AGENDA for the University of the Fraser Valley SENATE ... · PDF fileUniversity of the Fraser...

AGENDA

for the

University of the Fraser Valley

SENATE AWARDS & HONOURS COMMITTEE

February 24, 2016 - 2:30 pm

Abbotsford Campus, Room B133 Page

. 1. CALL TO ORDER . 2. ADOPTION OF CONSENT ITEMS . 2 - 4 2.1. Consent Items:

Agenda, 2016 02 24

Minutes, 2015 11 25

. 3. CONTINUING BUSINESS . 5 - 24 3.1. TEA Selection Committee's Response re SAHC's Inquiry re Eligibility of

Unsuccessful Candidates For Two Years

Background Information

Final Draft of Procedures Document . 25 - 26 3.2. Update on SAHC's request from Financial Aid - Calculations for Governor

General Awards - Kyle Baillie . 27 3.3. Governor General Annual Selection of Candidates for Medals

Action Items from SAHC Annual Timeline Tasks . 4. REPORTS . 4.1. Legislative Authority for Non-UFV, Donor-Funded Awards - Kyle Baillie . 28 - 29 4.2. Student Awards Operations Committee - draft terms of reference - Kyle

Baillie . 5. INFORMATION ITEMS . 30 - 32 5.1. Senate Approval of SAHC Chair extended term and revision to

membership composition details

. 6. ADJOURNMENT and NEXT MEETING . 6.1. The next meeting is on March 23, 2016.

Page 1 of 32

Minutesfor the

University of the Fraser ValleySENATE AWARDS AND HONOURS COMMITTEE

November 25, 2015 - 2:30 pm Abbotsford Campus, Room B133

PRESENT: Hannah Black, Nicole Dixon; Kulwant Gill, Lucy Lee, Curtis Magnuson, Christina Neigel, Paula Stubbings, Alisa Webb (Chair)

REGRETS: Kyle Baillie, Al Wiseman

1. CALL TO ORDER

1.1. The meeting was called to order at 2:34 pm, with Alisa Webb in the chair.

2. ADOPTION OF CONSENT ITEMS

2.1. Consent Items: Agenda, 2015 11 25 Minutes, 2015 09 30

MOTION:THAT the agenda for the November 25, 2015 meeting of the Senate Awards and Honours be approved, with agenda items 3.3, 4.1, 4.2, and 5.2 tabled to the next meeting.C. Magnuson/C. NeigelCARRIED

MOTION:THAT the minutes for the September 30, 2015 meeting be approved with one correction, to information item 4.1.which states that the chair of SAHC will hold an extended term ending July 31, 2018. The extended term of the chair will end July 31, 2017.P. Stubbings/L. LeeCARRIED

3. DECISION ITEMS

3.1. Teaching and Research Excellence Award Procedures First Set of Revisions to Procedures for SAHC approval (from 2014-15

academic year) Memo from Chair of TEA selection committee re revisions

The committee reviewed the procedures and made the following recommendations:

AGENDA ITEM # 2.1.

Consent Items: Agenda, 2016 02 24 Minutes, 2015 11 25 Page 2 of 32

Senate Awards and Honours CommitteeNovember 25, 2015

Eligibility Criteria that the TEA selection committee be consulted regarding the eligibility for

unsuccessful candidates from the past year be automatically considered as candidates: is this a considered timeline approved by the selection committee or did the TEA selection committee wish to mirror the REA selection committee eligibility for unsuccessful candidates from the past two years be considered;

Criteria for Selection of Award Recipient - Indigenized Curriculum SAHC questioned the wording in the TEA procedures: Criteria for Selection

of Award Recipient section, criterion 2. e., “provides evidence of an indigenized curriculum". The committee noted that the curriculum in some courses, such as those in Physics or Trades, cannot be indigenized in content. The committee recommended that the indigenization of programs may be preferable wording;

the committee also noted that faculty have not received assistance and guidelines for indigenizing curriculum;

the committee requested a record of the discussion, noting that this may be revisited in the future, pending further information / guidelines from the Indigenous Curriculum Committee.

Criteria for Selection of Award Recipient - Student Evaluations that the TEA selection committee be consulted regarding criteria in 1. a)

Teaching Practice: Student Evaluations: "comments suggest the professor cares". SAHC noted that this is not a measurable criterion and can't be evaluated;

the committee suggested that the above criterion be reworded in conjunction with the criterion, "comments denote a high level of teaching competence", perhaps combining them with some alternate wording to demonstrate a measurable quality which denotes that the instructor is committed to student success and made efforts to adapt her/his teaching style to effectively communicate with the learning styles of students.

MOTION:THAT the Senate Awards and Honours Committee approve the Research Excellence Award Procedures as presented.THAT the Senate Awards and Honours Committee approve the Teaching Excellence Award Procedures, as presented, with the exception of the criterion: "comments suggest the professor cares." for which SAHC recommends further consultation with the TEA selection committee to include a measurable option. L. Lee/N. DixonCARRIED

ACTION: The chair will forward SAHC’s recommendations to the TEA selection committee.

3.2. 3.2. Response and Further Revisions proposed by TEA Selection Committee Memo from Chair of TEA selection committee Revisions - in track changes

The committee reviewed the response and further recommendations by the TEA

AGENDA ITEM # 2.1.


Senate Awards and Honours CommitteeNovember 25, 2015

selection committee and made the following recommendations: SAHC concurred with the TEA selection committee recommendation that

SAHC need not receive the individual adjudication sheets but it did recommend that the chair of the TEA selection committee collect and retain the individual adjudication sheets for a period of one year, in compliance with record retention practices at UFV.

