AC-98-32 FACULTY OF SCIENCE ACADEMIC COMMITTEE Minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday, October 20, 1998, at 3:00 p.m. in the Arts Council Room (160). PRESENT: Dean Shaver (Chair), Associate Dean Mendelson (Vice- Chair), Professors Brawer, Drury, GrÅtter, Lapointe, Paquette, Pasztor, Silvius, Wechsler, Yau; Associate Dean Norris; A. Chaudhry, J. Lefebvre, J. Liao, T. Samanta, G. Tsimiklis; J. D'Amico. REGRETS: Professors Baines, Franklin, Kakkar, Panangaden, Rasmussen; Ms. H. Waluzyniec; Ms. D. Cowan. DOCUMENTS: AC-98-20 to AC-98-31 AC-98-31A Dean Shaver called the meeting to order at 3:10 p.m. Dean Shaver welcomed the student representatives to the Academic Committee meeting. ADDITIONS/CHANGES TO THE AGENDA - Exchange Students, Prof. V. Pasztor, to be considered under Other Business, Item #8. (1) MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 23, 1998 AC-98- 20 Prof. GrÅtter moved, seconded by Prof. Pasztor, that the minutes be approved. The motion carried. (2) BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES - Minutes of April 28, 1998, Page 4, Minutes 801.5,801.6, Leo Yaffe Award Committee (for information) 202.1 Dean Shaver reported that the Leo Yaffe Award Committee membership had been changed: the committee members no longer include departmental chairs, which avoids potential conflicts of interest; the committee had been expanded, in order to have broader representation from various departments; there were a number of former Leo Yaffe Award winners mixed with non-winners on the committee; there had been two student members and six alternates nominated by SUS this year. Dean Shaver said the purpose of the alternates was to enable a student member to step down in the event that the student had been taught by a professor nominated for the award. He said it would be an unfair conflict of interest if a student had been taught by a nominee. Dean Shaver asked members for comments. 202.2 Associate Dean Mendelson asked whether it would be more advisable for the SUS to nominate alternates from a variety of different departments. 202.3 Dean Shaver replied that this was an issue for the SUS. - Minutes of September 23, 1998, Minute 104.2, SCTP(Formerly NRCP) and Course/Program Approval Process, AC-98-2 202.4 Associate Dean Mendelson said that the SCTP Course/Program Approval Process information had been circulated via e-mail to relevant individuals in departments. (3) MATHEMATICS & STATISTICS 189-222A/B/C/L/T Calculus III AC-98- 21 3 credits Changes: pre/corequisites & course description Prof. Drury moved, seconded by Prof. GrÅtter, that the changes be approved. The motion carried. Course Retirement 189-227A/B Mathematics for Life Science Students AC-98-22 3 credits Prof. Drury moved, seconded by Prof. Silvius, that the course be retired. The motion carried. (4) PSYCHOLOGY New Course 204-753A/B Health Psychology Seminar I AC-98-23 3 credits New Course 204-754A/B Health Psychology Seminar II AC-98-24 3 credits New Course 204-755A/B Health Psychology Seminar III AC-98-25 3 credits New Course 204-756A/B Health Psychology Seminar IV AC-98-26 3 credits New Course 204-757A/B Health Psychology Seminar V AC-98-27 3 credits New Course 204-758A/B Health Psychology Seminar VI AC-98-28 3 credits Prof. GrÅtter moved, seconded by Associate Dean Mendelson, that the above courses be adopted. The motion carried. (5) GUIDELINES FOR UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH COURSES AC-98-29 205.1 Associate Dean Mendelson reminded the Committee that courses at McGill are required to have course descriptions. He said that it is important that students understand what they are getting into and that this is particularly true for research courses. Associate Dean Mendelson also said it was useful to have formal descriptions of research courses to ensure that supervising professors understand what is entailed, especially if they only have an adjunct relationship with a department or if they are new faculty. Associate Dean Mendelson also said it was useful to have formal descriptions to give the professor, especially a new faculty member. He said that a number of years ago the Department of Psychology had adopted a one-page set of guidelines (document #AC- 98-29), which he included here as an example of the kind of guidelines students and professors find useful. It is important that students and professors have similar understandings of what is expected. Associate Dean Mendelson said there were other issues to be considered: security, in terms of allowing students access to laboratories at all times; the level of supervision in labs; perhaps the training before students are allowed to function in a laboratory. Yet another issue would be evaluation. The evaluation should be standardized for all registrants in the research course. Associate Dean Mendelson said he thought it should be conducted by a single individual who oversees the evaluation of all students. 205.2 Associate Dean Mendelson said that the above were some of the reasons he thought it would be useful for departments to have formal guidelines for undergraduate research courses. He asked members for comments. 205.3 Dean Shaver said that the purpose of the discussion was not to adopt the Department of Psychology's guidelines, but rather to first discuss whether the Academic Committee felt there was a need for such guidelines. He said that if the committee thought guidelines were a good idea, then a motion could be discussed as to whether departments should be required to submit guidelines for undergraduate research courses. 