defined learning outcomes.

Progressing This activity helps build faculty capacity in the developement and implemenation of compentency‐based programming.

Develop, implement and evaluate models to assess competencies and learning outcomes at the course, program and

institutional level.

Dr. Thomas Carey (Guelph University) has been working with faculty in the Wilson School of Design and Faculty of Arts around the development of accurate assessment methodologies for experiential learning and learning

outcomes‐focused education.

Developing These methodologies will help inform other Faculties develop their own discipline specific

assessment of competencies.

GOAL 3: To Define Learning Outcomes and Methods of Demonstrating Student Capability

Page 1


Engage a representative university team to work with Faculties and

Departments to determine the most appropriate models of adapting ofessential skills to diverse disciplines.

Preliminary discussions are taking place aimed at addressing essential skills at the program level. Much

work remains to be done

Developing To be determined

Page 2


Narrative Status ImpactVISION 2018 Strategic Plan declares

a commitment to internationalization;an emphasis on intercultural

understanding and the developmentof successful global citizens. To doso we will expand our internationalrecruitment, encourage diversity

among the student body, and createreal and virtual spaces that facilitateinteraction between domestic and

international students

KPU Internationalization Plan outlines a comprehensive approach to recruitment,

retention and global competencies. Internationalization includes a comprehensive approach to a cultural competencies certificate as a value‐add to a KPU student’s credential.

Progressing The implementation of the Internationalization Plan will formalize and operationalize positive initiatives to achieve international recruitment goals and develop successful global citizens.

Promote increased participationby Aboriginal peoples in the Lower

Mainland of B.C. through thestrengthening of recruitment ofAboriginal learners and support

services to ensure their success by: • launching educational

partnerships for learners of all ages with our eight neighbouring First Nations;

• establishing an Elder‐in Residenceprogram by Fall 2014;

• developing new KPU programs that will instill an understanding of indigenous culture, history and world views; and

• enabling a global perspective by domestic and international student interaction and

interdisciplinary curriculum.

KPU's first Elder in Residence was installed in January 2015. A corresponding Indigenous Protocol was approved by the Aboriginal

Advisory Committee May 2015. The Faculty of Arts minor in Indigenous Community Justice is making its rounds through the governance approval process. A high level of activity is

underway at the Squamish First Nation trades centre in collaboration with KPU, the ITA and the North School District. The Tsawwassen

farm school has been established in collaboration with the Tsawwassen First

Nation. A very successful pow wow was held at KPU Surrey in September 2014 and KPU will

celebrate National Aboriginal Day with diverse activities on June 22.

Progressing KPU's profile in the aboriginal community has been positively enhanced by these activities. These activities have generated interest with our regional community partners, industry and

government.

GOAL 4: To Ensure Student Success and Well‐Being

Page 1


Provide an appropriate range ofintegrated and easily accessible studentsupport services that improve rates

of retention, progression through, andcompletion of studies

The Strategic Enrolment Management plan will identify specific tactics to promote retention and reduce attrition. Foundation of Excellence proposed a First Year Experience project to follow the launch of the University Transitions project in Facll 2015. Institutional Analysis & Planning has developed useful tools to analyse retention data to inform enrolment planning

and guide student support initiatives.

Progressing The SEM plan data and first year initiatives will demonstrate reduced attrition and increased

enrolment by Fall 2016.

Ensure educational services andprograms provide accessibility toour students with disabilities and

incorporate universal design principlesfor all teaching and learning.

Funding has been provided adaptive software systems for the Department of Services for Students with Disabilities. Universal Design

Plan is being prepared, approval of policy HR15 (Diversity and Inclusiveness), Universal Design

Plan is being developed and steered by President’s Council on Equity and DiversityPolicy HR15 on Diversity and Inclusiveness

being developed

Progressing KPU will be able to provide students with up to date adaptive software and a more

comprehensive approach to accommodation.

Engage students in the developmentand establishment of co‐curricularprograms and activities that enliven

their learning and assist with transitionswithin KPU.

Student Life and Development has surveyed existing co‐curricular and extra‐curricular opportunities, and has posted them, on the Experiential Learning website. Next steps include reporting on learning objectives attached to current co‐curricular/extra‐curricular opportunities and delivering a

method of tracking, incentivizing, assessing, and recognizing these programs and activities.

Progressing New co‐curricular programs will be proposed to address gaps that exist with existing co‐

curricular programs.

Page 2


Work with student groups to developstudent‐initiated activities, facilitiesand programs to bolster student

participation while providing a socialand physical environment that

reinforces a sense of belonging andcampus community.

Student Services provides services, programming, and spaces that foster a

welcoming and supportive community and encourage student engagement and success.

Student Services hosts and coordinates space on campus for student events.The First Year

Working Group has been formed to initiate and operationalize the many recommendations

collected through the Foundations of Excellence survey reports.

Orientation is moving forward to an enhanced

university –wide model for Fall 2015 to reinforce support for student success.

Progressing These coordinated activities enhance student participatation in campus community life and

encourage student well‐being.

Recognize that recreation, athletics,and the physical and mental well‐being

of students are fundamental to ahealthy campus environment and topositive learning experiences. TheUniversity will promote active

participation in recreational activitiesand student varsity sports through

the continued support and refinementof athletic and recreation programmingthat encourages student involvementand uses accessible club programming

space.

The Department of Student Services is in continual discussion with the KSA to identify and fund additional finesse and wellness facilities around ca. The Birch building

renovations will provide Mental well‐being; Update on recreational programs forthcoming

Progressing These activities will enrich campus life and nurture a greater sense of campus as a

community.

Page 3


KPU will develop a comprehensiveMental Health strategy for the full

university community.

Our mental health strategy, presenting under way, integrates diverse discussions and

practices being developed across the post‐secondary sector. Faculty and administration have attended and participated in diverse

webinars, workshops and conferences to build an internal capacity to deliver a comprehensive

mental health strategy for the whole community. The Human Resources

Department is leading this initiative in collaboration with Student Services and the

KSA.

Progressing This initiative sends a clear signal that the mental well‐being of the KPU community is of the utmost importance to the university. The full impact of this strategy will reveal itself over

time.

Page 4

SENATE


AGENDA #: 5

PRESENTED BY: Dana Cserepes

Issue: Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum

For Information: The Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum meet on June 3, 2015 and approved the following revision Bachelor of Music in Musical Arts The Senate Subcommittee on Course Curriculum (SCC) submitted a report to SSCC recommending revisions to the Course Outline Template. SSCC discussed the report at both its May 2015 and June 2015 meetings. SSCC accepted the report. The report is being revised by the Senate Vice Chair to include some of the issues and concerns identified by the members of SSCC. The committee endorsed the proposed amendments to the mandate for the Senate Subcommittee on Course Curriculum and the Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum. The committee provided feedback on the Curriculum and Budgetary Impact Consultation Forms. This was the final meeting for the chair. She thanked the committee members for all their hard work and provided cake!

SENATE


AGENDA #: 5.1


Issue: Program Revision: Bachelor of Music in Musical Arts Continuance Requirements

For Information At its June 3, 2015 meeting the Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum reviewed the Program Revision to the Bachelor of Music in Musical Arts Continuance Requirements and recommended it for Senate's approval. Attached: Program Revision: Bachelor of Music in Musical Arts Continuance Requirements

For Approval THAT Senate approve the Program Revision for the Bachelor of Music in Musical Arts Continuance Requirements.

SURREY CAMPUS 12666 – 72ND Ave.


MEMORANDUM

1

TO: Senate

FROM: Diane Naugler, Associate Dean, Faculty of Arts

DATE: June 22, 2015

Re: MUSIC – Continuance Requirements Amendment

The current program continuance requirements for the Bachelor of Music in Musical Arts degree as listed

in the KPU calendar reads:

Program Continuance Requirements

For students admitted to Year 1 of the program, continuation into Year 3 requires:

completion of all Lower Level requirements; a cumulative GPA of 2.7; and successful completion of MUSIC 2454 or equivalent.

With the recent approval of the music program declaration requirements for music by the Arts Faculty Council in March 2015 as well as the recent elimination of most continuance requirements into third year by the majority of programs in the Faculty of Arts, the Music Department requests that the current Program Continuance Requirements for Music be updated and replaced by the following Program Continuance Requirements for the Bachelor of Music in Musical Arts degree: Program Continuance Requirements

For students admitted to Year 1 of the program, continuation into Year 2 requires:

Successful completion of three credits of ENGL at the 1100-level within the first 30 credits. This change was approved by the Faculty of Arts Faculty Council on May 27, 2015, the Faculty of Arts Curriculum Committee on May 1, 2015, and the Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum on June 3, 2015. The implementation date for this change is September 2016.

SENATE


AGENDA #: 5.2


Issue: Revision: Course Outline Template

For Information At its June 3, 2015 meeting the Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum reviewed the Revision to the Course Outline Template and recommended it for Senate's approval. Attached: Revision: Course Outline Template

For Approval THAT Senate approve the Revision to the Course Outline Template.


12666 – 72ND Ave.