SAHC made the recommendation that the chair of the REA selection committee retain the individual adjudication sheets for one year.

MOTION:THAT the Senate Awards and Honours Committee recommend to the TEA and REA selection committees that the chairs of the selection committees retain individual adjudication sheets for a period of one year.N. Dixon/C. MagnusonCARRIED

ACTION: The chair will forward SAHC recommendations to the TEA and REA selection committees.

3.3. UFV Athletic Awards - Kyle Baillie - deferred to next meeting

4. REPORTS

4.1. Legislative Authority for Non-UFV, Donor-Funded Awards - Kyle Baillie - deferred to next meeting

4.2. Update on SAHC's request from Financial Aid - Calculations for Governor General Awards - Kyle Baillie - deferred to next meeting

5. INFORMATION ITEMS

5.1. Approval from Research Excellence Award Selection Committee - for SAHC Changes

5.2. Student Awards Operations Committee - draft terms of reference - deferred to next meeting

6. ADJOURNMENT and NEXT MEETING

6.1. The December meeting of SAHC is cancelled. The next meeting is on January 27, 2016.

AGENDA ITEM # 2.1.


TEA PROCEDURES – PROPOSED REVISIONS BY SAHC

From: Maureen Wideman Sent: February-15-16 12:15 PMTo: Monique CastonguayCc: Alisa WebbSubject: RE: TEA and REA procedures - background information

The rationale is simple: people put a lot of work into pulling together the nominations. We’d like to see the nominations stand for one additional year to provide opportunities for those nominated to have a second chance at being recognized for their teaching and learning skills. Two years is not necessary and it would greatly increase the work of the committee and be extremely repetitive.

Maureen Wideman, PhDDirector of Teaching and LearningUniversity of the Fraser [email protected]

To Monique CastonguayFrom Maureen Wideman

Yes, Monique, one year is preferable. The committee has made a decision on the winner and I will be forwarding the documentation for that to you later today.

Thanks,

Maureen Wideman, PhD

From: Monique Castonguay Sent: February-11-16 10:45 AMTo: Maureen WidemanSubject: TEA and REA procedures - background information

Hi Maureen

Thank you for giving SAHC the go-ahead for the final version of the TEA procedures. There is still one outstanding item before the procedures are brought to Senate for approval. You were going to check with the selection committee about the two-year consideration for unsuccessful candidates. You indicated that one year might be preferable.

AGENDA ITEM # 3.1.

TEA Selection Committee's Response re SAHC's Inquiry re Elig... Page 5 of 32

mailto:[email protected]

Has the selection committee made a decision on this item?

Monique

From Maureen WidemanTo SAHC

Hi Monique and Alisa,

I think these are great suggestions, and I know I would prefer that we not go back two years for teaching awards, but we could agree to one year. I will send an email out to the committee to get some kind of vote on these changes.

Thanks for this,

Maureen Wideman, PhDDirector of Teaching and Learning

From: Monique Castonguay Sent: November-30-15 9:53 AMTo: Maureen WidemanSubject: Teaching Excellence Award Procedures

Good morning Maureen

The Senate Awards and Honours Committee has reviewed the Teaching Excellence Award selection committee’s further proposed revisions to the Teaching Excellence Award procedures. SAHC recommends the following:

That it concurs with the selection committee request that individual adjudication sheets need not be submitted to the Senate Awards and Honours Committee; (Reference: Timelines: March 15-30, in number 2 - attached);

That the individual adjudication sheets by all members of the selection committee be retained by the chair of the selection committee for a minimum period of one year, in keeping with UFV record retention practices; (Reference Timelines: March 15-30, new number 5 - attached);

That the criterion, “comments suggest the professor cares…” in the Teaching Practice: Student Evaluations section, be reworded to state a measurable criterion which could be evaluated by students. SAHC suggested the criterion might be revised in conjunction with the criterion, “comments denote a high level of teaching competence” for a measurable competence, e.g. comments which suggest the instructor is committed to student success and made efforts to adapt her/his teaching style to effectively communicate with the learning styles of students. (Reference, Criteria for Selection of Award Recipient, Teaching Practice, criterion in Student Evaluations).

The Senate Awards and Honours Committee is pleased to recommend to Senate the approval of the revisions to the procedures for the Teaching Excellence Award selection committee, with the exception

AGENDA ITEM # 3.1.


of the criteria, “comments suggest the professor cares…” and, “comments denote a high level of teaching competence” , pending consultation with the selection committee to provide alternate wording. The procedures document will then go to Senate for final approval.

SAHC also requests confirmation from the selection committee as to whether it recommends that unsuccessful candidates be considered for one additional year or if it was intending to consider unsuccessful candidates for an additional two years, in keeping with the REA selection committee procedures? (Reference, Eligibility: criterion 5, and Nomination Mechanism: criterion 11).

The next meeting of the Senate Awards and Honours is on January 27, 2015. A response to the committee on its proposed recommendations would be much appreciated, by the agenda deadline of January 18, 2015. If you need further clarification or wish to discuss further, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Best regards,

Alisa WebbChairSenate Awards and Honours Committee

AGENDA ITEM # 3.1.


REA PROCEDURES – PROPOSED REVISIONS BY SAHC

Hello Scott

There is one further revision proposed by the Senate Awards and Honours Committee. SAHC will not require that individual adjudication sheets completed by the members of the selection committee be forwarded to the standing committee. Instead, it recommends that the individual adjudication sheets be retained by the chair of the REA selection committee for a minimum period of one year, in keeping with UFV record retention guidelines. I have attached the draft procedures with the recommended change.

