Last issue, I reported on the motion before Senate to approve new promotion requirements for first years that align with upper year requirements (50% pass to 60%), with the added option of having struggling students split their 1A term into two terms (thereby avoiding a potential fail later on in their academic careers). This motion passed, pretty much unanimously, at Senate with some discussion concerning implementation being brought to the table. Dean Sedra and Provost Geoff McBoyle assured Senate that implementation will be carefully considered, and our Dean praised our academic counselling, suggesting that they will continue to identify and assist students at risk. At the EngSoc meeting, we heard from first years that this new idea of splitting 1A into two terms is actually being tested this year with students at risk, it should be interesting to see how this unfolds. To be clear, I do believe that the changes are being made have good intentions, I just want to be absolutely certain that poor implementation and communication doesn’t put students in a worse-off situation.
The last senate meeting was a gruelling 3.5 hours with many topics being discussed. The dominating issue was in relation to how the University should govern the research institutes that it creates. Concerns have been brought to the table that the governance structure of these research institutes, which are typically research-industry partnerships, were not conducive to enabling an environment of academic freedom (the ability to research and conclude whatever the researcher establishes without fearing repercussions or swaying the research/conclusion in favour of a special interest group (i.e. a donor)). There was a very long debate about who (and how) within the University should setup guidelines and structure to ensure academic freedom. After much deliberation, there was a tied vote to table the discussion and more points raised by the Faculty Association and the University administration (both parties agreed something needed to be done, but they disagreed on who, how and when). Senate voted in favour of the Faculty Association’s proposal to send the discussion to the Faculty Relations Committee where further discussion can be had directly with UW Administration. I found it puzzling at times why there was so much resistance to certain ideas; however, not being a specialist in collegial governance I did my best to represent the Engineering Undergraduates by siding with the option that provided the most discussion in the most collaborative manner. I hope to report back in future months the positive outcome of the Faculty Relations Committee’s discussions.
Lastly, I’d like to pass on a note received from Katie Eley (Interim Coordinator, Student Resource Office). There is lots of information available about the new student transition program that we talked ever so much about at the beginning of the term. This information can be found on the Student Success Office’s website here: http://success.uwaterloo.ca/newstudent.html. Check it out!
Good luck on finals and stay safe on co-op for those of you that are leaving! If you have any questions, email me at senate@engmail.uwaterloo.ca.
Leave a Reply