S-03-13 FACULTY OF SCIENCE Meeting of Faculty Tuesday, October 7, 2003 Leacock Council Room - L232 ATTENDANCE: As recorded in the Faculty Appendix Book. DOCUMENTS: S-03-1(Revised) S-03-6 to S-03-12 Dean Shaver called the meeting to order at 3:04 p.m. (1) ADOPTION OF AGENDA Prof. Levine moved, seconded by Prof. Ewing, that the Agenda be adopted. The motion carried. 201.1 Dean Shaver introduced Mr. Mehdi El Ouali (Department of Physics), as the new graduate-student representative at Faculty of Science meetings. 201.2 Dean Shaver pointed out that a revised list of SUS representatives had been tabled, and welcomed Ms. Asha Patel, a new student member. (2) CANDIDATES FOR DEGREES a) Bachelor of Science S-03-7 Associate Dean Mendelson moved, seconded by Prof. Ewing, that the above candidates be recommended to the Senate Steering Committee for the Bachelor of Science degree. The motion carried. b) Diploma in Environment S-03- 8 There were no students receiving this Diploma. c) Diploma in Meteorology S-03- 9 There were no students receiving this Diploma. Associate Dean Mendelson further moved, seconded by Prof. Derome, that the Dean be given discretionary power to make such changes in the degree list as would be necessary to prevent injustice. The motion carried. 202.1 Associate Dean Mendelson thanked the advisers in both the Student Affairs Office and in departments for their work in preparing the degree lists. (3) MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 S-03- 6 Mr. Friedlander moved, seconded by Prof. Ewing, that the Minutes be approved. The motion carried. (4) BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES There was no business arising from the Minutes. (5) REPORTS OF COMMITTEES a) Committee on Student Standing S-03- 10 Due to lack of business, there was no report from the Committee on Student Standing. b) Nominating Committee S-03- 11 205.1 Associate Dean Mendelson said that the Nominating Committee had recommended that Prof. David Burns, Department of Chemistry, be one of three Faculty representatives on the Council of Graduate & Postdoctoral Studies. Associate Dean Mendelson moved, seconded by Prof. Th‚rien, that the recommendation of the Nominating Committee be adopted. The motion carried. c) Academic Committee S-03-12 SECTION A: NEW PROGRAMS - Bachelor of Arts and Science (B.A.Sc.) AC-03-2 Prof. Schmidt moved, seconded by Prof. Ewing, that the B.A.Sc. as described in Document AC-03-2 be approved. The motion carried. Associated New Course: BASC 201 Arts & Sci Integrative Topics AC-03- 3 3 credits Associate Dean Mendelson moved, seconded by Ms. Malone, that the course be adopted. The motion carried. Major Concentrations in Science: - Major Concentration in Chemistry AC-03- 4 - Major Concentration in Biology: Organismal Option AC-03- 5 Cell/Molecular Option AC-03- 6 - Major Concentration in Earth, Atmosphere and Ocean Sciences AC-03-8 - Major Concentration in Geography: Physical Geography Option AC-03-9 - Major Concentration in Physics AC-03- 10 Prof. Grant moved, seconded by Mr. Vorstenbosch, that the above programs be adopted. The motion carried. 205.2 Dean Shaver congratulated members, and said that the Faculty of Science now had a new program - a Bachelor of Arts and Science. This program was also in the process of being approved by the Faculty of Arts. SECTION B: MAJOR PROGRAM CHANGES None SECTION C: NEW COURSES 1. MATHEMATICS & STATISTICS Course Changes Associated With New Course: MATH 580[from MATH 586] Applied PDE 1 AC-03- 11 4 credits Changes in number, title & description Prof. Schmidt moved, seconded by Mr. Harron, that the changes be approved. The motion carried. MATH 581 Applied PDE 2 AC-03-12 4 credits Prof. Schmidt moved, seconded by Mr. Harron, that the new course be adopted. The motion carried. 2. NEUROLOGY & NEUROSURGERY NEUR 550 Free Radical Biomedicine AC-03-14 3 credits New Course Approved by SCTP in May 2002 Prof. Levine moved, seconded by Prof. Baines, that the course be adopted. The motion carried. SECTION D: MAJOR COURSE CHANGES None SECTION E: MINOR PROGRAM CHANGES MATHEMATICS & STATISTICS - Honours Program in Applied Mathematics AC-03-16 - M.Sc. Program in Applied Mathematics AC-03- 17 Prof. Schmidt moved, seconded by Mr. Sen, that the program changes be approved. The motion carried. SECTION F: Minor Course Changes & Other (For Information Only) 1. Minor Course Changes AC-03- 1 d) Other Reports or Academic Business There were no other reports or academic business. (6) DEAN'S BUSINESS - Enrolment: Associate Dean Morton J. Mendelson 206.1 Associate Dean Mendelson gave an update on the enrolment figures. He said that at the last Faculty meeting, the figures had suggested that the Faculty would have an enrolment of about 40 students more than the previous year. However, more recent figures indicated that there would actually be about 40 fewer students in the current year. 206.2 Associate Dean Mendelson said that the Faculty of Engineering had an extra 70 students in the current year, and this had put pressure on the Departments of Mathematics & Statistics, and of