www.oise.utoronto.ca/aq SUMMER 2005 / FALL/WINTER 2005-2006 65
C. SUPPLEMENTAL PRIVILEGES
C.1In each session, a student may have only one supple-mental privilege in any course, taken in that session, in which a final grade less than the minimum required for recommen-dation for the Additional Qualification has been received.
C.2Application for supplemental privileges must be received by the Registrar’s Office within three weeks of receiving the grade or decision.
C.3A student granted supplemental privileges may qualify in one of the following ways, as authorized by the Faculty Council of OISE/UT:
i) by taking an examination
ii) by otherwise satisfying the requirements of the course Principal/instructor(s) concerned
C.4The grade achieved on any supplemental work or exam-ination will be incorporated in the evaluation procedure established by the instructor for the course concerned, and will be used to determine the student’s final grade in that course. This final grade will be applied to the criteria out-lined for recommendation for the Additional Qualification.
C.5No student will be permitted to take more than twice any final examination, final assignment, or part thereof, for any course listed in the Continuing Education Calendar except by permission of the Faculty Council of OISE/UT.
D. STUDENT ACCESS TO EXAMINATION PAPERS
D.1Copies of final examination papers for the preceding three sessions of Continuing Education courses are available in the Education Commons. These are available for review by students upon request. In some cases, departments may be granted an exemption from filing an examination.
Exemptions may be granted by the Director of the Continuing Education Program in consultation with the Associate Dean (Research and Field Activities). In those cases, an exemption notice will be filed in place of the copy of the examination.
D.2A student has the right to petition for the re-reading and re-checking of marks on a final examination or a final assign-ment. A written petition must be submitted to the Registrar within two weeks of receiving the grade or decision. A stu-dent also has the right to review, with a representative of the program, his or her final examination or final assignment. A fee covering administrative costs and copying costs (where applicable) will be levied and paid prior to this review.
E. WITHDRAWALS
A student may withdraw from an OISE/UT Continuing Education course without academic penalty on or before the last date for withdrawal without academic penalty published for each session. When a course is offered outside the regular program dates, the last date for withdrawal from a course without academic penalty shall be deemed to be the fifth class before the end of the course. If written notice of withdrawal is submitted to the Registrar before the official deadline, the designator WDR (withdrawn without academic penalty) will be entered on the student’s record. A student who withdraws without notifying the Registrar in writing will be assigned a grade of F in all courses. A student who wishes to withdraw after the official deadline must petition the Registrar for per-mission to do so without academic penalty.
F. PROCEDURES IN THE EVENT OF DISRUPTIONS
F.1 PRINCIPLES
The following principles shall apply in the event of disrup-tion of the academic program:
i) The academic integrity of academic programs must be honoured; and
ii) Students must be treated in a fair manner recognizing their freedom of choice to attend class or not without penalty.
F.2 PROCEDURES
i) The Vice-President and Provost, or the Academic Board, shall declare when a disruption of the academic pro-gram has occurred. The Provost shall take steps to inform the University community at large of the changes to be implemented and will report to the Committee on Academic Policy and Programs regarding the imple-mentation of the procedures and changes to the status of the academic programs.
ii) Individual instructors responsible for courses that are disrupted shall determine, as the disruption proceeds, whether any changes to classroom procedures are need-ed to complete the course.
iii) Changes to the classroom procedures should, where pos-sible, first be discussed with students prior to the class in which a vote of the students present on the proposed changes is to be taken. Changes agreed upon by consen-sus should be forwarded to the Principal of the course with a report on the attendance at the class where the vote was taken.
iv) Where consensus on changes has not been arrived at, or where a vote is not feasible, the instructor, after the class discussion, will provide the Director of the Continuing Education Program with his or her recommendation,
OISE/UT GRADING PRACTICES
66 SUMMER 2005 / FALL/WINTER 2005-2006 www.oise.utoronto.ca/aq
along with the results of any classroom votes. The Director, in consultation with the Associate Dean (Research and Field Activities), shall then make a decision.
v) Where classes are not able to convene, the instructor, with the prior approval of the Director of the Continuing Education Program shall make changes deemed necessary to the classroom procedures. In the absence of the instructor, the Director of the Continuing Education Program, in consultation with the Associate Dean (Research and Field Activities) will make such changes and submit them for approval to the Provost.
Where courses are to be cancelled, approval of the Faculty Council of OISE/UT is required. If the Faculty Council of OISE/UT cannot meet, approval of the Dean, or in the absence of the Dean, the approval of the Provost, is required.
vi) Students must be informed of changes to classroom pro-cedures. This may be done by circulating the changes in writing to the class, posting in the departmental and fac-ulty offices, reporting to the divisional council, as well as listing in the campus press. Should classes resume stu-dents must be informed, at class, of any changes made during the disruption.
vii) Where changes to the classroom procedures are made, students who do not wish to complete the course under the revised procedures may withdraw without academic penalty. This must be done prior to the last day of classes.
viii) Where students have not attended classes that are meet-ing, they nonetheless remain responsible for the course work and meeting course requirements. However, where possible, reasonable extension of deadlines for the course requirements, or provision of make-up tests shall be made and reasonable alternative access to material covered should be provided.
ix) A student who feels, owing to his or her special circum-stances, that changes to the classroom procedure have unreasonably affected his or her grade, may appeal the grade following the procedures as set out in each division.
G. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Where the instructor or a student has a conflict of interest, or is in a situation where a fair and objective assessment may not be possible, this should be disclosed to the Director of the Continuing Education Program or, if appropriate, to the Associate Dean (Research and Field Activities), who shall take steps to ensure fairness and objectivity.
