As filed with the University Secretariat and posted on the Queen’s Senate Faculty Caucus blog, 11 November 2010:
Given that Queen’s is about to embark on drafting its academic plan;
Given that this is part of a process in which strictly financial considerations will be addressed at a later stage;
Given that an academic plan should formulate the university’s ideals and goals for teaching, learning, and research, and specify how best to achieve them; and
Given that the faculty and students, by virtue of being most immediately involved in the university’s teaching, learning, and research, are best positioned both to formulate the ideals and goals pertaining to these activities and to specify their minimal means and requirements;
I move that any Queen’s Senate committee charged with drafting the academic plan include mostly faculty and students, and more specifically that it include one senior administrator, one member of staff, two students, and four faculty members, with each member being nominated and elected democratically by his or her own constituency (e.g., students by students, faculty by faculty) within the university community at large.
Given that any Senate committee charged with drafting Queen’s academic plan will need extensive advice and information from all who will be affected by the plan (faculty, students, staff, administrators; members from all academic units and programs, etc.); and
Given that the documents attempting to synthesize community consultation thus far, such as the Arts and Science Response to Where Next? (15 April 2010) and Imagining the Future (23 Aug. 2010), do not complete this process and are contested in some of their representations and omissions; and
Given that Queen’s Students and Employees for Real Academic Planning (QSERAP) have proposed a viable means of continuing consultation in the form of “Open Planning Meetings on Specific Issues,” or “targeted discussions” (Open Letter to Principal Woolf and Dr. Susan Cole of 20 October 2010), a proposal welcomed by the Chair of SCAD as “very constructive and meritorious”*;
I move that Senate mandate and sponsor a series of widely accessible town-hall meetings to address specific key issues, as laid out in the QSERAP open letter; that the scheduling of these meetings be coordinated so that the consultation on each particular issue can inform the drafting of the corresponding section of the plan; and that the academic plan not be presented to Senate or the Board of Trustees until these meetings have taken place.