If the selection committee is in agreement with the revision, the procedures will move forward to Senate for approval. The next SAHC meeting is on January 27, with a deadline for agenda items on January 18.

Thanks very much

Alisa Webb, ChairSenate Awards and Honours Committee

AGENDA ITEM # 3.1.


September 2015 – revisions include REA & TEA proposed changes and SAHC proposed changes

Teaching Excellence Procedures Research Excellence Award Procedures

Purpose In accordance with the Board policy, Academic Excellence Award (BRP-240.10), this award will recognize and celebrate excellence in teaching at UFV.

In accordance with the Board policy, Academic Excellence Award (BRP-240.10), this award will recognize and celebrate excellence in research at UFV.

Number of Awards

One annual award, however, it is possible to not hand out an award one year if no suitable candidate is found.

One annual award, however, it is possible to not hand out an award one year if no suitable candidate is found.

Eligibility 1. B Type faculty, including lab instructors, after probation period;

2. Sessional faculty after equivalent of two years of teaching (accumulation of 14 sections);

3. Winners cannot be nominated for five years following receipt of the award;

4. Those nominated previous years may reapply if not selected, as outlined in the nomination process guidelines.

5. Unsuccessful applicants from the past year will automatically be considered as candidates for the teaching excellence award. Nominators will be invited to:

Let the nomination stand as submitted;or

Let the nomination stand and provide a brief update;or

Withdraw the nomination upon the nominee’s request.

If the nominator is not available, the nominee will be contacted to determine if

1. B Type faculty, including lab instructors, after probation period;

2. Sessional faculty with equivalent of two years of teaching (accumulation of 14 sections);

3. Winners cannot be nominated for five years following receipt of the award;

4. Those nominated previous years may reapply if not selected, as outlined in the nomination process guidelines.

5. Unsuccessful applicants from the past two years will automatically be considered as candidates for the research excellence award. Nominators will be invited to:

Let the nomination stand as submitted;or

Let the nomination stand and provide a brief update;or


AG

END

A ITEM # 3.1.

TEA S

election Com

mittee's R

esponse re SA

HC

's Inquiry re Elig...

Page 9 of 32


s/he would like to have the nomination stand for another year.

Timelines September/October:Call for selection committee members is made.November 1:1. Teaching Excellence Award selection committee

is formed and meets to review process and guidelines, establish a rating system for criteria, and set the meeting schedule.

2. Call for nominations for the academic year’s award recipient is initiated by the office of the Director of Teaching and Learning, as chair of the selection committee: deadline for nominations is the second Friday in January.

3. As nominations are received, the selection committee prescreens applications to ensure all parts have been received, and notifies the nominator of any omissions.

January 15 – 30:1. Committee shortlists nominees based on

completed information packages received by deadline.

February 1:1. The Chair will, on behalf of the committee,

solicit further information as needed for each applicant.

March 1 – 15:1. Information is compiled.The Chair will contact the Registrar to initiate

random sample of students if required. Letters are sent to random sample of former students

September/October:Call for selection committee members is made. November 1:1. Research Excellence Award selection committee

is formed and meets to review process and guidelines, establish a rating system for criteria, and set the meeting schedule.

2. Call for nominations for the academic year’s award recipient is made by the selection committee: deadline for nominations is the second Friday in January.

3. As nominations are received, the selection committee prescreens applications to ensure all parts have been received and notifies the nominator of any omissions.

January 15 – 30:1. Committee shortlists nominees based on

completed information packages received by deadline.

February 1:1. The Chair will, on behalf of the committee, solicit

further information as needed for each applicant.

March 1 – 15:1. Information is compiled.March 15 – 30:1. Committee makes final selection, rating each

nominee on each criterion.2. Selection committee chair or designate meets

AG

END

A ITEM # 3.1.

TEA S

election Com

mittee's R

esponse re SA

HC


Page 10 of 32


of short listed nominees.2. Completed survey must be received by the

committee by the end of February.March 1 – 15:1. Random survey information is compiled.March 15 – 30:1. Committee makes final selection,

rating each nominee on each criterion.2. Selection committee chair or

designate meets with SAHC to present its recommendation for an award recipient, providing written documentation to summarize the process, as follows: Number of applications

received/eligible; Names and titles of the unsuccessful

candidates; Parameters and details of the

adjudication process in reaching decisions; this will include the individual adjudication sheets completed by all members as well as the final adjudication sheet completed by the committee, showing the scoring used in the selection of the award recipient to demonstrate how the winning candidate met the criteria; in reaching its decision;

How the winning candidate met the criteria and how the committee arrived at a final decision;

The letter of nomination, all letters of recommendations, the letters of support, and the curriculum vitae of the successful candidate;

with SAHC to present its recommendation for an award recipient, providing written documentation to summarize the process as follows:

Number of applications received/eligible;

Names and titles of the unsuccessful candidates;

Parameters and details of the adjudication process in reaching decisions; this will include the individual adjudication sheets completed by all members as well as the final adjudication sheet completed by the committee, showing the scoring used in the selection of the award recipient to demonstrate how the winning candidate met the criteria; in reaching its decision;

3. How the winning candidate met the criteria and how the committee arrived at a final decision;

The letter of nomination, all letters of recommendation, the letters of support, and the curriculum vitae of the successful candidate;

The names and titles of the members of the REA selection committee..

4. SAHC reviews the documentation e process to ensure procedural requirements have been met, in order to inform its and makes a recommendation to Senate in April.

5. The Chair of the selection committee will

AG

END

A ITEM # 3.1.

