Wednesday, September 16, 2026

The Clerk to Senate, Mr Christopher Eaton, reported that four Senators, Dean Jan Hare of the Faculty of Education, Dr Ben Britton, Dr Charles Menzies, and Dr Wendy Norman, were acclaimed to the Senate Nominating Committee following the first call for nominations, and three additional Senators, Mr Stewart McGillivray, Ms Eshana Bhangu, and Dean Clare Crowston of the Faculty of Arts, were acclaimed following the second call. He noted that one vacancy remained and invited nominations. Senator Ingrid Price inquired about the work of the Nominating Committee. In response, the Clerk explained that the Committee was particularly active at the start and end of the Triennium, with responsibilities including making recommendations for committee appointments, considering onboarding and orientations for senators, and identifying revisions and improvements for the next Triennium. He added that its work between these periods included policy matters and implementation of the External Review of the Vancouver Senate. Senator Price nominated herself for the remaining seat. There being no further nominations, the Clerk declared that Senator Price was elected by acclamation.

The Provost, Dr Gage Averill, reported that the Working Group had met four times and reviewed the University’s existing global partnerships, institutional processes, student safety abroad, research security requirements, and approaches at other Canadian universities. He noted that the group supported a concise, principles-based framework rather than prescriptive policy. He advised that the draft framework was being finalized and would be brought to Senate for consideration at the October Senate meeting. Senator Sarah Kamal asked whether student participation in the development of the Working Group’s work could be addressed before its presentation to Senate in October. In response, the Provost explained that the draft framework would return to Senate for full debate. He clarified that the Working Group had been asked to develop principles as advice for Senate and that a student member served on the Working Group. He added that the Working Group had not consulted individual constituencies due to time and scheduling constraints, but students would continue to be involved in the broader discussion.

The President welcomed new Senators and welcomed members back to campus for the new Academic Year. The President noted the Senate reception held at Norman MacKenzie House and highlighted the return of campus activities, including Imagine UBC, the pep rally, and Homecoming. The President reported that the University had received federal investment in the Eddie Goldenberg Research Chairs of Canada and had recruited nine researchers through the first intake. The President also noted a $40 million donation from the MacIsaac family and reported that the School of Nursing had been renamed the MacIsaac School of Nursing with approval by the Senate and the Board of Governors. The Gateway Health Building had also been renamed the MacIsaac Health Building. The President reported that the University, in partnership with the Province of British Columbia, would mark the groundbreaking of the first phase of the Lower Mall Precinct Project. The project was expected to provide 1,500 beds for graduate students at a total cost of approximately $550 million, with $300 million in provincial support. The President noted that university researchers attracted almost $1 billion in research funding annually, supporting more than 10,000 research projects. The President also reported that more than 300 ventures had been established from UBC research. The President observed that these developments reflected the talent, impact, and momentum at the University. The President reported that the University was one year into implementing the refresh strategic plan endorsed by Senate and had made significant progress. A presentation from the Provost on UBC’s Strategic Directions 2025-2030 was included on the agenda. The President noted that the post-secondary sector across Canada continued to face fiscal and broader political and geopolitical challenges. He reported that the University remained in a relatively solid fiscal position while noting the need for continued financial discipline. The President reminded Senate that the University was a public, non-sectarian, and non-political post-secondary institution and would work with elected officials of any party. The President noted that the University did not support or endorse political candidates or parties as an institution, while encouraging members of the university community to participate in political discourse and vote. The President noted the upcoming municipal elections in British Columbia and reported that the University would continue to work with the City of Vancouver to advance its priorities, including the proposed Millennium Line UBC Extension. Senator Bryan Buraga inquired about the impact of U.S. sanctions on Iranian citizens and residents who were unable to access services provided by the Law School Admission Council, including the LSAT. He noted that, to his understanding, the Law School Admission Test was a requirement for admission to the Juris Doctor program at the Peter A. Allard School of Law. He reported that the issue had already affected some students and asked how the University was responding. He also asked whether the admissions process should be reviewed. In response, Dean Pro Tem. of the Peter A. Allard School of Law, Prof Bruce MacDougall, explained that alternative tests were available, including the National Admissions Test for Law, which was used by some universities in the United Kingdom and Asia. He noted that, based on his understanding, affected Iranian citizens who were outside Iran could take the Law School Admission Test if they contacted the testing agency. He added that the University was continuing to clarify the process. Dean MacDougall reported that Deans across Canada were working towards a coordinated approach for students affected by the inability to take the test. He confirmed that accommodations would be provided, although the specific arrangements had not yet been determined pending further information from the Law School Admission Council. …