Physics. He said that it had been expected that there would be a greater increase in enrolment in the Science Freshman Program, but the increase had not actually occurred. Nonetheless, Associate Dean Mendelson thanked the relevant departments for their preparatory efforts. (7) REPORT ON ACTIONS OF SENATE - Senate Meeting of September 17, 2003: Prof. M. Baines 1. RESOLUTION ON THE DEATH OF PROFESSOR DONALD CLOGG The following resolution on the death of Dr. Donald Clogg at the age of 78, was presented by Dean Fuks, and adopted unanimously by Senate. RESOLUTION ON THE DEATH OF PROFESSOR YOGESH PATEL The following resolution on the death of Dr. Yogesh Patel at the age of 61 was presented by Dean Fuks, and adopted unanimously by Senate. RESOLUTION ON THE DEATH OF MR. DAVID BOURKE The following resolution on the death of Mr. David Bourke at the age of about 72 was presented by Ms. Geller, and adopted unanimously by Senate. 2. CHAIR'S REMARKS The chair also congratulated Professor Nicholas Kasirer on his recent appointment as Dean of the Faculty of Law, with a term commencing on November 1, 2003. 3. QUESTION RE THE IMPACT OF DELAY IN CONSTRUCTION OF THE TROTTIER BUILDING. In response, Dr. Vinet noted that the Trottier Building is a teaching facility and only provides space for programs in computer science, software engineering, electrical engineering and computer engineering. The delays have therefore had no effect on research activities. With respect to teaching, once it had been determined that there would be a delay in the completion of the building, alternative plans were developed to accommodate teaching needs. All classes have been rescheduled elsewhere on campus and Dr. Vinet advised Senate that there had been no disruption of classes. Classes will be offered in the Trottier Building beginning on Monday, September 22, 2003. Dr. Vinet added that the operation of laboratories was delayed by few days, but cell and open labs in the Trottier Building opened on September 15. 8. QUESTIONS RE THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW ARTS BUILDING. Vice-Principal Vinet advised Senate that the University is committed to working with the Faculty of Arts to realize a new Arts Building of reasonable size, to be erected preferably on the Peel-Penfield site or at an equally suitable location. Although it is customary for the University not to commence the design phase for new construction until all funding has been assured, the Aministration requested and was granted an exception to this policy for the Arts Building. Up to $450,000 has been committed for the conceptual design that has been prepared for the New Arts Building project. In addition, an architect has already been selected following normal University practices, based on the assumption that the Powell site on Penfield between Peel and McTavish will be the location for the New Arts Building. With respect to the status of the project, Dr. Vinet advised Senate that the University is currently unable to make a commitment to finance the approximately $15 million necessary for Phase 1 of the new Arts Building (which would offer approximately 4400 net square metres). He also noted that he will work closely with the Principal, and the Vice-Principal (Development and Alumni Relations) and the Dean of Arts to develop a plan that reflects the priority that the University places on this construction project and the collective and collaborative efforts that must be undertaken jointly to make it a reality. On the question of timeline, Dr. Vinet noted that the construction of a new Arts Building is an integral part of the campus development plan for the next ten years. Dr. Vinet noted that a very generous pledge of $1 million has already been made by the Eakin family and that other donations, both large and small, are being actively sought for this project. McGill is also applying to the MEQ 2003-2008 capital programme requesting that the Provincial Government fund 50% of the total costs for both phases of the proposed New Arts Building. 9. 353rd REPORT OF THE ACADEMIC POLICY AND PLANNING COMMITTEE Regarding Item IC, Change in Degree Designation, Faculty of Education, Dr. Vinet presented the proposed change in degree designation from the B.Ed. in Kinesiology to B.Sc. (Kinesiology). Professor Baines pointed out a discrepancy in the number of required credits in the General and Applied Kinesiology programs. He noted that on pages six and seven the number of course credits required is 48 whereas in Appendix "F" the number of course credits required is 51. Dean Crago replied that she will look into this matter and provide a response at a later date. Vice-Principal Vinet accepted as a friendly amendment from Professor Mendelson his request that the descriptive text in the APPC report be amended to provide "Bachelor of Science (Kinesiology)" rather than simply "Bachelor of Science". On motion by Dr. Vinet, seconded by Professor Perrault, Senate approved the change in degree designation from B.Ed. in Kinesiology to B.Sc. (Kinesiology). Academic Performance Issues/Policies/Governance, Model