TEA S

election Com

mittee's R

esponse re SA

HC


Page 11 of 32


The names and titles of the members of the TEA selection committee..

3. SAHC reviews thee documentation process to ensure procedural requirements have been met in order to inform its and makes a recommendation to Senate in April.

4. The Chair of the selection committee will collect individual adjudication sheets from all members of the committee and retain them for a minimum period of one year.

collect individual adjudication sheets from all members of the committee and retain them for a minimum period of one year.

Call for Nomination Process

1. The availability and details of the award and a call for nominations will be initiated by the selection committee, in conjunction with the University Relations office, and other appropriate means.

2. Nomination information will be available through the deans’ offices, Faculty Services, the Teaching and Learning Advisory Committee office and website.

3. Instructors may be nominated for a teaching excellence award by ‘B’ faculty, students, alumni, and staff, but may not be nominated by (or letters of support provided by) any member of the Teaching Excellence Award selection committee.

4. It is the role of the nominator to complete the nomination form and gather the required supporting documents.

5. No one may solicit a nomination on his or her own behalf.

1. The availability and details of the award and a call for nominations will be initiated by the selection committee, in conjunction with the University Relations office, and other appropriate means.

2. Nomination information will be available through the deans’ offices, Faculty Services, the Research and Graduate Studies office and website.

3. Researchers may be nominated for a research excellence award by 'B' faculty, sessional faculty, or university administrators, but may not be nominated by (or letters of support provided by) any member of the Research Excellence Award selection committee.

4. It is the role of the nominator to complete the nomination form and gather the required supporting documents.

5. No one may solicit a nomination on his or her own behalf.

Nomination Mechanism

Each The nomination package, which must consist of one hard copy and one electronic

The nomination package, which must consist of one hard copy and one electronic copy, is

AG

END

A ITEM # 3.1.

TEA S

election Com

mittee's R

esponse re SA

HC


Page 12 of 32


copy, is submitted confidentially to the Teaching and Learning Advisory Committee office and consists of the following: 1. 1. A 1. A Letter from the nominator

outlining why the nominee is worthy of the Teaching Excellence award (200 - 300 words);

2. The nominee’s teaching philosophy (no more than two pages

3. The nominee’s two best class sets of UFV teaching evaluations, to be supplied by the nominee to the nominator, from two separate years, going back no further than six years. All written comments must be included.

4. A signed release form, permittingcommittee members to examine additional UFV teaching evaluations if necessary, to be supplied by the nominee upon request;2. The nominee’s two best class sets of UFV teaching evaluations to be supplied by the nominee to the nominator, from two separate years, going back no further than six years. Written comments must be included;

5. A copy of the current curriculum vitae of the nominee;6. A consent form signed by the nominee, agreeing to be nominated;7. Letters of support from faculty, staff, and students, based on knowledge of the nominee’s work that reflects the criteria of the teaching excellence. Maximum 5 letters.8. Examples of work reflecting some of the

submitted confidentially to the Research and Graduate Studies office and consists of the following: 1. Letter of Nomination (1,000 words maximum):

a. The nominator is responsible for describing the nominee's work in relation to his or her particular discipline in language which the multidisciplinary committee adjudicating this award can comprehend;

b. This letter should lay out the broader research/creative program of the nominee over the previous 5 years;

c. It should also highlight any outstanding creative or research achievement[s] in that same time period;

d. Nominators should consider the following criteria in their description of the research/creative enterprise: Originality/addition to knowledge Disciplinary context and

influence/reception of work among peers within the discipline concerned (reviews, stature of journals in which work was published, etc.)

Impact/significance of the work for UFV/stakeholder groups/community at large

Role for, and/or training of, students in relation to work or while conducting work

Incorporation of creative/research achievement/knowledge into classroom and teaching

AG

END

A ITEM # 3.1.

TEA S

election Com

mittee's R

esponse re SA

HC


Page 13 of 32


criteria, as outlined in the Selection of the Award Recipient section;9. Specific evidence of professional and scholarly activity;10. Official course outlines and nominee’s syllabi. Maximum of 2. 11. Submissions will be automatically considered for two consecutive years. If applicable, the committee will contact the previous year’s nominees and nominators to ensure that all information is current and to seek consent from the nominee and the nominator to let submissions stand.

Nominators will be invited to: Let the nomination stand as submitted;

Or Let the nomination stand and provide a

brief update;Or


If the nominator is not available, the nominee will be contacted to determine if s/he would like to have the nomination stand for another year.

6. Letters of support from faculty, staff, and past and current students, based on knowledge of the nominee’s work which reflects the criteria of teaching excellence - Maximum of 5 letters;

It is the responsibility of the originator of the nomination to collect all the documentation from

Clarification of the researcher’s role in any joint/multi-disciplinary projects

2. Letters of support (500 words maximum);The nominator will be responsible for soliciting

letters of support from outside the UFV community. The nominee may suggest a list of colleagues from whom it would be suitable to solicit letters of support: Two letters should come from recognized

scholars specializing in a similar field of research/creative endeavour who can speak to the quality and significance of the nominee's work in the field;

Up to two additional letters may also come from non-academic sources who have a connection to, and comprehension of, the research/creative activity being nominated (i.e. government agencies, industry, community partners), or a former/current student who has experienced the nominees’ incorporation of research into the classroom.

3. CV from the Nominee: The nominator shouldwill request a CV from the nominee, highlighting his or her research/creative productivity over the previous 5 years, and not exceeding five pages;

4. Consent Form: The nominator must include a consent form signed by the nominee, indicating his or her willingness to stand for the award.

Unsuccessful applicants will automatically be considered as candidates for the research

AG

END

A ITEM # 3.1.