Senator Ben Britton inquired about the University’s change in its provision of disability accommodations, specifically the use of a generative artificial intelligence notetaking tool. He expressed the view that the change could affect individual students’ academic progression and could intersect with instructors’ academic freedom. He acknowledged the University’s responsibility to provide accommodations for students with disabilities. He observed that the change could affect classroom discourse and interactions among students, including the topics discussed. Senator Britton asked how the decision had been reached and whether the matter should have been brought to Senate. Senator Charles Menzies asked whether fiscal considerations, including potential cost savings or efficiencies, had informed the decision to replace individual human note-takers with a generative artificial intelligence tool. He reported that he had tested the tool using his own lectures and presentation materials and suggested that, in his experience, it appeared less responsive than a human note-taker. In response, Senator Simon Bates explained that the software had been in use at UBC Okanagan for one year. He noted that the software was introduced through the Centre for Accessibility. Discussions had taken place with the Associate Deans, although a full consultation had not occurred. The software had undergone a Privacy Impact Assessment, as required for software used at the University, and had been found compliant. Senator Britton acknowledged the response and explained that his concerns related to the implications for academic interactions between instructors and students, rather than other considerations. He suggested that the matter be discussed as an academic issue rather than solely in relation to the replacement of note-takers, while also recognizing the labour implications. Senator Ben Britton proposed that the matter be referred to the Teaching, Learning and Library Committee, given the nature of the issue.

The Chair of the Senate Appeals on Academic Standing Committee, Dr Susan Forwell, presented. Senator Forwell reported that all appeals on file were progressing in accordance with established procedures. She noted an increase in the number of standing appeals in Vancouver in recent months, as reflected in the five-year data presented. Senator Forwell explained that the Committee functioned as an appellate tribunal and did not rehear matters. She noted that students sometimes sought to have underlying decisions reconsidered rather than alleging unfair or improper procedures, which the Committee had authority to review. She identified this as a reason for the low rate at which appeals were allowed. Senator Forwell reported that the complexity and volume of appeals continued to increase, with staff receiving increasingly detailed and individualized questions from appellants that required tailored responses. She noted that these matters increased the time required for all parties to prepare for requested changes and contributed to an increase in pre-hearing matters directed to the Chair. Senator Forwell reported an increase in the identification of actual and perceived conflicts of interest between Committee members and parties. She explained that Committee members identified as having a potential conflict were replaced on the relevant panel and that members were now canvassed for potential conflicts before panel assignments to reduce disruptions. Senator Forwell thanked the members of the Committee. She also recognized Jo-anna Cowen and James Goddard of the Senate Office for their support.

