Report: Academic Board - October 3, 2019

---

ITEMS 13 to 16 WERE CONSIDERED IN CAMERA. ITEMS 4, 5 AND IN CAMERA ITEM 14 ARE RECOMMENDED TO THE GOVERNING COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.  ITEMS 7, 8, and IN CAMERA ITEMS 13 AND 15 WERE APPROVED.  ALL OTHER ITEMS ARE REPORTED FOR INFORMATION.

OPEN SESSION

1. Chair’s Remarks

Professor Nicholas Terpstra introduced himself as the incoming Chair, and welcomed new and returning members.  The Chair extended regrets on behalf of the Vice-Chair, Professor Douglas McDougall, as well as the Board’s Senior Assessor, Professor Cheryl Regehr, Vice-President & Provost, who was representing the University at a symposium at Humboldt University of Berlin in Germany.

The Chair informed members that he had granted a speaking request to a non-member to address the University’s mental health policies and services. The Chair advised members that Item 12 ‘Other Business’ would, at least in part, be moved to the start of the agenda such that the meeting would begin with the speaker’s remarks and any ensuing discussion.

The Chair first invited Professor Sandy Welsh, Vice-Provost, Students to make a statement.  Professor Welsh spoke to the recent tragedy and loss of one of the University’s students, an incident which had impacted the entire University community.  She shared that she had personally met with the student’s family and extended the condolences of the University community, who she reported were deeply touched by all the messages of support.  At the family’s request, no further information was shared.

The Vice-Provost assured members that supporting those most affected, and doing so in a respectful way, balanced against the need to provide compassion and privacy to the family in terms of sharing information. She also stressed that mental health is a shared responsibility, and that the University was committed to working together with community partners and all levels of government to address this issue.

In closing, Professor Welsh stressed the University’s deep commitment to students’ well-being, both academically and personally. 

The Chair then invited Ms. Jaime Kearns, President of the Association for Part-Time Undergraduate Students (APUS) to speak.

In her remarks, Ms. Kearns expressed concerns about the University’s financial contributions to mental health and accessibility services.  She raised the issue of the academic culture at the University and its impact on student mental health.

Ms. Kearns also reported that students were fearful of seeking supports because of the perceived negative repercussions of the University-Mandated Leave of Absence Policy (“UMLAP”).  References were also made to extended wait times and counselling fees. 

In closing, Ms. Kearns encouraged faculty members to re-evaluate how successful learning was communicated to students and how this was evaluated.  She stressed the need to prioritize healthy learning and supportive spaces for students.

In reply, Professor Welsh assured members that the administration shared the community’s concerns and was aware of the prevalence of mental health issues and the particular vulnerability of the age group of many students. To that end, Professor Welsh described some of the actions taken by the University in support of student mental health.  These included:

• Increased resources in support of mental health, and engagement with community partners to provide additional services;
• An investment of close to $3M annually to respond to the growing needs around mental health support and accommodation, including more on-location counsellors in colleges and faculties;
• Last spring, extended counselling services to offer drop-in supports and plans to do so again this year.
• Same-day counselling services, available on all three campuses;
• A newly launched task force made up of students, faculty and staff to look at ways to improve services and review physical spaces; and
• A 24-hour telephone counselling service offered in multiple languages.

Professor Welsh acknowledged the need to foster a supportive learning community to help students thrive.  She reported that the Faculty of Arts & Science and other divisions were engaged in discussions to look at how academic culture affected students and where their academic processes could be changed to be more aligned with supporting students’ academic and mental health well-being.

A member asked whether the University or its faculties and departments had a practice or policy of noting mental health and accessibility services in syllabi or on course websites.  In response, Professor Susan McCahan, Vice Provost, Academic Programs, confirmed that while language was available for faculty to use on their syllabi about mental health and that this was encouraged, the administration was assessing whether boilerplate language in syllabi was the most effective way to communicate about this topic with students.  She added that it was important for faculty members to articulate this messaging in their own ways. Professor McCahan stated that it had been recommended to faculty that they also draw attention to resources and list them on their website at key times during the term, and that ‘Just in Time’ slides were provided to faculty for use in their classrooms.  Professor McCahan also reported that the administration was working towards increasing its programming for faculty around tools like Universal Instructional Design (a method for designing courses and instruction for the broadest set of students) to ensure that instructors were thinking through their instructional choices in a way that was centered on the student experience.  In conclusion, Professor McCahan stated that should the Board request it, her Office would be pleased to provide a report later in the year about initiatives happening at the divisional level with regard to syllabi and course design.