TEA S

election Com

mittee's R

esponse re SA

HC


Page 14 of 32


the nominee and deliver it to the office of the Director of Teaching and Learning by the deadline.

excellence award for the next two years.Nominators will be invited to:

Let the nomination stand as submitted;Or

Let the nomination stand and provide a brief update;Or


Selection Process 1. The committee will shortlist nominees by assessing the information packages and producing a score for each of the four criteria outlined in the Criteria for Selection of Award Recipient section, along with a brief justification for the scores. In order to better assess the scholarship aspect of the criteria, the committee may seek input from members of the nominees’ department (head or other members of the department).

Optional Survey of Past Students:1. The committee may, with the assistance of the

registrar, survey a random sample of former students of the short-listed nominees, mailing questionnaires to five students per class for up to five previous years. Randomization will be based on the students enrolled on the stable enrolment date. Former students will respond anonymously.

1. The committee will independently assess each nominee's package of materials and produce a score in each of the four criteria outlined in the Criteria for Selection of Award Recipient section, along with a brief written justification for the score. Each criterion is to be scored out of 5.

2. The average aggregate score from all committee members will be generated by the chair/facilitator: a. An average aggregate score of 10 must

be obtained and a minimum score of 1 in at least 3 or 4 categories for the research/creative activity to be considered sufficient excellence to receive the award;

b. Should two or more nominees qualify, the nominee with the highest score should receive the award unless the difference is less than a single point; Under these conditions, the

committee must meet and re-evaluate the qualifying nominees,

AG

END

A ITEM # 3.1.

TEA S

election Com

mittee's R

esponse re SA

HC


Page 15 of 32


and reach a final decision by a simple majority;

c. Should a nominee’s average aggregate score fall short of the benchmark for consideration by 0.5 points or less, the committee should re-evaluate as above.

Reporting and Review

First of April:1. The Teaching Excellence Award selection

committee brings the recommendation forward to the Senate Awards and Honours Committee (SAHC), which will confirm that all procedures were followed. SAHC will bring a recommendation to Senate for approval. Any recommendations by the selection committee for changes to the process are forwarded to SAHC.

2. Once the award recipient is approved by Senate, the President informs the Board and the VP, Academic who, in turn, informs the award recipient. The recipient is publicly announced, with the award to be presented at an appropriate university event. Until such time, the decision will remain confidential.

3. The Teaching and Learning Advisory Committee notifies the University Relations office to begin the interview process with the winning candidate for publicity materials.

4. The winner’s nomination package is returned to the nominee once University Relations has had the opportunity to review the package for publicity purposes.

5. Other nomination packages are returned to

First of April:1. The Research Excellence Award

selection committee brings the recommendation forward to the Senate Awards and Honours Committee (SAHC), which will confirm that all procedures were followed. SAHC will bring a recommendation to Senate for approval. Any recommendations by the selection committee for changes to the process are forwarded to SAHC.

2. Once the award recipient is approved by Senate, the President informs the Board, and the AVP, Research who, in turn, informs the award recipient. The recipient is publicly announced, with the award to be presented at an appropriate university event designated for award recipients. Until such time, the decision will remain confidential.

3. The Senate Research Committee office notifies the University Relations office to begin the interview process with the winning candidate for publicity materials.

4. The winner’s nomination package is returned to the nominee once University Relations has had the opportunity to review the package

AG

END

A ITEM # 3.1.

TEA S

election Com

mittee's R

esponse re SA

HC


Page 16 of 32


nominees once the award recipient is publicly announced.

for publicity purposes. 5. Other nomination packages are returned to

nominees once the award recipient is publicly announced.

Confidentiality Statement

Members of the committee and nominators will treat as confidential all nominee information as well as all deliberations concerning the rating of the contents of the nomination packages.

Members of the committee and nominators will treat as confidential all nominee information as well as all deliberations concerning the rating of the contents of the nomination packages.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The chair of the Teaching Excellence Award selection committee will review the Conflict of Interest policy with committee members to address any conflicts. In addition, committee members will be advised to take into account in their deliberations the possible bias created by the greater familiarity with some candidates or fields of teaching. Both the Conflict of Interest policy and the Institutional Ethics statement will be provided electronically to committee members for review.

The chair of the Research Excellence Award selection committee will review the Conflict of Interest policy with committee members to address any conflicts. In addition, committee members will be advised to take into account in their deliberations the possible bias created by the greater familiarity with some candidates or fields of research. Collaborators with the candidate are excluded from the committee. Both the Conflict of Interest policy and the Institutional Ethics statement will be provided electronically to committee members for review.

Criteria for Selection of Award Recipient

Candidates will be short listed based on their scores, using the following evaluation criteria:1. Teaching Practice2. Curriculum Development3. Scholarship4. ServiceThese four criteria are baseline expectations which the award recipient must meet.A summary score will be calculated for each candidate by summing the scores obtained for each of the four criteria as determined from the attributes of the main criteria and the grid for evaluating candidates using the following scoring:

Emphasis will be placed on work accomplished as a member of the UFV community, but achievements within the past five years that were achieved elsewhere will be considered. Nominees’ research/creative endeavours will be assessed based on the following four criteria, relative to the discipline:

1. Originality / Innovation 2. Academic Impact 3. UFV / Community Impact / Influence 4. Mentorship / Interface of Research and

Teaching 1. The following are descriptive attributes of the

AG

END

A ITEM # 3.1.