205.4 There was some discussion of the issue, which Dean Shaver summarized. Concerns were that the expectations of professors and students be clearly described; that deadlines be given; that issues relating to security with respect to laboratories and building access, as well as safety procedures, be addressed; that account be taken of evaluation procedures and standards, as well as the issue of ethics; that there be a coordinator or some form of coordination of students involved in projects; that there be a schedule of review of students' progress; and that the eligibility of students for the course be considered, as well as the issue of who is eligible as a supervisor. Dean Shaver said that the above would be the issues to be addressed if the Academic Committee decided to require each department to submit guidelines. The role of the Academic Committee would not be to accept or refuse the guidelines, but to review them to check that all the above issues had been addressed by departments. He asked if there would be a motion to require departments to submit guidelines concerning undergraduate research courses. 205.5 Prof. Pasztor moved, seconded by Prof. Wechsler, that departments be required to submit guidelines concerning undergraduate research courses to the Associate Dean for review by the Academic Committee. The motion carried. (6) SCIENCE DEPARTMENTS OFFERING 18-CREDIT MINOR CONCENTRATIONS FOR ARTS STUDENTS 206.1 Associate Dean Mendelson said the Faculty of Arts has a multi-track system with a 36-credit Major Concentration and 18-credit Minor Concentrations. He said that at the Academic Committee meeting of September 23, 1998, the committee had decided that Science students could take Arts Minor and Major Concentrations. He said the Faculty of Arts has now asked whether Science departments would consider establishing 18-credit Minor Concentrations for Arts students. Associate Dean Mendelson said the four units that offer programs to both Arts and Science students (Geography, Mathematics, Psychology and the School of Computer Science) already have 18-credit Minor Concentrations. The Department of Chemistry has also created a Minor Concentration in Chemistry for Arts students, and he hoped that other departments would consider the issue. He had made no commitment to the Faculty of Arts, except to raise the issue at the Academic Committee. 206.2 After some discussion, Dean Shaver said that it was up to departments to decide whether to implement 18-credit Minor Concentrations for Arts students. (7) COURSES OUTSIDE THE FACULTIES OF ARTS AND SCIENCE AC-98- 30 207.1 Associate Dean Mendelson explained that the reason for bringing the issue to the Academic Committee was a recommendation from the Committee on Student Standing. He said a student case discussed at a CSS meeting involved a 'how to' course and transfer credits. A number of CSS members felt that the Science 'how to' rule (item #8, document AC-98-30) was inappropriate. Associate Dean Mendelson said that the purpose of the rule was to ensure that students do not take courses that are simply training them in another faculty for skills that are relevant to work in that faculty. He said that it was not a question of the value of a course in a particular faculty, but a question of the value of this course for a student who is getting an academic degree in the Faculty of Science. He said that the previous associate dean, when deciding whether a course was appropriate for Science students, asked whether or not there was academic content in the course, and, if there was, deemed that it would be creditable. If there was not academic content, i.e., if it was merely a course related to specific skills necessary for another faculty's department, then it was not creditable for Science students. Associate Dean Mendelson asked for comments from the Academic Committee. 207.2 The Academic Committee did not feel that the 'how to' rule should be changed. 207.3 Prof. Pasztor pointed out that item #1 and #2 in document AC-98-30, should be clarified. (8) OTHER BUSINESS - Student Exchange Programs 208.1 Prof. Pasztor said that as Director of International Education, she was a policy maker for student exchange programs, looking at policies for McGill students going abroad and at policies for students from other universities coming to McGill. She said that an increasing number of requests were coming in from students at other universities, particularly in Europe, who would like to come to McGill for a term or a year. Specifically, they would like to come to take an undergraduate research project for credit. Prof. Pasztor said that she was familiar with the situation only in the Department of Biology. In that department, project courses are very popular with McGill students. Prof. Pasztor said that project supervision took a lot of time and could be quite costly in terms of materials. She said that sometimes McGill students had to be turned away due to lack of placements. Thus, normally, the Biology Department cannot provide research projects for exchange students. However, the situation in other departments could well be quite different, and other departments could well be able to provide undergraduate research projects for exchange students. She said she would appreciate some feedback from other departments, either at the meeting or by e- mail, as to whether they would be able to provide exchange students with research project courses. 208.2 Dean Shaver said that Prof. Pasztor would be invited to talk about this issue, among others, at a future Science chairs meeting. The meeting adjourned at 4:18 p.m. academic\acmn1998octf.doc