In response to a member’s question regarding the gravity and critical nature of the mental health concerns raised, Professor Welsh stated that whether referred to as a ‘crisis’ or not, the mental health of the University’s student population was viewed by the administration as a top priority, and to that end, the administration was focused on working with community partners to improve services.  She encouraged continued dialogue, consultation and collaboration among all members of the U of T community towards this goal. 

The Chair thanked speakers and presenters for their comments, and members for their flexibility with the agenda. 

A five minute recess was called.

The Chair invited the following four students who had been granted speaking privileges to address the Board:

• Lucinda Qu
• Shahin Imtiaz
• Anykia Marks
• Catherine Clarke

The students collectively expressed concern about the University’s mental health policies and practices, and services which students viewed as inadequately resourced and funded.  They reflected on the pressure faced by students to succeed academically.  Recommendations were made by the students for increased resources directed towards Accessibility Services and mental wellness programs especially during peak periods to reduce wait times.  References were also made to the UMLAP. 

A member proposed a motion to add an item to the agenda.

A three minute recess was called. 

The motion was duly made and seconded.

THE MOTION FAILED.

The Chair offered an opportunity for the President and the Vice-Provost, Students to address the student presenters’ concerns and comments.

The President began by thanking the student presenters for sharing their thoughts in such a compelling and articulate way.  He noted that the previous week had been an extremely difficult time for the University community. 

In response to the concerns raised by the student speakers, the President offered comments with respect to the following:

• The ongoing work of the Presidential and Provostial Task Force on Student Mental Health, whose mandate was to consult with students and other key stakeholders to review existing services and programs related to student mental health, including the coordination of student supports, and to explore potential new solutions in this area.  The Task Force’s consultations were  underway, and it was scheduled to present its findings and recommendations in December 2019;

• The work of the Expert Panel on the Undergraduate Student Educational Experience, which was tasked with articulating and bolstering a shared vision for our undergraduate educational experience. As a part of this work, the administration was addressing interrelated questions around the nature of undergraduate student life, the University’s strengths in academic and research excellence, as well as initiatives to enhance student success and well-being.

• The Boundless Campaign’s focus on student needs and its success in helping to generate an endowment of over $1B for student supports, including gifts expressly made to expand student services and fund research related to student well-being and health.

In closing, the President reiterated that the leadership of the University was seized with these questions, and that discussions were happening at all levels including amongst principals and deans at a retreat and their regular meetings.

Following the President’s remarks, Professor Welsh addressed the UMLAP, in particular the fear among some students that accessing mental health supports at the University would trigger the Policy with negative consequences. Professor Welsh stressed that the threshold to invoke the UMLAP was extremely high. She assured students that health and wellness care providers were guided by obligations of confidentiality, and explained that the Policy was intended primarily for cases where a significant harm to self or others was identified.  Professor Welsh sought to clarify that the Policy was intended to be a source of support for students so they would not be treated under the Code of Student Conduct or other punitive measures, and that they could take a break from their studies without significant academic consequences. 

She also reported that in its first year, UMLAP had only been used in eight cases, and indicated that the students who had been placed on a leave had either resumed their studies, or were in the process of returning, without punitive implications of their behaviour that had been related to significant mental health issues at a particular time in their lives.

Professor Trevor Young, Dean of the Faculty of Medicine and Chair of the Task Force on Student Mental Health, then spoke to the work of the Task Force.  Professor Young reported the following:

• The Task Force had met five times and had another four meetings scheduled;
• Membership included strong student representation, and wide-spread consultations was taking place across all three campuses with both clients and providers of mental health care services;
• Over thirty focus groups had been organized, with input from over 500 people;
• The Innovation Hub in Student Life had held more than nine open sessions;
• Booths had been organized and input provided from members at welcome days and orientation events;
• Online input had been received as well, with close to 250 responses;

In closing, Professor Young indicated that the Task Force had some preliminary ideas of what its most important recommendations should be, which they hoped to share in draft form with the community, particularly with students, for their feedback before final consideration through governance.

Acknowledging the issues raised by students as critical, a member suggested that although the response of the administration was recognized as ongoing with continued efforts to improve and be more comprehensive, the pace at which some initiatives moved through the governance process might not be fast enough.