TEA S

election Com

mittee's R

esponse re SA

HC


Page 17 of 32


Level Description4 The candidate has demonstrated all to

almost all of the criteria listed with a high degree of exceptionality;

3 The candidate has demonstrated most of the criteria listed with a good degree of exceptionality;

2 The candidate has demonstrated some of the criteria listed with some degree of exceptionality;

1 The candidate has demonstrated very few of the criteria listed with no degree of exceptionality;

0 0 No evidence provided.

1. Teaching Practice

a. Student Evaluationso Provides complete student evaluations

(no edits to remove negative comments) from two courses within the last three years *;.

o Comments denote a high level of teaching competence;

o Suggestions for improvements can be easily addressed;

o Comments suggest the professor cares and makes extraordinary efforts to achieve deep learning and understanding;*Note: exceptions may have to be made

main criteria:1. Originality/Innovation

o Uniqueness or transformative nature of work

o Patents or monetary gains produced from work

o Awards, notoriety from worko Initiation of new programs

2. Academic Impact/Influence Within the Discipline o Reception of work among peers within

researcher’s discipline (reviews, awards, etc.)

o Profile of outputs (journal rankings etc.) o Record in securing funding from

external sources o Numbers of citations from work o Membership in discipline-specific

groups o Reviews of discipline-specific works

3. UFV/Community Impact/Influence/Scope of Research / Creative Activity o Impact of work for UFV community,

institutional profile, etc. o Public demonstrations, showings,

lectures, presentations of work o Utility/use of research / creative outputs

to community groups o Securing internal funding from UFV o Membership in community / national /

international groups o Press statements regarding work

Comment [MC1]: SAHC recommends that TEA selection cttee use alternate, measurable criteria – and maybe amalgamate with the criteria “comments denote a high level of teaching competence.

AG

END

A ITEM # 3.1.

TEA S

election Com

mittee's R

esponse re SA

HC


Page 18 of 32


depending on the faculty or program, (i.e. Faculty of Access and Continuing Education; ATS; Nursing program).

b. Learning Outcomes

o Aligns assessments and learning activities to learning outcomes, i.e. assessment of higher order thinking, analytical ability, projects, tests, ,learning activities, etc.;

o Provides evidence of grounding practice in learning theories;

c. Student Engagement

o Provides examples of student engagement in learning (such as active learning strategies, field experiences, service learning, learning communities, high impact practices, and/or undergraduate research);

o Demonstrates student support inside and/or outside of UFV; i.e. liaison/advocacy, or partnering with other departments such as student services, writing centre, career centre, etc.;As an example, a ten-minute video may be used to demonstrate effectiveness

o Creates an inclusive learning

4. Mentorship/Interface of Research and Teaching o Training students in research o Role for students in conduct of faculty

research o Incorporation of research into the

learning environment and pedagogy o Evidence of student research

accomplishments and testimonials

AG

END

A ITEM # 3.1.

TEA S

election Com

mittee's R

esponse re SA

HC


Page 19 of 32


environment that acknowledges andrespects diverse student backgrounds, experience, and values.

d. Teaching Innovationo Utilizes innovative pedagogical

approaches and/or incorporation of educational technological resources and supports to enhance the learning experience.

2. Curriculum Development

Program / Course designa. Determines need and

takes lead in development of new programs;b. Conducts original

course development, redevelopment or rejuvenation of a course

c. Seeks student input into revision of courses/curriculum;

d. Actively participates on curriculum and program planning committees;

e. Provides evidence of an indigenized curriculum;

f. Creates an inclusive learning environment that acknowledges and respects diverse student backgrounds, experience, and values.

3. Scholarship

Scholarship as it relates to improved teaching

AG

END

A ITEM # 3.1.

TEA S

election Com

mittee's R

esponse re SA

HC


Page 20 of 32


and learning:a. Involved in educational research and its

dissemination;b. Describes how research informs nominee’s

teaching and/or how nominee’s teaching is informed by his/her research;

c. Provides evidence of continued effort to improve teaching through published papers, abstracts, presentations on teaching within and outside UFV;

d. Produces books, course notes, and articles published at other institutions.

4. Service

Service as it relates to improved teaching and learning

a. Develops and conducts teaching workshops or seminars;

b. Mentors and consults with other faculty members to assist in the development of teaching practice;

c. Participates in educational planning and policy making;

d. Conducts presentations at teaching conferences, and other events; A

GEN

DA ITEM

# 3.1.

TEA S

election Com

mittee's R

esponse re SA

HC


Page 21 of 32


Award Recognition

The award recipient will receive the award during an appropriate university event designated for award recipients. The award will include:

1. a plaque with the award recipient’s name and the year of the award;

2. a framed certificate;3. a professional development award grant in

the amount of $2,500 in a specially-created account administered by the university; these funds are accessible for a maximum of two years.

The award recipient will receive the award during an appropriate university event designated for award recipients. The award will include:

1. a plaque with the award recipient’s name and the year of the award;

2. a framed certificate;3. a research grant in the amount of $2,500 in

a specially-created account administered by the university; these funds are accessible for a maximum of two years.

AG

END

A ITEM # 3.1.

TEA S

election Com

mittee's R

esponse re SA

HC


Page 22 of 32


Appendices:

Selection Committee Terms of Reference

Terms of ReferenceThe UFV Teaching Excellence Award selection committee (TEASC), with the authority as delegated by the Senate, will take responsibility for selection of the recipient for the Teaching Excellence Award and report to the Senate Awards and Honours Committee (SAHC).

SAHC will ensure the process and criteria are met, a selection committee is set up to select a recipient, and relate any recommended changes to Senate. Members of TEASC cannot nominate or provide letters of support for an instructor who is nominated for this award.

