S-96-14 FACULTY OF SCIENCE Minutes of Meeting Tuesday, November 12, 1996 Leacock Council Room - L232 ATTENDANCE: As recorded in the Faculty Appendix Book. DOCUMENTS: S-96-10 to S-96-13 Dean Shaver called the meeting to order at 3:04 p.m. Dean Shaver welcomed the student representatives to the Faculty of Science meeting. (1) MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 1996 S-96-10 Prof. Williams-Jones moved, seconded by Prof. Farrell, that the minutes be approved. The motion carried. (2) BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES Minute 104.1 - School of Computer Science 202.1 Dean Shaver said the Dean of the Faculty of Science, the Director of the School of Computer Science, and a student representative had appeared before APPC to present their viewpoints on the transfer of the School of Computer Science to the Faculty of Science. The Dean of Engineering attended a subsequent meeting. Dean Shaver said that he thought that APPC had decided to recommend the transfer. The proposal would be discussed and debated at a future Senate meeting. Minute 107.1- Hagerman Prize (Value $250) 202.2 In response to Prof. Farrell, Dean Shaver said that he would check whether or not an acknowledgment letter had been sent to Ms. Hagerman. Minute 107.16 - BSc/BEd Degree Program 202.3 Associate Dean de Takacsy reported that the BSc/BEd Degree Program had been approved by Senate on November 6, 1996. Minutes 107.7 to 107.14 - Experimental Medicine Courses 516-510A & 516-511A 202.4 The following letter was written to Associate Dean de Takacsy by Prof. Price in response to queries from Faculty members concerning the above courses. October 28, 1996 Associate Dean N. de Takacsy Faculty of Science 853 Sherbrooke Street West Montreal, Quebec H3A 2T6 Dear Dr. de Takacsy, In response to your letter dated October 16th, 1996, in which you ask for clarification regarding certain points pertaining to courses 516-510A (Bioanalytical Separation Methods) and 516-511A (Joint Venturing: A Researcherís Perspective), we would like to provide you with the following: 1. 516-510A: What does a 0.5 hour laboratory entail? There are three two-hour labs associated with this course. They are intended to give the students brief hands-on experience of high-performance liquid chromatography, gas chromatography and capillary electrophoresis. Each lab will demonstrate a simple drug analysis, and the students will be expected to make calculations of parameters such as capacity factors and mobilities based on data obtained. 2. 516-510A and -511A: Why are there no prerequisites listed for these 500-level courses? These courses should be accessible to anyone with a science background. They were placed at the 500-level and are therefore available to last year undergraduate students and graduate students, all of whom will have had sufficient basic science training to undertake them. The course organizers are quite open to and would encourage prospective students to approach them to discuss their previous experience and suitability for the course. 3. 516-511A: Why does a three-credit course consist of 2 hours of lecture and 0.5 hour of seminar per week? This is 0.5 hours short for a three-credit course. The course is being taught as a graduate level course, with access available to suitable undergraduates with an interest in participating in the business of Ttechnology transfer and development of liaisons, with industry, in support of fundamental and applied sciences.î Our inquiries to Graduate Faculty on construction of the course resulted in advice that between 40 and 45 hours was sufficient for a three- credit course. In consideration of the anticipated extra effort outside of class that this course will require of those that want to take the fullest advantage, we consider the course to be of more than adequate duration. In fact, it was indicated in the course proposal that there was an anticipated 15 hours of preparation needed, which time was considered part of actual class time. As regards the seminar time, this is not fractionated in 0.5 hour segments, but will include 1 and 2 hour presentations above and beyond course lectures. 4. 516-510A and -511A: How many Science students are currently enrolled in these courses? 516-510A: Total enrollment consisted of 3 students, for the first presentation of the course. This number did not include any undergraduate students. 516-511A: This course will be taught as a îBî course for the 1996-1997 academic year. This course, at the present time, does not have any enrollment of undergraduate students that we are aware of. To the best of our information, we have had indication that there are 8 students who either have or are planning to register. Enrollment was anticipated to be greater and to have included undergraduate and îSpecialî students. However, as you are aware, this approved course was not placed on MARS for the early registration as it should have been and we believe that we lost between 4-10 potential registrants for this reason. 5. 516-511A: Please provide more evidence that this course deserves to be a 500-level course, and more clarification on the level at which this course will be taught. The 500-level was chosen deliberately in order to limit the course to graduate and senior undergraduate students, who may wish this as a first experience to decide on a career orientation or graduate education stream. For example, it will allow a first testing of registrants as to whether they may wish to pursue a management, economic or more pragmatic scientific graduate research career. The level at which it is being taught and the necessity to accommodate students of diverse fundamental backgrounds requires a challenging effort by the instructors to ensure the greatest value and advancement of knowledge and practical experience to registrants. In recent discussions with the Associate Dean of Graduate Studies at the University of Montreal, Dr. Malo, he has indicated their intent to follow our example in principle, creating a course or courses similar, if not identical, to course 516-511A. Dean Yalovsky and I have offered collaboration and cooperation