The Chair then invited the Dean of the Faculty of Arts & Science, Professor Melanie Woodin, to address the Board.  In her comments, Professor Woodin described how, as a result of a town hall organized by the Computer Science Students Union, focused attention was brought to the connection between the program’s admission process and its impact on student mental health.  She reported that as a result of those discussions, a commitment was made by the administration to make substantive changes to the admissions process and how students progress through the program.  Dean Woodin encouraged other faculties to review their own policies and procedures to identify aspects that were inherently stressful to students, and to work with students to modify those elements in a way that still met the academic nature and requirements of the program, but that decreased these barriers to success. Professor Woodin concluded her remarks by indicating that both the President and Provost were supportive of moving forward in this way.

In response to the concerns voice around the UMLAP, a member suggested that the process by which the Policy was reviewed be made transparent to members at a future Governing Council meeting.

The Chair thanked presenters for addressing the Board directly with their experiences and expectations, and for their continued work towards addressing student mental health.  The Chair reminded members that the role of governance was one of oversight and not the day to day management of the University.  He was very appreciative of the information shared in the presentations, and recognized that they underscored concerns shared by students and Board members. The Chair sought to clarify, however, that while a function of the Board was to be a place where these concerns could be raised, it was not a place where they could necessarily be resolved but that the administration was present and listening. He concluded by saying that the intention of the Board and University’s leadership was to ensure that students thrive.

At 5:34p.m., the Chair advised members that a motion to extend the meeting would likely be needed.

2. Orientation

In light of time limitations, the Chair advised members that there would be no Orientation presentation.  Members were encouraged to review the slides and reference material provided, and to forward any questions to the Secretary separately following the meeting.

3. Report of the Vice-President and Provost

There was no report from the Vice-President and Provost.

4. Capital Projects:

1. Report of the Project Planning Committee for the Landscape of Landmark Quality

Professor Donald Ainslie, Principal of University College, and Mr. Gilbert Delgado, Chief University Planning, Design and Construction, provided an overview of the capital project, highlighting the following main points:

• The project was focused on enhancing the student experience by prioritizing student spaces at the very centre of the St. George campus;
• The project’s goal of remaking the greenspaces in the historic centre of campus would focus primarily in four areas:  
  • King’s College Circle
  • Hart House Circle and Tower Road
  • Sir Daniel Wilson Quadrangle; and
  • the Back Campus

• Car traffic and surface parking would be dramatically reduced and replaced with a single level 263 space underground garage with capacity for 53 electric vehicle parking spaces, and secure storage capacity for 88 bicycles;
• Accessibility was a priority of the project with a $250,000 donation made by the University of Toronto Students’ Union to help fund the accessibility upgrades.

Mr. Delgado concluded the presentation by outlining the planned schedule for the project which included obtaining final governance approval on October 24, 2019, design completion in December 2019, and onboarding of a construction manager, with completion planned for 2023.

A member raised a question about the project’s electrical infrastructure and asked whether additional costs would be incurred in future retrofits to accommodate more electric vehicles.  Additionally, the question was raised as to whether student groups and future users of the space were consulted to ensure sufficient electrical outlets were provided for events on the Front Campus.

Mr. Delgado clarified that each of the 53 charging stations could power two electric vehicles, and confirmed that the system could be expanded over time.

Principal Ainslie addressed the question regarding the availability of electrical outlets.  He reported that Academic and Campus Events had been consulted and was very familiar with student needs.  Their input had helped ensure that a proper balance had been reached between the needs of potential users and interruptions to the landscape. 

Principal Ainsle went on to address a further concern about pick-up and drop-off locations for events on campus, informing the Board that space had been allocated around Hart House and the entrance to the parking garage.  He indicated that vehicular traffic around King’s College Circle would be limited to that required to service the surrounding buildings or to accommodate accessibility needs.   

In closing, Principal Ainslie clarified that the reference to “St. George” was intended to describe the location of the project and not a formal naming of the project.

On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

YOUR BOARD RECOMMENDED

THAT the Report of the Project Planning Committee for the Landscape of Landmark Quality, dated August 23, 2019, be approved in principle; and,

THAT the project totaling 86,340 square metres (sm), including a below-grade parking structure area totalling  9,075 gross square metres (gsm), and an entrance pavilion totalling 100 gross square metres (gsm) above grade, be approved in principle, to be funded by fundraising, Future Major Capital Project Reserves, and financing.

Extension of Time

On motion duly moved, seconded and carried

YOUR COMMITTEE RESOLVED THAT

the time of adjournment be extended by thirty minutes.