MEMORANDUM

TO:

Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum (SSCC) SENATE

CC: Salvador Ferreras, Provost and Vice President Academic

FROM: Senate Subcommittee on Course Curriculum (SCC)

DATE: April 17, 2015June 12, 2015

SUBJECT:

SCC’s Feedback and Recommendations on Revisions to the Course Outline Template and Manual

The Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum (SSCC) accepted this memo for recommendation to Senate on June 3, 2015. The issues and concerns identified by members of SSCC were addressed by the track changes shown in this memo; these track changes were reviewed at a subsequent SCC meeting and were accepted by the committee. The Provost, the Deans, IET, and the Registrar’s Office (OREG) were consulted on the recommendations in this memo. This memo received support from the Provost and the Deans. OREG provided additional recommendations in a separate memo; they were reviewed at SSCC and SCC, and they were endorsed by both committees. IET advised that it is unable to accommodate the technological revisions with the existing SharePoint application due to limitations in the SharePoint platform, and it recommended that KPU sources a third-party application that is purpose-built for curriculum development and approval tracking. The Senate Subcommittee on Course Curriculum (SCC), in consultation with the Faculty Curriculum Committees, is providing the following feedback and recommendations on revisions to the course outline template. These recommendations are summarized in two parts: technological and pedagogical revisions. For reference, a copy of the existing, blank course outline template is provided at the end of this memo. The committee is seeking SSCC’s endorsement and recommendation to Senate’s endorsement for making these revisions to the course outline template and the course outline manual, which gives detailed instructions for completing the official KPU course outline using the course outline template. The committee recommends that the Provost consults with the Information Technology (IT) Governance Committee regarding making the technological changes and that a representative number of end users (course developers) from different Faculties be invited to the IT Governance Committee meeting to speak to these changes. After the Senate and the IT Governance Committee have has approved of proceeding with the revisions, SCC recommends that faculty be involved in their implementation and that the revised course outline template be thoroughly beta-tested by faculty before it is launched.

Implementation Date: September 2016 or sooner, to be determined in consultation with the IT

Governance Committee.

2

Some of the recommendations are going to be lengthy implementations (e.g., policy changes and Collective Agreement issues). Will there be a plan to make the immediate changes to ease the process, and then add other changes after they work through the system?

Recommended Technological Revisions and Updates Consider Mac support on the SharePoint Development Site for course outlines. Ensure SharePoint support for the latest updates of the Windows operating system

Windows 8.1 is currently not supported. Fix the software bugs in the course outline template on SharePoint

Faculty develop courses using the course outline template (an InfoPath document form) on the SharePoint Development Site. Random formatting problems and missing text are introduced when the InfoPath document form is converted to a Word or PDF document. This conversion process is necessary in order for the InfoPath document form to be printed and published to the Course Outline Library.

The formatting problems include missing bullets, changes in font sizes, changes in spacing, missing spacing between words, and split boxes. This occurs even when course developers are not copying and pasting text from Word to the SharePoint Development Site’s course outline template.

Some of the check-boxes that are checked in the SharePoint document form are not checked when converted to a Word or PDF document. An example is the check-box below the Teaching Modes table, “May be offered in approved 3-hour blocks”.

Some things are not being saved when changes are made in the SharePoint Development site. There is an exponential loss of productivity for a tool that is not working well. Is it possible for a Word

template (with some password protection) be used on the SharePoint Development Site instead of the existing InfoPath application?

Only once all of the technological issues have been resolved, make the course outlines readily available for students. Include the version history of approved course outlines

Either archive all the course outlines in the Course Outline Library, or have some way of tracking what the changes are from one approved version to another.

Add the following functionality to the SharePoint Development Site

Spell-check functionality Track changes functionality Inline commenting Summary Page:

o Reformat with drop-down boxes for selection. o Automatically (or have some way to) ensure the corresponding check-boxes on the summary page

are checked when changes are made to those areas in the course outline template. Consider making the course outline manual an online document with hyperlinks Consider embedding instructional training videos to the online course outline manual.

3

These instructional training videos would be available for use by faculty 24/7 (24 hours a day, 7 days a week).

Recommended Pedagogical Revisions Allow for more flexibility in the use of wording throughout the course outline

Clear communication of the concept should be the goal, not meeting specific wording. For example, in the calendar description, remove the requirement that every sentence must begin with

“Students will” or “They will”. This will make the calendar description friendlier and more enticing for students.

Summary Page

Add the course developer’s name. Add an option (a check-box) to indicate whether the course is cross-listed. This option would include a

text-box to enter the cross-listed courses and an additional check-box to indicate whether other Departments and Faculties have been consulted.

Add an option (a check-box) to indicate whether the course has equivalent courses. This option would include a text-box to enter the equivalent courses. Equivalent courses are courses that have enough content overlap such that students cannot receive credit for both courses (e.g., PHYS 1102 and PHYS 1220). Note that equivalent courses are not the same as cross-listed courses. (Cross-listed courses have identical course outlines, while equivalent courses do not.)

Add an option (a check-box) to indicate whether the course is a “general education” course. Do we have a definition for “general education”? What about courses that are restricted for a short period, but then available seats are opened up for any student to register? How can we let students know about these courses?

Revisions: Options 1-3 are not thought to be helpful. There is some confusion over the formatting of the following options in the summary page: New Course

/ Replacement Course, Course number / acronym change, and Credit change. Does this information need to be included, and if so, how can it be made less confusing?

Add an option (a check-box) to indicate whether this new or revised course outline is part of a new or revised program submission. This option would include a text box to include the program name(s).

Add an option (a check-box) to indicate the level of the course (Preparatory, Undergraduate, or Vocational).

Add a check-box to indicate whether the course rubric (acronym and number) for new courses has been approved by the Registrar’s Office.

Essential Skills

Essential skills should be program-based and not course-based. They are not relevant on a per course basis and would be more appropriately included in the full program proposals for new programs and in the program review of existing programs. SCC recommends that the entire “Essential Skills” section be removed from the course outline template. This will require an amendment to Policy L.9.

The specific skills pertaining to the course can be included in the Learning Objectives/Outcomes section.

http://www.kpu.ca/sites/default/files/Policies/L09.pdf

4

Transferability of the Course Change the “Transferability of the Course” heading in the course outline template to read “Requesting

Course Transfer” for clarity. The current choices are

o Not transferable o Transferable: (Years 1 and 2) Refer to the BCCAT Transfer Guide o Transferable: (Years 3 and 4 other) individual articulation agreements

Add a fourth option, “Transferable: Adult upgrading (ABE, ESL, etc.)” Add another option (a check-box) with available space to indicate and recognize external accreditation

groups. Should a rationale be provided if the “Not transferable” box is checked?

Learning Activities

Should Learning activities should remain flexible to allow different instructors the ability to adapt the course to suit their teaching styles or to innovate. In allowing for this flexibility, the following should be indicated on the course outline template: “Learning activities should be appropriately related to learning outcomes.” This statement will be added in addition to what is already on the template under “Learning Activities”, namely “Activities may include, but are not restricted to, the following:”

The above bullet is intended to recognize that a given course may be taught by many different instructors, and so there needs to be flexibility for different instructors to be given the academic freedom to adapt the learning activities to suit their teaching styles, while simultaneously meeting the learning outcomes for the course.

Indicate the following on the course outline template: “Learning activities should strive for a balance that will lead to outcomes.”

Under the “Learning Activities” heading, the course outline template currently states “Activities may include, but are not restricted to, the following:” All members of SCC are strongly opposed to SSCC’s recommendation to change the words “may include” to “shall include” because this change will restrict academic freedom.

Assessment

Must be flexible to accommodate different types of courses being offered at KPU (e.g., Field schools, labs, research projects).

The student assessments are currently linked to Policy C.20 with regards to the minimum number of elements in an assessment and the maximum percentage allowable for each assessment. This policy was designed when we were a 2-year institution. With 3000-level and 4000-level courses generally having fewer assignments but of greater weight, this policy will need to be changed.

There should be a greater percentage weight allowable for students’ contribution to learning (previously participation) participation than the current 10% maximum. These are things that contribute to group work and things that are done in outcome-based activities. Students’ contribution to learning can include participation in class, but it does not preclude participation. There should also be guidelines for how participation learning contribution is assessed. A statement could be added to the template: “Learning contributions may include but are not restricted to the following:” (followed by a list of appropriate contributions – e.g., active listening, oral contribution and elaboration in discussion/debate, course related volunteer opportunities, peer critique, leadership activities, mentorship, scribing for others, etc.)

http://www.kpu.ca/sites/default/files/Policies/c20.pdf

5

Teaching Modes Remove Collective Agreement contractual language from the course outline, but keep the information

that students need to know about the course (e.g., whether it is a lecture classroom-related, lab, practicum, Field School, etc.). This info is also important for articulation evaluations. Suggestions for information to keep: o Class size o Change “lecture” mode language to “classroom related” to better reflect the best practices of a

teaching university. o Show hours allotted to all types of delivery, not only “labs”. o Could include experiential/contextual delivery, simulation, and other types of methods such as

theoretical application vs. practical/real/actual applications. o Add information on whether the course could be online, face-to-face, or a hybrid delivery. o Could also include interdisciplinary delivery and/or team teaching.

With the Teaching Modes table removed, greater clarification is needed regarding what will and will not be included in the updated course outline template.

Teaching modes should not be included in the course outline document for students. The teaching modes table and the credit calculator would be more appropriately located somewhere else that is officially published and readily available for use by faculty and administrators. They must be simultaneously implemented and linked to the course outline.

In the Course Outline Template Summary page, remove the “Teaching Mode” check-box from the list of revisions for approval by Senate.

SCC recognizes that our recommendations may have Collective Agreement implications, so we recommend that the Provost and Vice-President Academic discusses the Teaching Modes bullets with the KFA to determine how they could be accommodated when updating the course outline template. Learning Resources

A list of learning resources can be provided, but it does not need to be split into required and recommended. A recommended list is sufficient, as it provides flexibility for instructors to change texts without having to revise the course outline.

Is it possible to take out the words “Required” and “Recommended” and just have the heading “Textbooks, Lab or Shop Manuals, Equipment, etc., such as:” in the template?

Bibliography

A bibliography is not needed. However, “Do library resources in this area need more development?” should be kept as an option in the

course outline template.

COURSE OUTLINE © Copyright Kwantlen Polytechnic University

SUMMARY

☐ New Course / Replacement Course

☐ Course number/acronym change

☐ Credit change

Does this course replace another course? No If “Yes”, please specify:

☐ This course is being discontinued.