A member of the Senate Student Appeals of Discipline Committee, Mr Stewart McGillivray, presented. Senator McGillivray explained that the Committee differed from the other appeals committee in that it addressed non-academic misconduct, academic misconduct, and allegations under Policy SC17: Sexual Misconduct Policy. Senator McGillivray reported that four appeals had been heard during the reporting year, none of which had been allowed. He noted that one complex matter had involved multiple potential hearing dates and up to 1,500 pages of material. Although the hearing had ultimately not proceeded, he indicated that the matter illustrated the increasing complexity of cases before the committees. Senator McGillivray referred to statistics on appeals filed in each year and noted that these could be considered alongside the reports of the President’s Advisory Committee on Student Discipline. Senator Ingrid Price noted the work involved with the Appeals of Academic Standing Committee and asked whether approaches could be considered to streamline or change the process. The Clerk responded that an internal review of the appeals procedures had been conducted four years earlier to identify improvements for students. He reported that measures had included reducing the Committee’s quorum to allow more panels to operate regularly. The Clerk reported an increase in appeals, grievances, and complaints across the University. He noted that the University needed to review its regulations, particularly those relating to academic standing, as appeals in this area had become lengthy and involved complex matters. The Clerk explained that revisions to the rules were being considered to streamline the process, including the possibility of written-submission-only procedures for simpler matters. The Clerk reported that the current focus was on providing decisions to appellants and that the preparation of reasons for decisions was taking longer than desired. He noted that changes in the Canadian legal landscape had also increased the complexity of the documentation required for decisions, resulting in longer reasons than had previously been required. Senator Ben Britton reported that he had drafted reasons on behalf of one of the standing committees and noted that preparing the reasons for one case had taken several hours in addition to his regular work. He explained that the process involved reconciling the discussion and documentation with support from the Senate Office. Senator Britton referred to the External Review of the Vancouver Senate discussed during the previous triennium and noted that appeals had been addressed as an explicit item. He explained that the recommendations included alignment between the two Vancouver Senate appeals committees to address common issues related to scheduling and committee operations, as well as support for the Senate Office in implementing updates. Senator Britton recommended that Senators assigned to the appeals committees review the recommendations before participating in committee discussions and training. Senator Wendy Norman noted a recurring issue concerning academic discipline that had also been observed when hearing student appeals. She explained that students often appeared to expect that an appeal could result in a decision being reversed, whereas the Senate committees were responsible for determining whether the process had been followed. Senator Norman asked whether information could be provided to appellants earlier in the process, or before an appeal was submitted, to clarify that the appeal concerned whether the process had been followed and did not provide an opportunity to reverse the underlying decision. She suggested that appellants could be required to read and acknowledge information explaining the purpose and scope of an appeal when submitting an application. …

The Provost, Dr Gage Averill, presented. The Provost reported on progress under the refreshed strategic plan and noted that 16 actions had been identified in the first year across seven strategic directions. He reported that 13 of the 16 actions had been marked as progressing, while three had been moved into the second year. The Provost explained that work on cross-campus pathways and mobility had been moved to later years due to issues related to budgets, calendars, and course numbering. He noted that work continued on the objective of greater mobility between campuses. He highlighted that the expansion of experiential education had been moved into the second year due to issues with consistent tracking data and funding. He noted that funding requests had been brought forward and that work was underway at the other campus, with similar work to begin at this campus. The Provost noted that work on the Millennium Line UBC Extension continued and noted that the project remained dependent on various government bodies and was subject to provincial budget pressures. He reported that advocacy continued with provincial and federal governments. The Provost reported on progress across the other strategic actions. Under Discover and Innovate for Impact, he highlighted research initiatives in areas including climate resilience, battery innovation, bioproducts, clean energy, prescribed fire training, critical minerals infrastructure, and sustainable agriculture. He reported that approximately 85% of the $25 million investment in these initiatives came from external funding sources. The Provost highlighted that more than 314 net new undergraduate research positions had been created across the campuses through a four-year, $2 million pilot. Under Creating Flexibility for Learners, the Provost reported that 18 new micro-credentials had been approved in 2025-2026 across both campuses. He noted that these offerings addressed areas including artificial intelligence skills, the blue economy, primary care and nursing, and health and environmental sciences. The Provost reported that the first cohort of 16 students had been enrolled in the Faculty of Education’s Teacher Mentorship Pilot Program, developed in partnership with First Nations and the Okanagan School of Education. He highlighted the program’s multi-access format and its delivery in Indigenous languages, including the Okanagan language. He also reported on progress in experiential education and noted that the MacIsaac Health Building brought 10 health-care programs together under one roof and integrated student health and well-being services. He explained that the building housed the University’s first purposebuilt interprofessional primary care teaching clinic and provided students with hands-on experience through team-based care and integrated training. The Provost highlighted that the Experiential Education Competency Framework had been piloted at UBC Okanagan and would be developed across all campuses before being brought to Senate for system-wide endorsement. He also reported that more than 2,900 students had created e-portfolios through the Experience & Involvement Hub to document competencies and skills developed through experiential learning. He also noted that on initiatives under Partnering for Purpose, including the launch of the UBC Catalyst Ventures Fund with an initial $20 million investment to support the development and scaling of companies based on UBC research and intellectual property. He reported that the University had raised $301 million in philanthropy, engaged more than 122,000 alumni, and received more than 782 major gifts in fiscal 2026. He also highlighted the $8 million Canadian Prescribed Fire Training Program, developed by UBC Okanagan in collaboration with the Weston Family Foundation. …