in developing this much needed alternative career choice (in the spirit of the Estates General). We anticipate, over the next year, to collaborate with the University of Montreal in the establishment of their course and/or other mutually advantageous opportunities in this domain. Finally, Ian Shugar, Executive Secretary of the MRC, has taken a personal interest in the development and progress of 516-511A, viewed by him as a growing, if not current, necessity for providing graduates with the best opportunity to succeed in their chosen careers. I hope that all of the questions raised by the members of the Faculty of Science have now been answered to their entire satisfaction. Sincerely, Gerald B. Price, Ph.D. Director Division of Experimental Medicine cc: Dr. M. Yalovsky (3) ANNOUNCEMENTS 203.1 Dean Shaver announced that Prof. David Noble Harpp, Department of Chemistry, had been chosen as one of the recipients of the 1996 Michael Smith Award for Science Promotion. He said that Prof. Harpp was the only individual so recognized; the other five recipients were all organizations/institutions. On behalf of the Faculty of Science, Dean Shaver congratulated Prof. Harpp. (4) REPORTS OF COMMITTEES a) Committee on Student Standing S-96-11 There was no report due to the meeting having been cancelled. b) Academic Committee S-96-12 Report on Minor Course Changes (AC-96-13) (for information) Physiology - Minor in Neuroscience (AC-96-14/14A) Prof. Ingram moved, seconded by Prof. Farrell, that the above changes be approved. The motion carried. Psychology New Course 204-495B Psychology Research Project (AC-96-15) 3 credits Prof. Baker moved, seconded by Prof. Paquette, that the above course be adopted. The motion carried. Minor Program Changes: Major, Honours & Faculty (Faculties of Arts & of Science) (AC-96-16) Prof. Farrell moved, seconded by Prof. Paquette, that the above changes be approved. The motion carried. Residence and Program Requirements (BSc Degree) (AC-96-17) Prof. Baker moved, seconded by Prof. Ingram, that the above changes be approved. The motion carried. (5) DEANíS BUSINESS There was no Deanís business. (6) REPORT: McGill School of Environment (MSE) - Prof. Ingram 206.1 Prof. Ingram reported that the coordinating committee for the Faculty of Science for the MSE meets every Thursday morning. The working group of the three faculties had met twice, and would be meeting again on November 15, 1996. The divergence of opinion on the core courses had narrowed substantially between the first and second meeting. A draft document of what the core courses would entail had been put together, and would be discussed at the meeting on November 15, 1996. A workshop which had been planned originally for the end of November had been postponed, and would likely be held on December 12 and 13, 1996. (7) MEMBERSí QUESTION PERIOD There were no questions. (8) REPORTS ON ACTIONS OF SENATE* PROF. DE TAKACSY REPORTED ON THE SENATE MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 199612. The Principal reminded Senate that his term and the terms of two Vice-Principals will expire in 1999, and announced that the BOG has initiated the relevant statutory processes. The following have been elected by acclamation: Senate Nominating: Professors GowriSankaran, Hales, Japp, Wallis, Wisse, Zucchi; and student representatives, McGowan and Rooney. Senate Steering: Professors Gottlieb, White and Wihl. Senate Representatives to the BOG: Professors Farrell and Meighen Senate moved into committee of the whole (Pat Farrell in the chair) to consider the financial report for 1995- 96. It turns out that we ended up with a surplus of $7.8 M instead of the $4.4 M anticipated in the budget. This surplus becomes a deficit once the $13.4 M charge for the special early retirement plan is included, but of course the charge is being repaid by Departments right now, and will continue to be repaid until the base budgets for the retired people are recovered by the Departmental budgets. About $500 K were spent on an investigation into Facilities Mangement, and $900 K were lost through overruns in Business Operations which is now being completely reorganized. Senate received the following annual reports: - Sexual Harassment The assessors dealt with 4 formal complaints, offered 14 educational seminars/colloquia and participated in a number of other activities: consultation, research and professional. Sharon Bezeau replaces Judy Stymest as one of the 4 assessors, the other three being Robert Lecker, Katrine Stewart, and Pat Wells. - Ombudsperson for Students Prof. Hopmeyer dealt with 288 cases, some very quick, others more involved. Most of the cases (181) related to academic problems, the next largest category (20) relating to admissions. Her report included advice to students, Faculty and staff on how to avoid problems rather than trying to fix them. - Appeals Committee Two interesting issues. First the committee ruled that time spent as assistant professor (special category), or similar positions, does not count towards the tenure clock regardless of agreements between the professor and the chair/dean/VP. Professors in such situations may receive early consideration for tenure, but the mandatory consideration comes in the 6th year of the tenure track appointment. Secondly, the committee holds that professors must be given access to the complete texts of letters of reference if the tenure committee is tending negative. The Vice-Principal (Academic) presented cogent reasons why the University provides the professor with a summary of the letters but not the full text. Notwithstanding these reasons, Senate voted to support the position of the appeals committee. A new Committee on Cultural Activities was established. The report of APPC included a recommendations on fund raising priorities. The priorities were approved by Senate with the addition of an item entitled îelimination of the accumulated deficit,î but the procedures for reviewing requests were referred back to APPC. Quarterly reports on staff positions and tenure track positions were received. 