Effective date:

Brief rationale:

☐ Revision for approval by Divisional Curriculum

Committee Changes involve:

☐ Descriptive Title

☐ Calendar Description

☐ Outcome/Objective

☐ Content

☐ Essential Skills

☐ Learning Activities

☐ Learning Resources

☐ Minor Assessments Consistent with Policies B.4

and/or C.20

☐ PLA

Revisions

Option 1: This course outline has undergone a complete review, and revisions were made to bring it up to date with respect to current practice in the discipline and follows the standards set in the Course Outline Manual. (Both implementation and review dates change)

Option 2: This revision changes specific areas but does not constitute a review of the whole course outline. (Implementation date changes, but review does not)

Option 3: This course outline has undergone a complete review, and no changes were made. (Both implementation and review dates change)

☐ Revision for approval by Senate

Changes involve:

☐ Credits (triggers a new course)

☐ Prerequisites/Corequisites

☐ Access, class size

☐ Required for credential

☐ Assessments inconsistent with Policies B.4 and/or C.20

☐ Teaching Modes

☐ Impact on other programs

Transfer Credit

☐ This revision affects transfer credit status.

☐ Please send this new course outline for transfer credit.

Other

☐ Q-status for B.A. degrees

- Please submit this course for approval as a quantitative course

☐ Approved for Q-Status

Acronym and Number: Descriptive Title: Implementation date: Click here to enter a date. Banner Title:

COURSE OUTLINE © Copyright Kwantlen Polytechnic University

Department Name:

Course Acronym and Number:

Former Acronym and Number:

Credits:

Descriptive Title:

Calendar Description:

Required for the following credentials:

Prerequisites:

Corequisites:

Transferable? Not Transferable

Insert institutions and transfer information below:

Implementation Date: 1-Sep-15

To be Reviewed Date: 1-Sep-20

Discontinued Date:

Learning Objectives/Outcomes:

A student who successfully completes the course will have reliably demonstrated the ability to:

Content:

Content will include, but is not restricted to, the following:

Essential Skills:

A student who successfully completes the course will have been given opportunities to learn and

demonstrate the following Essential Skills at an appropriate level:

Creative thinking and problem solving skills

Oral skills

Interpersonal skills

Teamwork and leadership skills

Personal management and entrepreneurial skills

Writing skills

Reading & Information skills

Visual Literacy

Mathematical skills

Intercultural skills

Technological skills

Citizenship and global perspective

Learning Activities:

Activities may include, but are not restricted to, the following:

Assessment Methods:

Grading system used:

LETTER GRADE

Assessment plans comply with Kwantlen policy and may resemble the following:

Assessment Type Value

Total 100%

Methods for Prior Learning Assessment:

The following PLA methods will be used:

☐ Challenge exam

☐ Standardized test

☐ Product / Portfolio

☐ Demonstration

☐ Interview

☐ Worksite assessment

☐ Self-assessment

☐ External evaluation

Teaching Modes:

Modes Hours per

Week

Class

Size

Duration

(in weeks)

Classroom-Related Instruction (Lecture)

Type of Course (Other, Music, Trades): Other 0 0 0

Simulated Learning Environment (Lab) 0 0 0

Individual Learning Environment (Lab) 0 0 0

Practicum Supervision/Field Experience 0 0 0

Reality Learning Environment 0 0 0

☐ May be offered in approved 3-hour blocks

Learning Resources:

Required Textbooks, Lab or Shop Manuals, Equipment, etc., such as:

Recommended Textbooks, Lab or Shop Manuals, Equipment, etc., such as:

Bibliography Attached? (for suggested library acquisitions)

Yes

Bibliography

Do library resources in this area need more development?

Yes

Approval Process Signatures

This course outline complies with the relevant Kwantlen policies. It follows the guidelines set out in the Kwantlen Course Outline Manual. Department or program learning objectives/outcomes and essential skills that have been identified in this course outline can be reasonably achieved through this course.

Course Developer(s): Signed Date:

Department Chair: Signed Date:

Divisional/Associate Dean: Signed Date:

Senate Vice Chair: Signed Date:


SURREY CAMPUS

12666 – 72ND Ave.


MEMORANDUM

TO:

Jennifer Au, Vice Chair, Senate

CC:

FROM:

Salvador Ferreras, Provost and Vice President, Academic

DATE:

April 20, 2015

SUBJECT:

Support for SCC’s Feedback and Recommendations on Revisions to the Course Outline Template

Thank you for the opportunity to provide the Senate Subcommittee on Course Curriculum with amendments

and recommendations to the new proposed course outline forms as contained in the April 17, 2015 memo to

the Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum.

I believe the recommendations contained in this document encapsulate the necessary changes that will allow

KPU to provide a clearer and more streamlined process for the development and approval of courses through

governance.

I support these changes and look forward to their implementation through the regular governance process.

Sincerely,

Dr. Sal Ferreras

SURREY CAMPUS 12666 – 72ND Ave.


MEMORANDUM

T 604.599.3251 kpu.ca/business

TO:

Jennifer Au

CC:

The Deans

FROM:

Wayne Tebb

DATE:

May 26th, 2015

SUBJECT:

Course Outline Template

The Deans are in favor of a clear and more streamlined course outline and related approval process. We

recognize that the Senate sub-committee on Course Curriculum report recommends a number of changes

that, if adopted, will improve our current practice.


MEMORANDUM

TO: Jennifer Au, Vice Chair, Senate

FROM: Zena Mitchell, Interim University Registrar

DATE: June 9, 2015

SUBJECT: Recommendations on course outline template revisions

Thank you for the opportunity for OREG to consult on proposed changes to the course outline template.

Further to what has been identified thus far, I’d like to provide the following feedback:

On the summary page:

Where it indicates “Acronym and Number” I’d like to request a check-box indicating that the course rubric (both the acronym and the number) have been approved by OREG (for both new courses and course rubric changes).

Please include a check box indicating whether the course-level is (1) preparatory, (2) vocational, or (3) undergraduate.

Could the section titled “Other” be changed to “Attributes” and indicate the following: o Clarification on Q-status (not sure there a need for two different Q-statuses as currently presented or if it

should be distinguished as “applied for Q status” and “Q status approved” to assist in the approval workflow?)

o Writing Intensive o General Education

Using course “attributes” provides opportunities for future expansion of this section in the future.

Further to the recommendation on cross-listing, could we clarify that the cross-listing should indicate the other course(s) with which cross-listing occurs?

If a course is to be discontinued, other impacted courses should be indicated (those that have the newly discontinued course as a pre or co-req). Also, Programs containing the discontinued course should be flagged so that SSCC is advised of a program change necessitated by a discontinued course (and from there the calendar can be updated accordingly).

A recommendation has been made to indicate whether a course is transferable specifically for Adult Upgrading (ABE, ESL, etc.). However, if the template indicates the of the course is, this recommendation won’t be necessary.

A more fulsome glossary would be helpful. Specifically clarification around the following terms would be useful: o Equivalents o Replacements o Credit exclusion

Additional Notes:

I would like to request that that the approval / sign-off process allow for confirmation of tuition for the new course. This does not have to be directly within the course outline template, but perhaps on the course outline sign-off sheet? A series of options indicating the tuition category of the course would be useful (in correlation with the categories identified in Bylaw 4, as approved by the Board). Now that we have so many differential tuition categories (at the course level), the OREG continually receives questions around how tuition is set, and the various options for tuition. If there were a check box and approval signature, it would streamline the implementation of the course when it comes to scheduling.

I hope you find this useful. If there are questions, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

KWANTLEN POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY SURREY CAMPUS

12666 – 72ND Ave. Surrey, BC Canada V3W 2M8

MEMORANDUM

TO:

Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum (SSCC)

CC:

Salvador Ferreras, Provost and Vice President Academic

FROM:

Maggie Fung, Chief Information Officer

DATE:

May 26, 2015

SUBJECT:

Re: SCC’s Recommended Technological Revisions to the Course Outline Template

IET has reviewed SCC’s recommendations on technological changes to the course outline template. We have concluded that a number of the recommended changes would not be accommodated in the existing application due to the limitations of the SharePoint application development environment. These functions include:

1. Full support for Mac computers 2. 100% consistency with formatting of the content 3. Additional functionality:

o Spell‐check

o Track changes

o Inline commenting

o Summary Page:

Reformat with drop‐down boxes for selection.

Automatically (or have some way to) ensure the corresponding check‐boxes on the summary page are checked when changes are made to those areas in the course outline template.

It is our understanding that the above functions are critical to improving the user experience and enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of the course outline development process. In the current state, the existing application has incorporated the best available solution within the constraints of the SharePoint platform. The alternatives to addressing the technological recommendations are:

1. Redevelop the inhouse solution independent of the SharePoint platform. The SharePoint platform offers a cost effective rapid application development environment that provides a built-in Infopath forms, workflow function and integration to KPU’s account structure for authentication and approval. Developing the application from scratch outside of the SharePoint would require a substantial amount of IET resources and a significant amount of time to implement. Custom inhouse software development is not recommended for a resource constrainted organization like KPU.

KWANTLEN POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY SURREY CAMPUS

12666 – 72ND Ave. Surrey, BC Canada V3W 2M8

MEMORANDUM

2. Source a third-party application that is purpose-built for curriculum development and approval tracking. There are third-party solutions, like CurriUNET, that have the potential to meet SCC’s recommended functional requirements. They also offer the potential to leverage advanced functionality as well as vendor expertise to further enhance the curriculum development process. Implementation timeline would also be shorter. IET recommends this approach.

As a next step, I will bring forward IET’s recommendation to the IT Governance Executive Committee for further discussion and decision.

SENATE


AGENDA #: 6.1

PRESENTED BY: Alan Davis

Issue: Empowering the Senate Executive for July and August, 2015

For Information From the Senate Executive Committee mandate: "Senate annually, at the last meeting of the academic year, empowers the Executive to act for Senate on urgent items of regular business durng the months of July and August. Notice of any meetings of the Executive held under this authority (except those called for the purpose of dealing with its own regular business) shall be given to all members of Senate who may attend and vote. Any actions under this authority are reported to Senate at its next meeting."