2. Report of the Project Planning Committee for the Spadina Sussex Residence

The Board received a presentation from Mr. Delgado.

Mr. Delgado’s report to the Board included the following highlights:

• The University had a capacity for 6,478 beds, with a projected need in 2020 for 8,767 beds;
• The Spadina Sussex tower would provide 511 new residence spaces;
• the design was altered to accommodate the designation of 698 Spadina as a heritage building, which resulted in the tower height being slightly less than originally planned; 
• The earliest projected completion date was April 2022

In response to a member’s regarding whether the residence was a for-profit residence or cost recovery project, Professor Scott Mabury, Vice-President, University Operations & Real Estate explained that revenues from the project would cover the cost of construction and of maintaining the building’s future viability.  He added that there would be a return for the investors.

On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

YOUR BOARD RECOMMENDED

THAT the Project Planning Committee Report for the Spadina Sussex Residence, dated August 30, 2019, be approved in principle; and,

THAT the project totaling 19,328 gross square metres (gsm), be approved in principle, to be funded by University Provostial Funds, Daniel’s Corporation, and financing.

3. Geothermal System at King’s College Circle

Mr. Ron Saporta, Chief Operations Officer, Property Services & Sustainability, provided an overview of the King’s College Circle Geothermal project.  Mr. Saporta began by indicating to members that the Landmark project afforded a great opportunity to install a geothermal system in the heart of campus. He went on to provide highlights of the project which included:

• The geothermal system was an extremely low carbon system that provided long-term sustainable thermal energy;
• The system used ‘reject’ heat from the mechanical systems in the summer and stored it for use in the winter;
• The geothermal field was anticipated to provide 131,000 mmBTU of heat, making it the largest of its time in Canada in an urban setting;

In conclusion, Mr. Saporta listed the following benefits of the project:

• Provision of a sustainable, low-carbon source of heating and cooling;
• On-going reduced maintenance and utility expenditures;
• Targeted reduction of campus emissions by over 15,000 tonnes of CO2;
• Demonstration U of T’s commitment to carbon reduction and sustainability; and
• The creation of Living Lab and Experiential Learning type opportunities for students.

During the discussion of the project a member asked whether solar panels would be more efficient than a geothermal system.  Mr. Saporta stated that solar panels and geothermal systems were two separate systems and two different energy sources.  He explained that while solar panels created electricity, the geothermal system provided thermal energy that specifically offset natural gas and steam type power.

In response to a member’s question, Mr. Saporta clarified that there would be no impact to the parking spots and that the system would exist significantly below the parking structure.

A member inquired about the lifetime associated with the boring wells and how long use could be sustained.  Mr. Saporta replied that the material used in the wells themselves were rated for a 50-year life cycle

On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

YOUR BOARD RECOMMENDED

THAT the King’s College Circle Geothermal Feasibility Report, dated September 21, 2018, be approved in principle; to be funded by financing and Central Utility Funding.

OPEN SESSION CONSENT AGENDA

On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

YOUR BOARD APPROVED THAT

the consent agenda be adopted

5. Academic Board Terms of Reference – Minor Revisions

On a motion duly moved, seconded and carried

YOUR BOARD RECOMMENDED

THAT the proposed revised Academic Board Terms of Reference be approved, effective immediately, replacing the Terms of Reference previously approved on October 30, 2017.

6. Approvals Under Summer Executive Authority

The Chair reported that there were no approvals under summer executive authority within the purview of the Academic Board.

7. Capital Projects:

1. Report of the Project Planning Committee for 700 University, 4th Floor: Fit-out for the Department of Statistical Sciences and the Faculty of Arts and Science Professional Masters Hub

On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

YOUR BOARD APPROVED

THAT subject to confirmation by the Executive Committee,

THAT the Report of the Project Planning Committee for 700 University, 4^th floor: fit-out for the Department of Statistical Sciences and A&S Professional Masters Hub, dated August 23, 2019, be approved in principle; and,

THAT the project totaling 5,172 rentable square metres (sm), be approved in principle, to be funded by the Faculty of Arts and Science Building Fund and Future Major Capital Project Reserves.

2. Report of the Project Planning Committee for the Facilities Master Plan at the Koffler Scientific Reserve

On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

YOUR BOARD APPROVED

THAT subject to confirmation by the Executive Committee,

THAT the Project Planning Committee Report for Facilities Master Plan at Koffler Scientific Reserve, dated August 30, 2019, be approved in principle; and,

THAT the project totalling 903 net assignable square metres (nasm) (1,445 gross square metres (gsm)), be approved in principle, to be funded by the Faculty of Arts and Science Building Fund and Future Major Capital Project Reserves.