Duties1. To ensure the UFV community is informed of the

availability of this award, the selection criteria employed, and application procedures;

2. To receive applications and nominations for the award and to select successful candidates according to criteria established, and to recommend one candidate to the Senate Awards and Honours Committee who then makes the final recommendation to Senate. All deliberations will be confidential;

3. To recommend to the Senate Awards and Honours Committee appropriate administrative policies, regulations, and procedures with regard to the award.Composition of the CommitteeIn September, the Teaching and Learning Advisory Committee will call for nominations

Terms of ReferenceThe UFV Research Excellence Award selection committee (REASC), with the authority as delegated by the Senate, will take responsibility for selection of the recipient for the Research Excellence Award and report to the Senate Awards and Honours Committee (SAHC). SAHC will ensure the process and criteria are met, a selection committee is set up to for selection of a recipient, and relate any recommended changes to Senate. Members of REASC cannot nominate or provide letters of support for an instructor who is nominated for this award.

Duties1. To ensure the UFV community is informed of the

availability of this award, the selection criteria employed, and application procedures;

2. To receive applications and nominations for the award and to select successful candidates according to criteria established, and may recommend one candidate to the Senate Awards and Honours Committee who then makes the recommendation to Senate. All deliberations will be confidential;

3. To recommend to the Senate Awards and Honours Committee appropriate administrative policies, regulations, and procedures with regard to the award.

Composition of the CommitteeIn September, the Senate Research and Graduate Studies office will call for nominations for members of the Research Excellence Award selection

AG

END

A ITEM # 3.1.

TEA S

election Com

mittee's R

esponse re SA

HC


Page 23 of 32


for members of the Teaching Excellence Award selection committee.

Membership will include:1. One faculty member from each faculty: a

regular type B faculty or lab instructor during, or any time after, their third year of consecutive service to UFV, or sessional instructor who has taught the cumulative equivalent of two full years of instruction at UFV;

2. One employee (staff or non-instructional faculty) not represented by the above;

3. One member of the Alumni executive;4. One student.

The Director of Teaching and Learning will chair the committee.

Terms of OfficeThe Director of Teaching and Learning is an ex officio member of the annual committee. Other committee members will serve for two years, with half the committee appointed on alternate years to ensure continuity.

committee.

Membership will include:1. Four faculty members from the Senate Research Committee.2. One staff3. One student4. VP, Research or designate chairperson

The committee shall elect a chair from among its members.

Terms of OfficeCommittee members will serve for one year, with selection in November, and are limited to two consecutive terms.

AG

END

A ITEM # 3.1.

TEA S

election Com

mittee's R

esponse re SA

HC


Page 24 of 32

EXCERPT FROM SEPTEMBER 2015 MEETING

Governor General MedalsWork on the GG medal requirements will continue in the fall. To help SAHC in its overview role in the selection of recipients for GG medals, an annual report will be requested from Financial Aid, outlining how it applies the guidelines and criteria in the selection process for the finalists/winners. ACTION ITEM: Kyle will approach Financial Aid to request this information be provided to SAHC and report back at the October meeting.

EXCERPT FROM JANUARY 2015 MEETING

Until a system which can calculate cumulative GPAs is in place, the current process for the selection of eligible students will continue, with Financial Aid working with deans, who will be asked to provide the UFV Awards Committee with the top 3 students, with qualifying criteria used in the calculation;

The change for this year is for SAHC to provide oversight by reviewing the qualifying criteria used in the calculation of the top 3 students to ensure the process was followed.

AGENDA ITEM # 3.2.

Update on SAHC's request from Financial Aid - Calculations f... Page 25 of 32

UFV STANDARDS FOR GG MEDALS

GOVERNOR GENERAL'S MEDALS

Governor General's Academic Collegiate Bronze Medal — is awarded to the student who achieves the highest academic standing upon graduation from a diploma-level, post-secondary program (minimum two year, full-time duration). The Governor General's Bronze medal will be awarded based on:

1. Final 15 UFV credits

2. Transfer and any repeated courses will not be considered.

3. If there is tie, the next highest graded course will be considered for each student until the tie is broken.

Governor General’s Academic Silver Medal — is awarded to the undergraduate who achieves the highest academic standing upon graduation from a bachelor degree program. The Governor General's Silver medal will be awarded based on:

1. Final 30 upper level UFV credits

2. Transfer and any repeated courses will not be considered.

If there is a tie, the next highest graded course will be considered for each student until the tie is broken. Higher level courses break the tie over lower level courses.

AGENDA ITEM # 3.2.

Update on SAHC's request from Financial Aid - Calculations f... Page 26 of 32

ANNUAL SELECTION OF CANDIDATES FOR GOVERNOR GENERAL MEDALS

ACTION ITEM FROM SAHC ANNUAL TIMELINE TASKS: SAHC designate to assist Financial Aid with review of criteria for final candidates for GG medal (3 per faculty) to determine eligibility (to do until software is in place)

EXCERPT FROM JANUARY 2015 SAHC MEETING

Until a system which can calculate cumulative GPAs is in place, the current process for the selection of eligible students will continue, with Financial Aid working with deans, who will be asked to provide the UFV Awards Committee with the top 3 students, with qualifying criteria used in the calculation;

EXCERPT FROM SEPTEMBER 2016 SAHC MEETING

Governor General MedalsWork on the GG medal requirements will continue in the fall. To help SAHC in its overview role in the selection of recipients for GG medals, an annual report will be requested from Financial Aid, outlining how it applies the guidelines and criteria in the selection process for the finalists/winners.

ACTION ITEM: Kyle will approach Financial Aid to request this information be provided to SAHC and report back at the October meeting.