For Approval THAT Senate empower the Senate Executive Committee to act for Senate on urgent matters of regular business during the months of July and August, 2015.

SENATE


AGENDA #: 7

PRESENTED BY: Tom Westgate

Issue: Senate Standing Committee on the University Budget

For Information: The Senate Standing Committee on the University Budget (SSCUB) met on June 12, 2015.

Budget Development Principles and Criteria for FY 2016/17

At the SSCUB June 12 2015 meeting the Chair asked for input regarding the Budget Principles and Criteria put forward to the Senate September 29, 2014.

Amendments were made to the Sept 29, 2014 Budget Development Principles and Criteria which were approved by the Senate.

SSCUB also changed the title to “Budget Development and Management Principles and Criteria”. These principles and criteria are being recommended to Senate for approval.

Board Response to Senate Budget Recommendations SSCUB received the Board response to Senate budget recommendations.

Financial Update Stefanie Singer, Manager, Budgeting and Assurance, presented the Financial Update as of June 2015.

Key Points from the Financial update:

Financial Results were presented for the FY 14/15 KPU showing a 1% surplus across the board.

1% ensures KPU meets its legislated target.

1% surplus came mostly from savings.

Future target 1% surplus of budget.

What does FY15/16 look like?

Mandate to be in the “black” for year end.

Close monitoring of enrolment results.

Tight controls on spending remains.

Finance will meet regularly with divisional areas

Revenue Assumptions:

Domestic Enrolments – 0% to 2%

Domestic Tuition Increase – 2%

International Enrolments – 5% growth

International Tuition Increase – 2%

Ancillary Revenues – no net increase

Revenue Generating Activities – no net increase

Cost Assumptions:

Contract & other supplier costs increase: 2% to 5%

University wide increments & benefits increase: 2%

Enrolments of FY 14/15.

International enrollments increased.

Domestic enrollment decreased slightly.

Fiscal 2016/17 Budget Development Process

SENATE


AGENDA #: 7.1

PRESENTED BY: Tom Westgate

Issue: Budget Development and Management Principles and Criteria

For Information At its June 12, 2015 meeting the Senate Standing Committee on University Budget (SSCUB) approved the following set of budget development and management principles and criteria for recommendation to Senate. Priorities should be guided by our legislated mandate, the academic plan, Vision 2018, and the resources plan. The budget process will be open and informed. SSCUB has the following recommendations:

1. Consult regularly or as required with the University community regarding ongoing changes with the financial situation over the course of the year.

2. Encourage consultation and collaboration between academic and service areas during budget development.

3. Consider services already provided to our communities, and existing or potential partnerships with community services.

4. Balance growth, relevance, and sustainability with resource implications when launching new programs and reviewing existing programs.

5. Focus on the whole experience for current and future students in setting budget priorities.

The budget development and management principles and criteria are not listed in order of priority. All five priorities are considered equal.

For Approval THAT Senate endorse the budget development and management principles and criteria recommended by the Senate Standing Committee on the University Budget.

SENATE


AGENDA #: 8

PRESENTED BY: Marc Kampschuur and Task Force Members

Issue: Board / Senate Task Force on Bi-cameral Governance Report

For Information The Task Force met on May 26, 2015. Please see the attached report. Attached: Board / Senate Task Force on Bi-cameral Governance Report

Page 1 of 2

Board/Senate Task Force on Bi-cameral Governance Overview The Board/Senate Task Force on Bi-cameral Governance (“Task Force”) was formed to resolve issues related to compliance with the University Act in areas of shared responsibility for governance, support strategic processes through promotion of a more collaborative form of governance, and governance education. These objectives are exemplified by the revised Policy Protocol (approved by Senate and the Board in 2012). Since the Task Force’s formation, KPU adopted its first Strategic Plan and related plans are under development (Academic, Enrolment, Resource…). The development of these plans utilized open and collaborative processes such as stakeholder committees, public forums, and intra-web postings. Presently new member packages introduce new senators and governors to bi-cameral governance processes and an annual Senate/Board retreat offers further education to members. Communication conduits between Senate and the Board of Governors were established through Board membership on Senate (non-voting), the annual governance retreat, and continue to evolve through collaborative work in task forces, budget development processes, and other committees (i.e. search committees). Past The Task Force developed the Principles To Guide The Development Of A Successful Model Of Bicameral Governance At Kwantlen Polytechnic University (“Principles”) to guide KPU’s policy development process and compliance with the University Act. These Principles were adopted by both bodies and applied in policy development. The Task Force commenced a work plan to resolve ambiguity in areas of shared responsibility for governance through the revision of existing policies and development of new policies. Present Presently there are several significant polices in an advanced state of development under the revised Policy Protocol. These policies concern the budget process, the creation/dissolution of a faculty or department, and the revision or discontinuance of a program. On the radar is the issue of intellectual property. As the Policy Protocol was recently revised in accordance with the Principles, and as both Senate and the Board have robust governance committees, the Task Force may not be

Page 2 of 2

of benefit to these policies in an advanced state of development or to future policy development. Future

As the Task Force developed the Principles, substantially completed its work plan, reviewed the Principles subsequent to their application, and there are established conduits for communication and education, it has the intent to disband. Accordingly, the Task Force requests comment from Senate and the Board whether there are issues under its mandate of a one-time nature that require resolution or of a continuing nature that require assignment to a committee. It is the recommendation of the Task Force for Senate and the Board to approve the Principles as amended and integrate these into governance (publish on the Senate site and include in the Board Manual). The Principles, as adopted, would continue to guide policy development and be available to the benefit of any future Task Force. These will be considered by Senate and the Board at future meetings. If there are no further issues that require resolution or assignment, and the Principles are adopted as recommended, then the Task Force will vote to disband at its next meeting. In summary, the Task Force is confident that our processes are sufficient and appropriate and trusts Senate and/or the Board to respond if there is evidence to the contrary. The following motions were approved at the Task Force’s May 26, 2015 meeting. Motion 1: To adopt the revisions to the Principles. Motion 2: To disband the Task Force on the approval and adoption of the Principles

into governance processes by Senate and the Board of Governors. Sincerely, Marc Kampschuur, Chair, Board/Senate Task Force on Bi-cameral Governance

SENATE


AGENDA #: 9.1

PRESENTED BY: Steven Button

Issue: Mandate/Membership Revision: Senate Standing Committee on Program Review

For Information At its June 1, 2015 meeting the Senate Governance Committee reviewed the revisions to the mandate and membership of the Senate Standing Committee on Program Review and recommended them for Senate's approval. Attached: Mandate/Membership Revision: Senate Standing Committee on Program Review

For Approval THAT Senate approve the revision to the mandate and membership of the Senate Standing Committee on Program Review.


SURREY CAMPUS

12666 – 72ND Ave.


MEMORANDUM

TO:

SENATE

CC:

Stan Kazymerchyk, Chair, Senate Standing Committee on Program Review

Lori McElroy, Executive Director, Institutional Analysis and Planning

FROM:


DATE:

June 12, 2015

SUBJECT:

Proposed Revision to the Senate Standing Committee on Program Review Mandate and

Membership

The Senate Standing Committee on Program Review (SSCPR) reviewed its mandate and membership. The

committee is requesting Senate approval of the amendments as shown by the track changes below. These

amendments were endorsed by the Senate Governance Committee on June 1, 2015.

Mandate

1. Kwantlen Polytechnic University , through the Senate Standing Committee on Program Review (SSCPR),

performs regular and consistent reviews of educational programs and units of study that are under the jurisdiction

of Senate. The Senate Standing Committee on Program Review (SSCPR) oversees this process. Specifically, the

mandate of the SSCPR is to:

2.1. Kwantlen, through SSCPR, develops policies and procedures to coordinate and monitor the review of

educational programs and units of study. Make recommendations to Senate on proposed revisions to

Policy B.12, the Program Review Policy.

2. SSCPR ensures that reports are provided to Senate on the implementation of recommendations arising

from completed program reviews.Develop procedures and standards to ensure program reviews are

conducted in accordance with the principles of policy B.12, the Program Review Policy.

3. Review Self-Study Reports, External Reviews and Action Plans, and determine whether or not these meet

KPU’s program review standards.

4. Receive Institutional Responses to each program review, prepared by the Dean and Provost.

5. Receive Action Plan One year Follow-Up reports that consist of a summary of the project, and its

achievements.

6. Report to Senate once per semester with a summary of the number of program reviews that have been

initiated, the number of Action Plans approved, and other items of note, since the last report to Senate.

3.7. Report to Senate annually with a schedule for Program Reviews planned for the coming year.

2

Common Features for all Senate Committees

(Resolution #12 approved by Senate, October 12, 2008)

The Chancellor, President and Vice Chancellor are recognized as voting members of all committees.

However, it is understood that they are unlikely to be able to attend most meetings and their presence or

absence shall not count towards quorum.

Each Senate committee is comprised of some number of Senators, as appropriate for that committee.

Each Senate committee is chaired by a Senator

Chair of a committee should not be the administrator whose portfolio mirrors that of the committee.

Committee membership will be reviewed annually. Members are eligible for reappointment.

Membership

Chair: Elected by the committee.

Normally the chair will be elected in April from among the current membership for a two year term to commence

the following September. This information will be included in the report to Senate. The Chair is a voting member.