208.1 Prof. GowriSankaran added that Senate had called for nominations for people to serve on the advisory committee for the selection of a new principal, and that interested persons could contact any of the senators. PROF. GLASS REPORTED ON THE SENATE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 1996. The following items from the November 6 Senate are of most interest to members of the Faculty of Science. 1. There was a resolution on the death of Professor Robert Peters. 2. Professor Martin Webber, Department of Chemical Engineering, was appointed as an alternate on the Science Tenure Committee. 3. A document was passed setting out Guidelines and Procedures for Fund-Raising activities. The document is to be in effect for the coming three years. With the completion of the 21st Century Campaign, the University's fund-raising activities will continue as part of the mandate of the Development and Alumni Relations Office under the direction of the Vice- Principal (Development and Alumni Relations). The priority for fund-raising will be directed to finding private support for essential activities that are crucial for McGill to be an excellent university, but which are not included under the base budget. Activities of highest priority are: - Endowed chairs. - Endowments to support finite term appointments of junior staff and distinguished scholars. - Scholarships and fellowships. - Library acquisitions. - Technology -- broadly interpreted. - Maintenance of infrastructure. - New construction. - New projects that may cut into funding for essential projects should not be encouraged. The following are the revised procedures for fund raising: - The funding priorities guidelines will be disseminated to the University. - The Development Office coordinates formal contact with donors. - All faculties are expected to have a plan and priorities for fund raising initiatives. Proposals may be initiated by units, departments, and faculties and put forward to the appropriate Dean or Vice-Principal stating how the proposal fits in with the planning and priorities of the faculty. Proposals involving libraries, computers, or physical resources must bear the comments of the relevant director or Vice- Principal. - Proposals must be sent to the APPC Subcommittee for Fundraising Priorities for evaluation and further action. Items approved by the Subcommittee will be reported to the APPC. - In the case of time-sensitive items, the Vice- Principal (Academic) and Vice-Principal (Development) may take action, but they also, must report to APPC for information. - Senate approved a proposal for a new concurrent BSc/BEd for Science Teachers. The proposal is a consequence of the new government regulations for secondary school teacher certification which require the completion of at least 120 credits, approximately half in professional training and half in two academic disciplines corresponding to the compulsory subjects taught at the secondary level. The contents of five Science components were especially designed to meet the needs of teachers but are based on existing courses and programs. The five science components are: (1) Mathematics and Physics, (2) Mathematics and Chemistry, (3) Chemistry and Physics with Mathematics, (4) Biology and Chemistry with Mathematics, (5) Biology and Geography. 4. Students must meet admission criteria of both faculties. Admission to both components of the concurrent program will usually be made simultaneously. It will usually not be possible to start in one program and decide to add the second at a later time (but during the first year of operation suitable students will be considered for the joint program). Advising for the science component will be a joint responsibility of the two science department named in each program. The Departments will decide whether this will involve two advisers or one. Notice that advisers will have to add up the credits since the McGill computers are incapable of doing this for joint programs (?!) The two science departments will also be jointly responsible for making a graduation recommendation. Two degrees will be awarded at two different convocations during the same convocation period. Students may switch out of the concurrent program to either a BSc or BEd, but this is an irreversible reaction (they can't switch back). *Senate documents are available in the Deanís Secretariat for consultation. 208.2 In response to Prof. Farrell concerning whether the Faculty has plans for fundraising and, if so, are the plans private or public, Dean Shaver said that the Faculty was in the process of developing such plans, and that these would not be private. Dean Shaver said that the Chairsí Council was working towards the formulation of plans. One of the first steps was to get a report from the Development Office concerning the Twenty-first Century Fund. Due to staff changes in the Development Office, it was difficult to get a detailed report. He said the Faculty must think about what its priorities should be. He added that an attempt would be made to improve the yield from the Faculty Alumni Fund. Dean Shaver said that the above was a general response, and that more formal plans would be made through the Chairsí Council, with departmental input. Dean Shaver said he would like to publish a small document outlining the Facultyís priorities. In response to Prof. Farrell, Dean Shaver said that he supported the development from the School of Computer Science, and that there had also been an initiative in the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences (EPS) to generate a fund for endowed chairs. He said that he hoped to see a more formal proposal from EPS so that this could be adopted. Dean Shaver mentioned that Prof. MacLean, Professor Emeritus, EPS, had generously offered his service and time to this project. 208.4 Associate Dean de Takacsy said that the membership of the APPC Sub-committee on Fundraising Priorities was as follows: Vice-Principal (Academic) Chan Vice-Principal (Development) Drummond Prof. L. Lieblein (Department of English) Mr. D. McGowan (SSMU) Mr. D. Cohen (BOG) (9) OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. The meeting adjourned at 3:35 p.m.