3. Geothermal System at Robert Street Field

On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

YOUR BOARD APPROVED

THAT subject to confirmation by Executive Committee,

THAT the Feasibility Study for Robert Street Field Geothermal System, dated May 17, 2019, be approved in principle, to be funded by financing.

8. Report of the Previous Meeting: Report Number 222 – May 30, 2019

Report Number 222, from the meeting of May 30, 2019 was approved.

9. Business Arising from the Report of the Previous Meeting

There was no business arising from the report of the previous meeting.

10. Reports for Information

Members received the following reports for information:

1. 2019-2020 Calendar of Business
2. Report Number 254 of the Agenda Committee – May 21, 2019
3. Report Number 255 of the Agenda Committee – June 4, 2019
4. Report Number 256 of the Agenda Committee – June 27, 2019
5. Report Number 257 of the Agenda Committee – September 24, 201
6. Report Number 198 of the Committee on Academic Policy and Programs – September 16, 2019
7. Report Number 188 of the Planning and Budget Committee – September 17, 2019

END OF CONSENT AGENDA

11. Date of the Next Meeting: Thursday, November 21, 2019, 4:10 – 6:10 p.m.

The Chair reminded members that the next meeting would be held on Thursday, November 21 at 4:10 p.m.

12. Other Business

No other items of other business were raised.

THE BOARD MOVED IN CAMERA.

---

IN CAMERA CONSENT AGENDA

On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

YOUR BOARD APPROVED THAT

the in camera consent agenda be adopted

13. Capital Projects: Total Project Cost and Sources of Funding

1. 700 University, 4th Floor: Fit-out for the Department of Statistical   Sciences and A&S Professional Masters Hub

On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

YOUR BOARD APPROVED

THAT subject to confirmation by the Executive Committee, 

THAT the recommendation of the Acting Vice President, Operations & Acting Vice-Provost Academic Operations, as outlined in the memorandum dated September 17, 2019, be approved.

2. Facilities Master Plan at the Koffler Scientific Reserve

On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

YOUR BOARD APPROVED

THAT subject to confirmation by the Executive Committee, 

THAT the recommendation of the Acting Vice President, Operations & Acting Vice-Provost Academic Operations, as outlined in the memorandum dated September 17, 2019, be approved.

3. Geothermal System at Robert Street Field

On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

YOUR BOARD APPROVED

THAT subject to confirmation by the Executive Committee, 

THAT the recommendation of the Acting Vice President, Operations & Acting Vice-Provost Academic Operations, as outlined in the memorandum dated September 17, 2019, be approved.

---

IN CAMERA SESSION

14. Capital Projects: Total Project Cost and Sources of Funding:

1. Landscape of Landmark Quality

On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

YOUR BOARD RECOMMENDED

THAT the recommendation of the Acting Vice President, Operations & Acting Vice-Provost Academic Operations, as outlined in the memorandum dated September 17, 2019, be approved.

2. Spadina Sussex Residence

On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

YOUR BOARD RECOMMENDED

THAT the recommendation of the Acting Vice President, Operations & Acting Vice-Provost Academic Operations, as outlined in the memorandum dated September 17, 2019, be approved.

3. Geothermal System at King’s College Circle

On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

YOUR BOARD RECOMMENDED

THAT the recommendation of the Acting Vice President, Operations & Acting Vice-Provost Academic Operations, as outlined in the memorandum dated September 17, 2019, be approved.

4. New Student Residence at the University of Toronto Scarborough – Further Revised Total Project Cost and Sources of Funding

On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

YOUR BOARD RECOMMENDED

THAT the recommendation of the Acting Vice President, Operations & Acting Vice-Provost Academic Operations, as outlined in the memorandum dated September 17, 2019, be approved.

15. Report of the Academic Board Striking Committee

On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

YOUR BOARD APPROVED

THAT Zhiyuan (Annie) Lu be appointed to the Academic Board, effective immediately, for a term ending June 30, 2020.

On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried

YOUR BOARD APPROVED

THAT Zhiyuan (Annie) Lu be appointed to the Committee of Academic Policy and Programs effective immediately, for a term ending June 30, 2020.

16. Quarterly Report on Donations: May 1 – July 31, 2019

Members received the Quarterly Report on Donations for information.

The Board returned to Open Session.

The meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m.