Voting Members

• Chancellor

• President

• One faculty member from each Faculty (either a faculty member selected by the Senate Nominating

Committee in consultation with Faculty Council, or a Senator)

• One librarian (selected by the Senate Nominating Committee in consultation with the Chair of the

librarians)

• Deputy Provost

• Two deans/associate deans (to be selected by the Senate Nominating Committee in conjunction

consultation with the Provost and Vice President, Academic)

• Representative from Student Life and CommunityStudent Services (excluding the Office of the Registrar)

(selected by the Senate Nominating Committee in consultation with the Vice-Provost, Students)

• Representative from Institutional Analysis and Planning (selected by the Senate Nominating Committee

in consultation with the Executive Directive, Institutional Analysis and Planning)

• One student

Ex-Officio Non-Voting Members

• Program Review CoordinatorManager, Strategic Planning and Quality

• Representative from the Office of the Registrar

• Provost and Vice President, Academic

• Vice Chair of Senate

Terms of Office

faculty members – three-year term with one-third of these members to be selected each year

professional support staff – three-year term

deans/associate deans – reviewed regularly in conjunction with the Provost

senators – three-year term

student or student senator – one-year term

The chair will inform the committee if a member’s absences exceed three meetings within the academic year.

The committee will discuss the situation and the position may be declared vacant by the chair in conjunction

with the committee.

The committee has determined that it requires a minimum of three (3) senators as members.

Administrative Support: University Secretariat

SENATE


AGENDA #: 9.2


Issue: Mandate Revision: Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum and Senate Subcommittee on Course Curriculum

For Information At its April 13, 2015 meeting the Senate Governance Committee reviewed the mandates for the Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum (SSCC) and the Senate Subcommittee on Course Curriculum (SCC) and recommended revisions for Senate's approval. The proposed amendment to the mandate for SCC was endorsed by SCC on May 13, 2015 and by SSCC on June 3, 2015. The proposed amendment to the mandate for SSCC was endorsed by SSCC on June 3, 2015. Attached: Mandate Revision: Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum and Senate

Subcommittee on Course Curriculum

For Approval THAT Senate approve the revision to the mandates of the Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum and the Senate Subcommittee on Course Curriculum.


SURREY CAMPUS

12666 – 72ND Ave.


MEMORANDUM

TO:

SENATE

CC:

Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum (SSCC)

Senate Subcommittee on Course Curriculum (SCC)

FROM:


DATE:

June 11, 2015

SUBJECT:

Proposed Amendments to the SSCC and SCC Mandates

At its meeting on April 13, 2015, the Senate Governance Committee (SGC) reviewed the mandates

of the Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum (SSCC) and the Senate Subcommittee on Course

Curriculum (SCC). In consultation with the Chairs of SSCC and SCC, the committee made the

following recommendations to Senate:

THAT the Senate Subcommittee on Course Curriculum mandate be amended by striking the

words “grant approval” and replacing them with “recommend approval to SSCC” wherever

they appear.

THAT the Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum mandate be amended to receive

recommendations on new, revised, and discontinued course outlines from the Senate

Subcommittee on Course Curriculum (SCC) and to report with recommendations to Senate.

The proposed amendment to the mandate for SCC was endorsed by SCC on May 13, 2015 and by

SSCC on June 3, 2015. The proposed amendment to the mandate for SSCC was endorsed by SSCC

on June 3, 2015.

Background

At its March 17, 2015 meeting, the Senate Executive Committee (SEC) considered a submission from

SCC for inclusion in the Senate agenda. As part of its deliberations, SEC reviewed the mandate of

SSCC and that of its subcommittee, SCC. Due to the two committees having very different

mandates, SCC and SSCC operate independently of one another (with SCC reporting to SSCC once

a year). Notwithstanding the Vice Chair of Senate serving as Chair of SCC and also as an ex-officio

member of SSCC, concerns were raised regarding a possible disconnect between the two

committees that may lead to course outline revisions receiving Senate approval before the

corresponding program revision is approved by Senate. Further, some SEC members suggested that

2

there may be value for SSCC to also review all new and revised course outlines. Another member

suggested that course outlines may not need to be approved by Senate and that they can be

approved at the Faculty level.

To that end, SEC recommended that the SSCC and SCC committee mandates be reviewed by the

Senate Governance Committee.

In order to inform the Senate Governance Committee in its review, the Vice Chair of Senate

researched the role of Senate and its subcommittees in the approval of course outlines at other

universities in British Columbia (UBC, SFU, UVic, UNBC, VIU, UFV, TRU, and Capilano). In all of these

universities, Senate has a role in the approval of new and revised course outlines. In some cases

(e.g., UBC, SFU, and TRU), a Senate subcommittee has delegated authority to approve some or all

course outlines on behalf of Senate. Some universities (e.g., UBC, UFV, and TRU) have established

subcommittees of their Senate Curriculum Committees to assist them with the preliminary review of

their course and program proposals.

The Vice Chair of Senate also did a similar review of a few liberal arts universities in Canada

(MacEwan, Mount Royal, Ryerson, and Dalhousie).

The Senate involvement in the course outline approval process at other universities is summarized in

the Appendix of this memo.

Proposed Amendment to the SCC Mandate

1. The Subcommittee on Course Curriculum (SCC) is a SSCC subcommittee with a mandate to:

2. Receive and review all new course outlines and grant approval recommend approval to

SSCC in accordance with the criteria defined in the Course Outline Manual.

3. Receive and review all revised course outlines whose revisions require approval by the Senate

as specified in the Course Outline Summary Form and grant approval recommend approval to

SSCC in accordance with the criteria defined in the Course Outline Manual.

4. Oversee the annual review of the Course Outline Manual and recommend approval of any

revisions to the Senate.

5. Inform SSCC of any decisions made by the committee on a regular basis.

6. Review periodically the mandate, composition, and processes of the SCC, and make such

recommendations to SSCC concerning these as may be appropriate.

7. Other duties as assigned by Senate.

3

Proposed Amendment to the SSCC Mandate

1. Receive and review program concepts and full program proposals for degree and non-

degree programs (such as post-baccalaureate credentials, associate degrees, diplomas,

certificates, and citations).

2. Receive and review general curricular guidelines or requirements for programs.

3. Receive and review program revisions for degree and non-degree programs (such as post-

baccalaureate credentials, associate degrees, diplomas, certificates, and citations).

4. Report with recommendations to Senate on the status of program concepts, full program

proposals, program implementations, and program revisions in such a manner and at such

times as the program approval/implementation process and Senate may require.

5. Review the implementation of new degrees and non-degrees following:

One complete cycle of new degree and diploma programs*

Two complete cycles of new certificate, citation, and post-baccalaureate credential

programs*

Any and all changes will be presented to SSCC for consideration and recommendation for

approval by Senate. After the initial implementation schedule is complete, the Faculty

implementing the new program can request to stay under the purview of SSCC for an

additional cycle (or cycles) if they will be making significant revisions. Otherwise, further

reviews will be conducted under the direction of the Senate Standing Committee on Program

Review pursuant to Policy B12.

6. Receive recommendations on new, revised, and discontinued course outlines from the Senate

Subcommittee on Course Curriculum (SCC) and report with recommendations to Senate.

7. Review periodically SSCC's mandate, composition, processes, and approval criteria and make

such recommendations to Senate concerning these as may be appropriate.

8. Establish such subcommittees as needed to fulfill the committee's responsibilities.

9. Other duties as assigned by Senate.

4

APPENDIX: Senate Involvement in the Course Outline Approval

Process at Other Universities

BC Universities

UBC

The UBC Senate Curriculum Committee (SCC) is divided into seven subcommittees (Applied

Faculties, Arts, Continuing Studies, Editorial, Education & Health Sciences, Graduate, and

Science) that review all new and revised course and program proposals, including all

supporting material (e.g., curriculum and budget consultative reports). Once the

subcommittee has approved the proposal, it is forwarded to SCC for review and approval.

Category 1 proposals (new courses, and major revisions to existing courses and programs)

require final approval by Senate. SCC has delegated authority from Senate to approve

Category 2 proposals (minor revisions to courses and programs, and course discontinuances).

Changes submitted as Category 2 may be reconsidered as a Category 1 change at the

discretion of the SCC subcommittee charged with the review.

More detailed information can be found in the UBC Curriculum Guide:

http://senate.ubc.ca/sites/senate.ubc.ca/files/downloads/va_Curriculum_Guide_Version_10.3

4_03_2013.pdf

SFU

The SFU Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies (SCUS) has a mandate (in its terms of

references) that’s mostly curricular in nature: http://www.sfu.ca/senate/senate-

committees/scus.html

SCUS has delegated authority from Senate to approve program revisions (including changes

to program admissions), as well as new and revised course outlines; these are then sent to

Senate for information.

The Notice of Intent and Full Program Proposals of new programs are approved by SCUS and

recommended to the Senate Committee on Priorities (SCUP).

UVic

The UVic Senate Curriculum Committee reviews new and revised programs and course

outlines and recommends them to Senate for approval.

http://www.uvic.ca/universitysecretary/senate/committees/curriculum.php

The Senate agenda package has a link to a Senate SharePoint site where Senators can find all

the new and revised programs and course outlines. At Senate, these are approved by one

omnibus motion.

UNBC

The UNBC Senate Committee on Academic Affairs (SCAAF) as a broad-based mandate that

encompasses advising Senate on academic planning, curriculum (programs and courses),

program review, enrolment management, articulation agreements with other institutions,

research, teaching and learning, and the Library operations.

http://unbc.ca/sites/default/files/sections/governance/senate/05-scaaf-

senatecommitteeonacademicaffairs_5.pdf

http://senate.ubc.ca/sites/senate.ubc.ca/files/downloads/va_Curriculum_Guide_Version_10.34_03_2013.pdf

http://senate.ubc.ca/sites/senate.ubc.ca/files/downloads/va_Curriculum_Guide_Version_10.34_03_2013.pdf

http://www.sfu.ca/senate/senate-committees/scus.html

http://www.sfu.ca/senate/senate-committees/scus.html

http://www.uvic.ca/universitysecretary/senate/committees/curriculum.php

http://unbc.ca/sites/default/files/sections/governance/senate/05-scaaf-senatecommitteeonacademicaffairs_5.pdf

http://unbc.ca/sites/default/files/sections/governance/senate/05-scaaf-senatecommitteeonacademicaffairs_5.pdf

5

SCAAF has six subcommittees, including the SCAAF Subcommittee on Curriculum and

Calendar (SCCC). SCCC’s terms of reference includes making recommendations to SCAAF

on detailed Calendar entries on new and revised programs, as well as proposed changes to

programs, course deletions and additions, course retitling and renumbering, and Calendar

course descriptions.

http://unbc.ca/sites/default/files/sections/governance/senate/07-sccc-

scaafsubcommitteeoncurriculumandcalendar_1.pdf

VIU

The VIU Senate Curriculum Committee (SCC) reviews new and revised program and course

outlines, and recommends them to Senate for approval. New program proposals approved

by SCC are then forwarded to the Senate Planning and Priorities Committee for review and

recommendations to Senate for approval.

