Senate approved a new policy on Oct. 15 that requires a minimum of three sources of data for evaluating teaching: instructor self-reflections, peer reviews of teaching and student feedback collected in the Student Experience of Instruction surveys.
Contention around the policy, J-138: Integrated Evaluation of Teaching, was mostly centred around the increased workload the policy places on faculty members. Among the senators who weighed in on this point was Senator hagwil hayetsk (Charles Menzies), who raised questions about the authority of the Senate to “unilaterally change conditions of employment.” “I think we need clarity on this,” he said.
A memo to senators, sent prior to the meeting and attributed to Simon Bates, vice-provost and associate vice-president, teaching and learning, notes that a “majority” of the concerns raised at the consultation stage of the policy were also related to workload. The memo defends the policy by saying that a “robust evaluation of teaching” is essential, that it aligns with “peer institutional best practices” and formalizes processes that already exist in some areas of the university — but seems to tacitly acknowledge that it does entail work for faculty. Bates made the defence to the Senate again at the meeting.
Senator Sean Graham — who represents the Faculty of Science — said his unit of the university has implemented the practices in Policy J-138, “or something close to it, for at least 15 years.” As a faculty member who does both teaching and research, he said he is “strongly in favour” of the new policy. Notwithstanding the amount of work required, the effort is worth the “useful, formative feedback” generated from the process, Graham said.
The effectiveness of measures like J-138 was also debated. One senator asked whether we know if teaching is getting better, and if there were any plans to assess J-138’s implementation. Provost Gage Averill said it’s hard to systematically detect improvements because the quality of instruction depends on a “constellation of factors.”
Ultimately, J-138 was approved unanimously. It will take effect following a “one-year lead-in period … to allow faculties and academic units sufficient time to develop and implement appropriate procedures,” the proposal memo reads.
The most contentious item on the agenda that night, though, was a procedural one: the Agenda Committee proposed to move the start time of next year’s senate meetings from 6 p.m. to 4 p.m.
Committee chair Joanne Fox’s memo to senators cited a recommendation from the body’s governance review as the basis for the change, writing the shift is “anticipated to enhance participation, accessibility, and inclusivity … particularly [for] those balancing family commitments.”
Student senators intervened to raise competing equity concerns. “We have professional students in programs like education who might be doing their practicum during the workday. We have students who are enrolled in Co-Op programs, who are enrolled in other professional programs, [such as] dentistry, pharmacy, [and] law … there are a lot of student senators, who by design, won’t be able to make senate if senate starts at 4 p.m.,” Senator Kareem Hassib said.
Senator Cade Desjarlais, a law student, said moving to 4 p.m. would make it “nearly impossible” to attend, adding that meetings are once a month and showing up is the commitment of service to the university senators make when they run.
Senator Laura Moss was among the senators who spoke in favour of the motion, saying the start time was a “real access barrier” and she didn’t “remotely consider” joining the Senate until her children had left home.
Joining with the student senators, Senator hagwil hayetsk (Menzies) spoke against the motion. He said arguments relying on EDI “misapplied” the concept. At one point in the meeting, senate clerk Chris Eaton said that whenever senators have considered this issue, “no consensus” has emerged.
Student Senator Jasper Lorien tabled a motion to refer the issue back to the Agenda Committee for another solution to be proposed. Procedural pandemonium ensued. Three rounds of voting were needed because of complications with recording votes — Senate votes are recorded by staff counting raised packcards or using Zoom gestures, since the meeting is held in a hybrid of online and in-person attendance.
The vote came down to 27-23 in favour of sending the amendment back to the committee. After vexing about being “unclear about what we expect the committee to do,” President Benoit-Antoine Bacon asked Fox to focus specifically on student senators’ concerns when the committee meets to discuss the matter.
Earlier in the evening, Senate also approved the Faculty of Medicine’s affiliation with the “prestigious” Eurolife network of European medical and biomedical institutions. Among the ways it is expected to benefit the university are an expansion of graduate student exchange opportunities and access to new “high-impact, multi-institutional biomedical research initiatives,” according to the Admissions Committee’s submission.
As part of the agreement, UBC will pay the network €6,000 annual membership fee (equivalent to just under $10,000 at time of publication, per the Bank of Canada’s conversion figures).
First online
Share this article
Submit a complaint Report a correction