Research Progress Report Form for Graduate Students, Dr. Vinet, seconded by Dean Crago, proposed approval of the Model Research Progress Report Form for Graduate Students. Professor Noumoff asked whether the information and the comments on both forms would be seen by both the graduate student and his or her supervisor Dean Crago explained that these reports are based on mutual discussions between the student and the supervisor. Both the student and the supervisor complete the forms before meeting. The final report requires the signature of both the student and the supervisor and also provides an opportunity for the student to indicate "Student did not sign and does not agree with evaluation (explanation attached)." Professor Shore asked about the significance of the use of the terms "Guidelines" and "Regulations". Dean Crago replied that some elements of the proposal were mandatory while others were recommendations. Given that some were mandatory, they are considered to be regulatory in nature. 10. POLICY ON E-MAIL COMMUNICATION WITH STUDENTS Deputy Provost Anthony Masi, presented the Policy on E- mail Communication with Students (D03-17). In essence, the policy states that e-mail is an official mode of communication between the university and its students. The creation of this policy was made possible by the technological ability to guarantee that e-mails sent to students at their uniform e-mail address has in fact been delivered to that account. Therefore, it is now the students responsibility to monitor their official McGill e-mail address and should messages be lost as a result of their being forwarded to other servers such as Hotmail, this is not an excuse for missing deadlines or other academic matters. He added that the scope of the policy was modest and there were a number of caveats in the policy for example dealing with communication of confidential information. 11. ANNUAL REPORTS OF THE COMMITTEE ON TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER The Annual Report of the Committee on Technology Transfer (D03-11) was received. Dr. Proulx, Chair of the Committee on Technology Transfer, withdrew her recommendation to Senate to amend the membership of the committee. She noted that this recommendation will be referred to the Senate Nominating Committee as it falls within their jurisdiction to make recommendations to Senate on such issues. 12. 2003-2004 BUDGET Vice-Principal Yalovsky presented the 2003-2004 Budget (D03-01). He informed Senate that this Budget is in almost every respect the same budget presented in draft form to Senate at its meeting on May 14, 2003. Dr. Yalovsky noted that the University continued to forecast a breakeven budget for the 2003/04 fiscal year. He commented, however, on the high level of uncertainty in anticipating the level of funding from the provincial government. While there had been hope for a reinvestment in education, as indicated by the previous government, there is now some likelihood of budgetary cuts, given the financial situation in which the newly elected Liberal government finds itself. The universities have indicated clearly that this would be unacceptable and counterproductive. NOTES FROM THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE As agreed upon, Senate moved into Committee of the Whole, Dean Gruzleski in chair, for a discussion of the 2003-2004 Budget (D03-01). The notes from the Committee of the Whole are attached to these minutes as Appendix "B". Senate entered Committee of the Whole with Dean Gruzleski in the Chair. Professor Par‚ asked if the administration will supplement faculty budgets in the current academic year to permit faculties to meet the requirements under the new salary policy for part-time instructors. Dr. Yalovsky advised Senate that the Provost and Vice- Principal (Academic) had already advised Deans that they would receive funding in relation to these additional expenses in the current year and that only three faculties were primarily affected by this change. He indicated that a total of $700,000 had been set aside for that purpose in the current year. Professor Par‚ further asked whether this would be a recurring sum or a one-time allocation and, if a one-time allocation, how faculties would meet this additional expense in the future. Specifically, he asked whether faculties would be forced to cut courses. Dr. Yalovsky indicated that it was a one-time allocation only, designed to assist faculties in a transition year to the new salary scales. Thereafter, each faculty could address the budgetary issue in a variety of ways and although reducing course offerings was one option, there were a number of other creative solutions that faculties could consider. Professor Baines asked where matters stood with respect to the deregulation of international undergraduate students and whether the University still expected to generate additional funds from this source. Vice- Principal Yalovsky responded that the University is in ongoing discussions with the provincial government on this issue and that a final resolution