More detailed information on the curriculum approval process can be found in the SCC

submission guidelines:

https://www2.viu.ca/senate/docs/CCsubmissionguidelines.pdf

UFV

UFV has a policy on Undergraduate Course and Program Approval:

http://www.ufv.ca/media/assets/secretariat/policies/Undergraduate-Course-and-Program-

Approval-(21).pdf

In this policy, the UFV Senate Undergraduate Education Committee (UEC) is involved in the

review and approval of new and revised programs and course outlines.

UEC has a UEC Screening Subcommittee that reviews all course and program proposals for

clarity, completeness, and adherence to procedures. It has delegated authority to approve

minor course revisions.

http://www.ufv.ca/media/assets/senate/uec/resources/UEC-Screening-Subcommitte-TOR-

and-membership.pdf

TRU

The review and approval of new and revised programs and course outlines is part of the

mandate of the TRU Senate Educational Program Committee (EPC). All new course and

program proposals must be approved by the Senate Academic Planning and Priorities

Committee prior to being submitted to EPC.

EPC has a Submission Preview Subcommittee (SPS) that reviews all course and program

proposals for clarity and completeness and determines whether they are consistent with

existing academic policies and practices. SPS also determines whether the proposal is a

Category I, II, or III change.

o Category I – May be approved by the Faculty or School Council. SPS submits a list of

these to EPC for information.

o Category II – May be approved by EPC, on behalf of Senate

o Category III – Requires Senate and Board approval

EPC submits Category I and II course and program proposals to Senate for information.

More detailed information on the procedures of EPC can be found here:

https://tru.civicweb.net/document/69773/EPC%20Procedures%20Document_EPC%20approve

d%20April%202011_APPC%20Senate%20appr%20May%202011.pdf?handle=439C76D68DD2480

DBC3077E78DF0E84A

http://unbc.ca/sites/default/files/sections/governance/senate/07-sccc-scaafsubcommitteeoncurriculumandcalendar_1.pdf

http://unbc.ca/sites/default/files/sections/governance/senate/07-sccc-scaafsubcommitteeoncurriculumandcalendar_1.pdf

https://www2.viu.ca/senate/docs/CCsubmissionguidelines.pdf

http://www.ufv.ca/media/assets/secretariat/policies/Undergraduate-Course-and-Program-Approval-(21).pdf

http://www.ufv.ca/media/assets/secretariat/policies/Undergraduate-Course-and-Program-Approval-(21).pdf

http://www.ufv.ca/media/assets/senate/uec/resources/UEC-Screening-Subcommitte-TOR-and-membership.pdf

http://www.ufv.ca/media/assets/senate/uec/resources/UEC-Screening-Subcommitte-TOR-and-membership.pdf

https://tru.civicweb.net/document/69773/EPC%20Procedures%20Document_EPC%20approved%20April%202011_APPC%20Senate%20appr%20May%202011.pdf?handle=439C76D68DD2480DBC3077E78DF0E84A



6

Capilano

Capilano has policies on its program and course outlines approval processes:

http://www.capilanou.ca/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=15999


The Capilano Senate Curriculum Committee has the mandate to review all course and

program proposals and revisions, and recommend them to Senate for approval. Some minor

course outline revisions are exempted from the full approval process.

Other Canadian Universities

MacEwan University, Alberta

MacEwan’s Academic Governance Council (AGC) is the university’s senior academic

governance body and is analogous to our Senate. The MacEwan AGC has an Academic

Planning and Priorities Committee that makes recommendations on new programs and

program discontinuances. There is also an AGC Admissions and Selection Committee that

develops and reviews program admission criteria.

http://www.macewan.ca/wcm/ExecutiveandGovernance/AcademicGovernanceCouncil/in

dex.htm

However, the AGC does not have a role in the approval of course outlines, and the Dean is

the final approver.

o Course outline policy:

http://www.macewan.ca/contribute/groups/public/documents/document/c1025_cou

rse_outlines.pdf

o Course outline elements:

http://www.macewan.ca/contribute/groups/public/documents/document/c1025-

1_course_outline_element.pdf

o Course outline approval and distribution procedure:

http://www.macewan.ca/contribute/groups/public/documents/document/c1025-

2_crse_outline_procedure.pdf

Mount Royal University, Alberta

Mount Royal’s General Faculty Council (GFC) is the university’s senior academic governance

body and is analogous to our Senate. The GFC Academic Program and Policy Committee

(APPC) advises the GFC on programs and courses.

A review of GFC minutes show that both APPC and GFC approves new and revised course

outlines:

http://www.mtroyal.ca/cs/groups/public/documents/pdf/gfc_agepackagedec8.2014.pdf

Ryerson University, Ontario

The Ryerson Senate Academic Standards Committee makes recommendations to Senate on

new programs, program revisions, and program reviews.

http://www.ryerson.ca/senate/StandingCommittees.html



http://www.macewan.ca/wcm/ExecutiveandGovernance/AcademicGovernanceCouncil/index.htm

http://www.macewan.ca/wcm/ExecutiveandGovernance/AcademicGovernanceCouncil/index.htm

http://www.macewan.ca/contribute/groups/public/documents/document/c1025_course_outlines.pdf

http://www.macewan.ca/contribute/groups/public/documents/document/c1025_course_outlines.pdf

http://www.macewan.ca/contribute/groups/public/documents/document/c1025-1_course_outline_element.pdf

http://www.macewan.ca/contribute/groups/public/documents/document/c1025-1_course_outline_element.pdf

http://www.macewan.ca/contribute/groups/public/documents/document/c1025-2_crse_outline_procedure.pdf

http://www.macewan.ca/contribute/groups/public/documents/document/c1025-2_crse_outline_procedure.pdf

http://www.mtroyal.ca/cs/groups/public/documents/pdf/gfc_agepackagedec8.2014.pdf

http://www.ryerson.ca/senate/StandingCommittees.html

7

According to the Ryerson Undergraduate Management Policy, the Ryerson Senate does not

have a role in the approval of course outlines.

http://www.ryerson.ca/senate/policies/pol145.pdf

Dalhousie University, Nova Scotia

The Dalhousie Senate Academic Programs and Research Committee (SAPRC) has both

curricular and research mandates. It has two subcommittees. The SAPRC Academic Program

Subcommittee reviews and makes recommendations to SAPRC on the establishment, revision,

suspension, and discontinuance of undergraduate programs at any level (i.e., certificate,

diploma, and degree).

http://www.dal.ca/content/dam/dalhousie/pdf/university_secretariat/Senate%20Docs/SAPRC

%20Academic%20Program%20SubCommittee-ToR-2013-04-15.pdf

http://www.dal.ca/dept/university_secretariat/program-proposals.html

The Dalhousie Senate does not appear to have a role in the approval of course outlines.

http://www.ryerson.ca/senate/policies/pol145.pdf

http://www.dal.ca/content/dam/dalhousie/pdf/university_secretariat/Senate%20Docs/SAPRC%20Academic%20Program%20SubCommittee-ToR-2013-04-15.pdf

http://www.dal.ca/content/dam/dalhousie/pdf/university_secretariat/Senate%20Docs/SAPRC%20Academic%20Program%20SubCommittee-ToR-2013-04-15.pdf

http://www.dal.ca/dept/university_secretariat/program-proposals.html

SENATE


AGENDA #: 9.3


Issue: Membership Revision: Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum

For Information At its June 1, 2015 meeting the Senate Governance Committee reviewed the revision to the membership of the Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum and recommended it for Senate's approval. Attached: Membership Revision: Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum

For Approval THAT Senate approve the revision to the membership of the Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum.


SURREY CAMPUS

12666 – 72ND Ave.


MEMORANDUM

TO:

SENATE

CC:

Dana Cserepes, Chair, Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum

FROM:


DATE:

June 11, 2015

SUBJECT:

Proposed Revision to the Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum Membership

At its May 6, 2015 meeting, the Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum (SSCC) considered a request from the

Council of Deans and Advising Council to add an Educational Advisor to its committee membership. After

discussion, SSCC passed a resolution recommending that an Educational Advisor be added to its committee

membership as a voting member. This request was endorsed by the Senate Governance Committee on June 1,

2015 for recommendation to Senate.










Membership



the following September. This information will be included in the report to Senate.

Voting Members

• Chancellor

• President

• One faculty member from each Faculty

• One faculty member from each of the Library, Counselling, and Co-operative Education

• Deputy Provost

• One student

• Two deans/associate deans (to be selected by the Senate Nominating Committee in conjunction with

the Provost and Vice President, Academic)

• Representative from the Office of the Registrar

• Educational Advisor

2



• Provost and Vice President, Academic

Terms of Office

faculty members – three-year term with one-third of these members to be selected each year

professional support staff member – three-year term

deans/associate deans – reviewed regularly in conjunction with the Provost



The chair will inform the committee if a member’s absences exceed three meetings. The committee will discuss

the situation and the position may be declared vacant by the chair in conjunction with the committee.

The committee has determined that it requires a minimum of three (3) senators as members. This number does

not include the deans.