The change for this year is for SAHC to provide oversight by reviewing the qualifying criteria used in the calculation of the top 3 students to ensure the process was followed.

AGENDA ITEM # 3.3.

Governor General Annual Selection of Candidates for Medals A... Page 27 of 32

UFV STUDENT AWARDS OPERATIONS COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE

The UFV Student Awards Operations Committee receives its authority through the Board of Governors. The authority that is delegated by the Board of Governors, through the President, gives the Student Awards Operations Committee responsibility for the administration of scholarships, donor funded awards and bursaries. Criteria for awards will be established as follows:

• Direction regarding academic scholarship criteria will be received from the Senate Awards and Honours Committee;

• Direction regarding the donor funded awards will be established by the donor in consultation with University Advancement and the Student Awards Operations Committee; and

• Direction regarding bursaries will be established by the Student Awards Operations Committee with input from the applicable donor or external agencies.

Duties

1. To develop and revise, as necessary, non-academic criteria for the allocation of UFV scholarships, bursaries, and awards.

2. To provide advice to the Senate Awards and Honours Committee in matters pertaining to the development and revision of academic criteria of scholarships and awards.

3. To ensure the UFV community is informed of the availability of various awards, the selection criteria employed, and application procedures.

4. To conduct a yearly evaluation of the awards selection process and criteria. 5. To develop and approve new scholarships, awards and bursaries where necessary. 6. To receive applications and nominations for awards and to select successful candidates according to

established criteria. 7. To develop and implement appropriate administrative guidelines, regulations, and procedures with

regard to awards. Meetings The Student Awards Operations Committee shall meet on a monthly basis, but may cancel meetings when there are few or no agenda items. Quorum for a meeting shall be achieved by a minimum of four (4) members in addition to a chair person being in attendance. Membership - One representative from each of the instructional faculties - One representative from Student Services - One representative from the office of University Advancement - One representative from the Senate Awards and Honours Committee - One representative from the Student Union Society - One representative from Finance and Administration - Two members at large - Financial Aid Coordinator - Director of Student Life & Development or designate Additional members at large will be considered if representation from specified areas is unavailable. Chair/Co-Chair

AGENDA ITEM # 4.2.

Student Awards Operations Committee - draft terms of referen... Page 28 of 32

1. The committee shall be chaired by the Vice President, Students, or designate. 2. The vice-chair shall be appointed by the Vice President, Students, or designate.

Terms of Office

1. Committee members will serve for two years, with selection in September. 2. There is no limit to the number of terms that may be served.

*Staggering membership start dates will avoid losing veteran members all at once*

AGENDA ITEM # 4.2.

Student Awards Operations Committee - draft terms of referen... Page 29 of 32

Terms of Reference and Membership Composition Approved at Senate 2013 02 152014-15 Senate review complete, with revisions approved by Senate 2015 04 10

SENATE AWARDS AND HONOURS COMMITTEE

TERMS OF REFERENCE

1. The Senate Honours and Awards Committee advises Senate on the procedures for award application, adjudication, and decision. It further ensures that the criteria used to decide on awards and honours is clear, demonstrable, and measurable.

2. The central responsibilities of the SAHC are to advise Senate on the criteria and procedures for:a. Academic awards, honourary recognition, and other awards as directed by Senate;b. Awards stipulated in the Board policy on Academic Excellence Awards (BRP 235.03); and c. honourary degrees.

The Senate Awards and Honours Committee will:

3. Consult with relevant senate committees and/or other groups as needed and appropriate for any given award, including the UFV Student Awards Committee.

4. Ensure the appropriate expertise and/or representation is in place for the award administration and decision-making process.

5. From time to time, review the UFV forms of recognition and make recommendations to Senate and to the Board for changes regarding awards.

6. Provide an annual written report to Senate.

7. Perform other duties, as defined by Senate.

8. Meet as needed, with a minimum of three meetings per year.

AGENDA ITEM # 5.1.

Senate Approval of SAHC Chair extended term and revision to ... Page 30 of 32

Terms of Reference and Membership Composition Approved at Senate 2013 02 152014-15 Senate review complete, with revisions approved by Senate 2015 04 10

COMPOSITION

Chair:To be elected annually from the membership for a one-year term, unless directed otherwise by Senate

Vice-Chair: A voting member to be elected annually from the membership for a one-year term

Voting Members:• Provost & Vice-President, Academic (or designate) (ex officio)• Five faculty members, approved by Senate, at least one of whom shall be a member of Senate*• One dean or associate dean approved by Senate• One staff approved by Senate • Two students, one of whom shall be a senator • Vice President, Students (or designate) (ex officio)

Non-Voting Member• University Secretary and Registrar (ex officio)

Administrative SupportUniversity Secretariat office

* Normally, there shall be at least one member from each of the faculties, selected to ensure that the composition of the committee reflects the diversity of disciplines at the university.

AGENDA ITEM # 5.1.


Motions approved at Senate 2015 12 15

MOTION:THAT Senate approve revisions to the chair of the Senate Awards and Honours Committee (SAHC) terms of reference as presented and recommended by the Senate Governance Committee.CARRIED

MOTION:THAT Senate approve an extended term, ending July 31, 2017, for the current chair of the Senate Awards and Honours Committee (SAHC) as allowed in the SAHC terms of reference and recommended by the Senate Governance Committee.CARRIED

AGENDA ITEM # 5.1.


Date post:	21-Mar-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	lethuy
View:	217 times
Download:	5 times

AGENDA for the University of the Fraser Valley SENATE ... · PDF fileUniversity of the Fraser...

Documents