has not yet been reached. The amounts included in the budget were based on the assumption that the status quo would continue, but this might need to be revisited. Though I persisted, I still did not understand his answer. Professor Mendelson noted that the budget document indicated that the planning process would be completed by the fall and would lead decisions being taken with respect to the allocation of $6.2 million. He asked when the planning exercise will be completed and when would the allocation of these funds be determined. Vice-Principal Vinet replied that meetings are ongoing with deans and by mid-November there will be an articulation of the budget hypotheses. By February, a tentative budget should be set with final decisions expected by the end of March. He noted that the process was complex, and involved consideration of many components in the planning process. Vice-Principal Yalovsky added that, as he had noted earlier, part of the $6.2 million would be used to meet the additional expenses due to the increase in salary for course lecturers. Vice-Principal Vinet replied that the administration is in the process of developing a communication paper regarding the planning process that would be brought to Senate. Professor Acheson asked what plans the University has to create additional large classrooms, given the scarcity of such rooms both for classes and mid-terms. Those in the Trottier building have capacities of about 150 students which falls far below the size of many courses that often exceed 200-300 students. Vice- Principal Yalovsky answered that the Trottier Building included a large classroom with a capacity of 140 seats. This new construction would help liberate other space elsewhere on campus. Vice-Principal Vinet added that the overall space situation on campus showed a greater dearth of research than classroom space. He suggested that in addressing classroom space issues, the University needs to examine the underlying models and consider, for example, the use of a larger number of smaller sections rather than a single large section. Mr. Peters asked whether CFI funds could be used to address the space issues that the University is facing. Vice-Principal Yalovksy indicated that it is becoming increasingly difficult to use CFI funds to fund construction of additional space. He noted that measures being used by the provincial government to determine whether or not a University had a space deficit or surplus has recently changed. Under the old formula, McGill had a recognized space deficit. Under the new formula, McGill was considered to have a space surplus. 207.1 Associate Dean Mendelson mentioned that McGill's policy on e-mail being an official mode of communication between the University and students, would come into effect on January 1, 2004. 207.2 In response to a member who asked why students could not specify an e-mail address of their own choosing, Prof. Baines said that McGill could verify receipt of e- mails at McGill e-mail addresses, but could not do so for other e-mail addresses. 207.3 In response to a question concerning whether a student's departmental e-mail address was considered an official McGill address, Dean Shaver asked Prof. Baines to inquire about the matter. 207.4 In response to a question concerning the amount of advance notice to be given in e-mail communication by the University to students, Dean Shaver said that he assumed that common sense would prevail. He asked Prof. Baines to look into the matter. - Senate Meeting of October 1, 2003: Prof. J. Derome The Principal informed Senate that the University will take part in the Commission parlementaire on the funding of education/universities. We will be asking for increased funding both for the Qu‚bec university network in general and for McGill in particular. McGill will push for an accelerated correction (redressement) of its underfunding relative to the other Qu‚bec universities. The Principal noted that McGill is also not getting its share of the infra-structure funding and will be seeking to correct that state of affairs. She also mentioned that the Board of Governors is reviewing its own structure and functioning, asking questions like: What is the optimal size and composition of the Board? The university plans to submit a report to the Provincial government on the McGill University Health Centre by December 15. After approving some house-keeping amendments to the Statutes, Senate heard a report by Vice Principal Yalovsky on the 2002-2003 University budget. The accumulated deficit now stands at $13.7M compared to $79.5M twelve years ago - about average for the Qu‚bec universities. Part of the reduction in the accumulated deficit was accomplished by a one-time grant by the Provincial government of $24.6M. The revised deficit for this last year is $1.3M, instead of the $0.3M deficit that had been expected earlier. Senate adjourned after approximately 40 minutes. (8) MEMBERS' QUESTION PERIOD There were no members' questions. (9) OTHER BUSINESS There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 3:53 p.m.