SENATE


AGENDA #: 9.4


Issue: Membership Revision: Senate Standing Committee on Policy Review

For Information At its June 1, 2015 meeting the Senate Governance Committee reviewed the revision to the membership of the Senate Standing Committee on Policy Review and recommended it for Senate's approval. Attached: Membership Revision: Senate Standing Committee on Policy Review

For Approval THAT Senate approve the revision to the membership of the Senate Standing Committee on Policy Review.


SURREY CAMPUS

12666 – 72ND Ave.


MEMORANDUM

TO:

SENATE

CC:

Kim Rose, Chair, Senate Standing Committee on Policy Review

FROM:


DATE:

June 11, 2015

SUBJECT:

Proposed Membership Revision to Senate Standing Committee on Policy Review

At its May 11, 2015 meeting, the Senate Standing Committee on Policy Review reviewed its committee

membership and noticed that it has two representatives from the Office of the Registrar (one voting and one

non-voting). The role of “One representative from the Office of the Registrar” is misleading because the role is

meant to be a Strategic Enrolment Management representative from Student Services. The Senate Standing

Committee on Policy Review requested that its committee membership be amended to clarify this. The Senate

Governance Committee considered this request on June 1, 2015 and recommended to Senate that the

representative be appointed from Student Services.










Membership




Voting Members

• Chancellor

• President

• Four faculty members, at least three of whom must be chosen from different Faculties, one of whom may

be a faculty member without a Faculty

• One Counsellor

• One student

• One professional support staff

• One representative from the Office of the Registrar Student Services

2


• Provost and Vice President, Academic (or designate)

• Deputy Provost

• Director, Student Risk & Judicial Affairs (or designate)

• Registrar (or designate)


• University Secretary (or designate)

Terms of Office

faculty members – three-year term






The committee has determined that it requires a minimum of two (2) senators as members.


SENATE


AGENDA #: 9.5


Issue: Membership Revision: Senate Governance Committee

For Information At its June 1, 2015 meeting the Senate Governance Committee reviewed the revision to the membership of the Senate Governance Committee and recommended it for Senate's approval. Attached: Membership Revision: Senate Governance Committee

For Approval THAT Senate approve the revision to the membership of the Senate Governance Committee.


SURREY CAMPUS

12666 – 72ND Ave.


MEMORANDUM

TO:

SENATE

CC:

Sandi Klassen, University Secretary

FROM:


DATE:

June 11, 2015

SUBJECT:

Proposed Revision to the Senate Governance Committee Membership

The University Secretary is currently an ex-officio, non-voting member on the Senate Governance Committee.

With the reorganization of the Secretariat Office in July of 2015, the Vice Chair of Senate received a request from

the University Secretary that the committee membership be amended to clarify the role. The Senate

Governance Committee considered the request on June 1, 2015 and recommended to Senate that “University

Secretary” be amended to “University Secretary (or Executive Secretary to the Senate)”.










Membership




Voting Members

• Chancellor

• President


• One dean

• One professional support staff senator

• One student senator

• Two additional senators

2


• Provost and Vice President, Academic (or designate)

• Registrar (or designate)

• University Secretary (or Executive Secretary to the Senate)

Terms of Office

faculty members – three-year term


student senator – one-year term




The committee has determined that it requires a minimum of six (6) senators as members.


SENATE


AGENDA #: 10

PRESENTED BY: Don McGonigal

Issue: Senate Nominating Committee

For Information The Senate Nominating Committee met on June 15, 2015 and made the following recommendations for membership to Senate Standing Committees.

For Approval THAT Senate approve the following as members of Senate Standing committees effective September 1, 2015. Senate Standing Committee on Curriculum Student Senator – Kayla England, Faculty of Arts

Senate Standing Committee on Program Review Student Senator – Kayla England, Faculty of Arts Faculty member – Wayne Fenske, Faculty of Arts

Senate Standing Committee on the University Budget Faculty member – Carol Stewart, Faculty of Business

Senate Executive Committee Faculty member – Carol Stewart, Faculty of Business

Senate Standing Committee on Policy Review Counsellor – Laurie Detwiler

SENATE


AGENDA #: 10.1

PRESENTED BY: Don McGonigal

Issue: Appointment of Search Advisory Committee for the University Registrar

For Information: In accordance with the Search Advisory, Appointment and Re-appointment of Senior Academic Administrator Positions Policy and Procedures (HR20), the following members of the Search Advisory Committee for the University Registrar have been appointed by administration and the respective unions:

Chair: Sal Ferreras – Provost and Vice President, Academic

Two regular faculty members appointed by the KFA Panteli Tritchew – Business, Faculty of Business Susana Philips – Psychology, Faculty of Arts

One Librarian

Todd Mundle – University Librarian

One student appointed by the Kwantlen Student Association

Allison Gonzalez – Faculty of Design

One regular BCGEU staff member preferably selected from the relevant functional area, appointed by the BCGEU Cindy Stevens - Enrolment Services Supervisor

One excluded support staff employee preferably selected from the relevant functional area, appointed by the Chair Joshua Mitchell, Associate Registrar, Student Financial Services

One senior administrative officer of the institution appointed by the Chair Jane Fee, Vice Provost, Students

One Dean appointed by the Provost Patrick Donahoe – Faculty of Academic and Career Advancement

Senate is responsible for appointing up to three faculty members and one student representative on the Search Advisory Committee.

The Senate Nominating Committee met on June 15, 2015. Lacking quorum the following nominees are being submitted for Senate's consideration, selection and appointment:

Three regular faculty members, appointed by the Senate to ensure broad representation Mazen Guirguis – Philosophy, Faculty of Arts George Broderick – Business, Faculty of Business Melissa Swanink – English Language Studies, Faculty of Academic and Career

Advancement Karen Davison – Biology, Faculty of Science and Horticulture

For Approval: THAT Senate approve the following members of the Search Advisory Committee for the University Registrar

Three regular faculty members, appointed by the Senate to ensure broad representation 1 2 3.

One student, preferably a Senator, appointed by Senate Kayla England – Political Science, BA Policy Studies

SENATE


AGENDA #: 13

PRESENTED BY: Stan Kazymerchyk

Issue: Senate Standing Committee on Program Review

For Information: Period covered by this report: June 25 2014 to June 11 2015 Program Reviews Initiated:

Business Management: certificate and diploma: September 2014

Business Administration diploma: September 2014

Associate of Arts in Economics: September 2014 Self-Study Reports Approved:

Fashion Design: October 2014 External Reports approved:

Fashion Design: March 2015 Action Plans Approved:

Bachelor of Technology: Information Technology: September 2014

English: October 2014

Fashion Design: June 2015 Institutional Responses Received:

Response for Fashion Design: June 2015 One-Year Follow-up Reports on Action Plan Progress approved:

Horticulture: September 2014

Criminology: April 2015

Political Science: April 2015

History: May 2015 Other Activities:

Revised Mandate and committee composition

SENATE


AGENDA #: 15

PRESENTED BY: Zena Mitchell

Issue: Approval of Graduates to June 22, 2015

Attached: Graduates for Senate: June 22, 2015

For Approval THAT Senate approve the Graduates to June 22, 2015

Graduates for Senate SENATE MEETING: Monday, 22-Jun-2015

Graduates from the Chip and Shannon Wilson School of Design Diploma Diploma in Fashion and Technology Alejandra Gonzalez Jenavieve Maria-Kim Louie Diploma in Fashion Marketing Venus Ka Ki Lai Certificate Certificate of Foundations in Design Hiu Tung Yu

Graduates from the Faculty of Academic & Career Advancement Citation Citation in Career Choices and Life Success Hong Hong Dong Naixin Fei Maria Carmen Froess Socorro Monares Jonsen Sahar Khyabani Natsuki Miyakawa Tomomi Tanaka

Graduates from the Faculty of Arts Baccalaureate Degree Bachelor of Arts - Major in Anthropology Douglas Anthony Penner Bachelor of Arts - Major in Criminology Kiarash Khani Moghaddam Jacqueline Alexandra Tarantino Bachelor of Arts - Major in English Kimberley Anne Ytsma Associate Degree Associate of Arts Degree in Criminology Joraber Singh Lalli Associate of Arts Degree in General Studies Breanne Chan Associate of Arts Degree in History Jose Miguel Mijares Associate of Arts Degree in Psychology Ryan Binley With Distinction Shane Sunil Kumar Diploma Diploma in Arts Wei Sun

Diploma in Criminology Amanpreet Bains Kavita Devi Qing Gu Lauren Kolberg Diploma in Fine Arts Felicia Tianna Olivia Smith Diploma in General Studies Shuqin Huang Nicolas Frank Weinell Haiyue Zhou Certificate Certificate in Criminology William Edward Campbell Christopher James Epp With Distinction Anna Grace Benson Hitch Mark Dominic Macapinlac Allison Elizabeth McMillan Certificate in Special Education Teacher Assistant Katelyn Aime Teresa Anne Anderson With Distinction Tori Anderson Miranda Marie Anton With Distinction Leslie Gail Atwill With Distinction Michelle Bains With Distinction Amanda Jean Bauden With Distinction Anthony Beutel Jeanne-D'Arc Francesca Nancy Bilodeau With Distinction Jodi Marie Buchan With Distinction Tracy Ann Bucholtz With Distinction Helen Yueru Chen With Distinction Stephanie Leigh Corry With Distinction Jennifer Grace Danielsen With Distinction Sarabjit Deol With Distinction Pamela Lynn Devins With Distinction Sylvia Natalie Dhillon With Distinction

Corinne Janet Ellison With Distinction Yvonne Marie Evans Amanda Nicole Field With Distinction Carl Wiiliam French With Distinction Tayler Rae Glaspey With Distinction Wendy Laura Hammiel With Distinction Rhiannon Harris With Distinction Alana Lee Heard With Distinction Naila Heintz With Distinction Kennedy Laynne Hewer Anjela Iordanova Hintz With Distinction Savannah Hummelman With Distinction Arielle Crystal Hysert With Distinction Thomas Linden Ivey With Distinction Tiffany Anne Jerome With Distinction Irma Johnson With Distinction Michelle Anne Johnstone With Distinction Jillian Michelle Kelsey With Distinction Megan Elizabeth Kouwenhoven With Distinction Cassandra Elaine Labbe With Distinction Cody Larsen With Distinction Terry William Lewis With Distinction Anita Corry Lindhout With Distinction Effie Laurie Gray Lyons With Distinction Amber Shelby MacDonald Melissa Sylvia MacKenzie With Distinction Donatella McKellar With Distinction Megan Tara Smith McLatchy With Distinction

Takami Nattrass With Distinction Christina Nicole Neels With Distinction Shehnaz Nijjar Shanine Diana Palmer With Distinction Nazmin Patel With Distinction Lyndsey Nicole Pearce With Distinction Robyn Haley Pederson Carmen Esme Phelan With Distinction Katy Pinder With Distinction Idame Puray Puche With Distinction Bree-Ann Ramsey Terri Jeanne Roberts With Distinction Navreen Kaur Sandhu Darren Charles Sedore With Distinction Mikaela Jo Semenoff With Distinction Ashley Marie Semke With Distinction Kaitlyn Samantha Smith With Distinction Stephanie Ann Spry With Distinction Tharanga Imali Thissaarachchi With Distinction Kaysha Cassandra Tickner With Distinction Jasmen Toor Christine Denise Trommel With Distinction Paramjit Kaur Tut With Distinction Amy Van Ryk With Distinction Laurence Harald Veerman With Distinction Lisa Ann Wilson With Distinction Nicole Marie Wilson With Distinction

Graduates from the Faculty of Business Baccalaureate Degree Bachelor of Business Administration in Accounting Michael Kim Fung Trinh Bachelor of Business Administration in Accounting, Co-operative Education Option Elizabeth Medeiros Pereira Bachelor of Business Administration in Entrepreneurial Leadership Jaclyn Patel McNelis Bachelor of Business Administration in Marketing Management, Co-operative Education Option Samantha Dawn Williams Diploma Diploma in Accounting Stephen Alexander Black Maureen Isobel Bolivar John Chang Chen Cui Amrit Singh Dulla Brett Samuel Ellis Hung Kit Ho Patric Kuo With Distinction Chris Manaras With Distinction Elizabeth Paul Thonipurackal Ramanpreet Kaur Sandhu Harkanwaljit Singh Jenifer Stephenson Diploma in Business Administration Hoi In Ng Diploma in Business Management Fahad Nazhan Altimyat Ram Singh Johal Jasan Preet Singh Thind Diploma in Computer Information Systems Zayd Jakir With Distinction David Peter Tan With Distinction Edwin Tanu Diploma in General Business Studies Jasdeep Kaur Ghag Diploma in Marketing Management Michelle Ha Diploma in Public Relations Ailsa Kristine Berry Certificate Certificate in Accounting Quade Darryl Francis

Certificate in Business Management Lucas Giuriato

Graduates from the Faculty of Health Baccalaureate Degree Bachelor of Science in Nursing Prity Cudail With Distinction Certificate Certificate in Health Unit Coordinator Inisha Aujla With Distinction Gurkaren Kaur Bal With Distinction Anisa Chan With Distinction Mickenzie Taylor Cody With Distinction Ritika Sara Dhir Baljinder Kaur Ghuman With Distinction Asra Habib With Distinction Marissa Kobzey Kaitlin Leroux With Distinction Roshani Parmar With Distinction Helen Sergiannidis With Distinction Raman Kaur Shetta With Distinction Maninder Kaur Sidhu Jessica Erin Watt With Distinction

Graduates from the Faculty of Science and Horticulture Associate Degree Associate of Science Degree in Chemistry Tejinder Singh Dhaliwal Diploma Diploma in Horticulture Technology – Greenhouse and Nursery Production Margarita Popoff With Distinction Diploma in Horticulture Technology – Landscape Design and Installation Sarah Courtney Sims With Distinction

Graduates from the Faculty of Trades and Technology Diploma Diploma in Computer Aided Design and Drafting Tyler Ashton Peet With Distinction Certificate Certificate in Automotive Service Technician Robert Mark Linsley Certificate in Computer Aided Design and Drafting - Architectural Amanpreet Singh Nagra With Distinction Certificate in Public Safety Communications Erica Lee Ferguson Certificate in Welding Foundation Christopher David Ahnert With Distinction Hyang-Mi Bae With Distinction Henry Sungsik Bahng With Distinction Brandie Rose Baynes With Distinction Isaac Dean Beaulieu With Distinction Hafaez Bhanji Tanner Malcolm Blue Daniel Liam Boschman Buddy John Clarke With Distinction Nicholas Laurence Cleaver With Distinction Shane Coatta With Distinction Kilian Dominic D'Mello Kevin Biko Doss With Distinction Dalton William Duperreault Lucas Edward Eastwood With Distinction Jesse Kurt Edwards With Distinction William Steven Galvis Cody Jonathan Grills With Distinction Tejinder Kalirai Junwoo Lee With Distinction Joseph MacDonald Benjamin Manelis With Distinction

Ryan William Mcfegan With Distinction Alexander Mills With Distinction Christopher Pietrzyk With Distinction Arnold Radler With Distinction Patrick Ryan Rogers Rajveer Sidhu With Distinction Jagjeet Singh With Distinction John Cole Stevens With Distinction Braden Mathew Strelezki Brodie Michael Usipiuk With Distinction Timothy Alden V Yalung With Distinction Citation Citation in Carpentry/Building Construction Cory Stuart Adams Rachel Lynne Adams Jordan Wesley Aichele Casey MacKenzie Coulter Kyle Derrick Gorrill With Distinction Brandon Pavan Herman Kim Hoang Erick Georg Miller Mitchell Darren Robertson Aaron Arvinder Sahota Kelsey Emma Rose Sanders Chang Wei Su With Distinction Citation in Construction Electrician Jawad Anwari Murray John Batch With Distinction Riley James Brown With Distinction Michael George Alexander Child With Distinction Eric Ted Cooper With Distinction Justin Cross With Distinction Gelfri Ramon Castro Devers With Distinction Jason Dhesi

Amrik Singh Dhot With Distinction Erick Friedman Garrett Alan Gardner With Distinction Jeffrey James Gonzaga With Distinction Gurleen Singh Grewal With Distinction Robin John Hammond With Distinction Omar Jose Hanif Manvir Singh Hothi Alexander Christopher Walter Janzen With Distinction Rajmeel Jeet John Kim With Distinction Anmol Singh Ladhar Kristofer James Patrick Lee With Distinction Michael Loewen With Distinction Callum James Ewan MacKenzie With Distinction Steven William Mauch With Distinction Jude Okeri Faith Alexander Stephen On Jennifer Meghan Ricketts With Distinction Jesse Sean Robertson With Distinction Tarndeep Singh Sangha With Distinction Natasha Rae Lilian Svensson With Distinction Winston G Trueman With Distinction Logan Henry Turner With Distinction Derek Gregory Weselak Citation in Millwright/Industrial Mechanic Thomas Clayton Biederman With Distinction Joseph Robert Burrage With Distinction Dylan James Chew Christopher Creelman With Distinction Scott Michael Dailly Hardeep Singh Dhaliwal

Hicham EL Ouahdani With Distinction James John Wilder Farrell With Distinction Nathan Clarke Gagnon James Knutson Jaroslaw Ryszard Kobylt With Distinction Kyle Robert Lagerstrom With Distinction Taranpal Singh Mann Mario Schietroma With Distinction Ajesh Prakash Singh Brandon Joshua Smid With Distinction Konrad Trinh With Distinction Citation in Plumbing Marie Nora Adams With Distinction Jason Ahuja Adam Scott Aylett With Distinction Kristopher Kelly Chuback With Distinction Jason Dunbar Amir Ghasemzadehnaghadehi With Distinction Trevor Hallam Gurvinder Singh Hans Cayden Robert Helders John Richard David Lehbaur With Distinction Paramvir Singh Manoo With Distinction John-David Papp With Distinction James William Sangil-Dodds Carston Arthur Joseph Turner Heeyoun Yi With Distinction Citation in Plumbing (ACE-IT) Caleb Jack Brown Jeremy John Diffner Harkirat Ghotra Marshall Norman Russel Godard Howard Louis Larocque Kevin William Mitchell Jordan Daniel Pade With Distinction Justin Ishan Prasad

Jack Donovan Provencal Christopher James Reyers Axell Jean Pholl Rodriquez Aguilera Brockdon Randell Sears Erik Raymond Sedar Balraj Shergill Brandon Jeffrey Sinha John Arthur Scott Squaire Joshua Jakob Sundin Jacob Robert Yost Citation in Welding - Level B Harrison Grant Allen With Distinction Justin David Boschman With Distinction Jeff Wayne Campbell Sungjin Chang Andrew Glenn Charters With Distinction Christopher John Conover Dustynn Merle Diack With Distinction Daniel Peter Gilecki With Distinction Steven Alexander Hicks With Distinction Mark Cameron Laturnus Spencer Kenneth Marshall With Distinction Frank John Oelkers Cesar Antonio Portillo Turcios Ryan Banta Sahota

SENATE


AGENDA #: 15.2

PRESENTED BY: Zena Mitchell

Issue: Rescindment of Graduate

Attached: Graduates for Senate Approval -- Rescindment

For Approval THAT Senate rescind the approval of graduation for Himit Singh Sundur of January 26, 2015.

Graduates for Senate Approval – Rescindment SENATE MEETING: Monday, 22-Jun-2015

Graduates from the Faculty of Arts Bachelor of Arts, Major in Psychology Himit Singh Sundur

Documents

SENATE AGENDA - Your KPU · Program Development Guide. Moved by Dana Cserepes; seconded by Chris Tryanor: ... KPU’s oard of Governors’ thanks the Senate and the Senate Standing