CONTINUING EDUCATION PROGRAM
GRADING PRACTICES
PART II – INFORMATION FOR STAFF
A. PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE APPROVAL OF THE METHODS OF EVALUATION
The Faculty policy on the Procedures Governing the Approval of the Methods of Evaluation is as follows:
A.1The Director of the Continuing Education Program will receive sessionally from course Principals, details of pro-posed evaluation procedures for every course offered within their jurisdiction.
A.2The Director of the Continuing Education Program will have the responsibility of reviewing the proposed evaluation procedures and of either accepting them or requiring their modification.
A.3The decision of the Director of the Continuing Education Program to accept or to require modification of evaluation procedures will be guided by the University of Toronto Grading Practices Policy as approved by Governing Council on March 25, 1998 with particular reference to the following:
i) “Student performance in a course shall be assessed on more than one occasion. No one essay, test, examination, etc. should have a value of more than 80% of the grade”
(Part II.2 (c) in the Policy Statement).
ii) “At least one piece of term work which is a part of the evaluation of a student’s performance, whether essay, lab report, review, etc., shall be returned to the student prior to the last date for withdrawal from the course without academic penalty.” (Part II.2 (f) in the Policy statement).
iii) “In courses that meet regularly as a class there shall be an examination (or examinations) conducted formally under divisional auspices and worth (alone or in the aggregate) at least one-third of the final grade. Criteria for exemption may be determined by the division. The relative value of each part of an examination shall be indicated to the student. In each case of a written exam-ination, the value shall be indicated on the examination paper.” (Part II.2 (d) in the Policy Statement).
A.4The Director of the Continuing Education Program, in consultation with the Associate Dean (Research and Field Activities) may grant exemption from the requirement for examinations as stated in Part II.2 (d) of the University of
OISE/UT GRADING PRACTICES
www.oise.utoronto.ca/aq SUMMER 2005 / FALL/WINTER 2005-2006 67
Toronto Grading Practices Policy if the Principal and the instructor(s) of the course provide satisfactory alternative methods of evaluation. These methods of evaluation must be fair to students, consistent with the objectives of the course, as comprehensive as formal written examinations, and reflect appropriate academic standards.
A.5In addition, to qualify for exemption, one or more of the following criteria must be satisfied:
i) that there be formal examinations worth at least 25% of the final grade.
ii) that the course consists primarily of activities which are clinical, laboratory-centred or field-based.
iii) that the course be primarily concerned with the acquisi-tion and development of skills which are not appropri-ately evaluated through formal examinations, for exam-ple, oral language skills, classroom management skills, psycho-motor skills.
iv) that the course employ methods of evaluation which assess student performance on a scheduled, continuing basis throughout the duration of the course.
B. DESIGNATORS
The designators for the use of Course Principals, in consul-tation with the Director of the Continuing Education Program are:
INC – INCOMPLETE
INC is assigned by the Course Principal in consultation with the instructor where course work is not completed but where there are no grounds for assigning a failing grade. The INC carries no credit and outstanding course work must be com-plete on or before the final date for supplemental privileges.
This must be within the Calendar year in which grade reports are issued following completion of the session.
WDR – WITHDRAWN WITHOUT ACADEMIC PENALTY
WDR is assigned to all courses when a student withdraws before the deadline established for withdrawal or upon approval of a student’s petition for late withdrawal from the program. It carries no credit.
The final date for withdrawal without academic penalty is published in the Additional Qualification Calendars. When a course is offered outside the regular program dates, the last date for withdrawal from a course without academic penalty shall be deemed to be the fifth class before the end of the course. For withdrawal without penalty after the specified date, the student must petition the Registrar.
The student who withdraws without notifying the Registrar will be assigned a grade of F in all courses.
CONTINUING EDUCATION PROGRAM
APPEAL PROCEDURES
A. APPEAL OF ACADEMIC GRADES A student may discuss a disputed grade informally with the instructor(s) involved. If these discussions do not resolve the dispute, the following formal procedures may be initiated.
A.1A student may appeal, in writing, a disputed grade to the instructor responsible, within two weeks of receiving the dis-puted grade. The student will present to the instructor a writ-ten statement detailing the grounds of the appeal and the res-olution sought. The instructor will provide the student with a written statement giving the rationale for granting or deny-ing the appeal.
A.2The student may appeal the decision of the instructor, in writing, to the Director of the Continuing Education Program within two weeks of receiving the decision. The Director of the Continuing Education Program will seek to arbitrate the dispute. If the matter cannot be settled, the Director, in consultation with appropriate members of the academic staff, will review the case and submit to the student and the instructor, in writing, the ruling of the Continuing Education Office, and the rationale for the decision.
A.3The student or instructor may, within two weeks of receipt, appeal the ruling of the Continuing Education Office, through the Registrar, to the Appeals Committee of the Faculty Council of OISE/UT. This committee will accept only written submissions from each party. Neither party, nor his/her representative, may appear in person before the Appeals Committee. The written submissions should include the statements issued previously by the student, instructor and Director of the Continuing Education Program. The committee will review the case and, through the Registrar, submit in writing, to the parties concerned, the decision of the committee, and the rationale for the decision.
A.4The student, the instructor or the Director of the Continuing Education Program may, within two weeks of receipt, appeal the ruling of the Appeals Committee, in writ-ing through the Registrar, to the Divisional Appeals Committee of the Faculty Council of OISE/UT. The Chair of the Executive Committee will then, without undue delay, form a Divisional Appeals Committee to hear the appeal. In addition to providing written submissions, the appellant and a designated representative of OISE/UT may appear in per-son, with or without counsel or other advisor, and present arguments in person or by counsel/advisor. Intent to be rep-resented by counsel, or other advisor, must be stated at the time the appeal is submitted. Written material must be sub-mitted at least two weeks prior to the date of the appeal
OISE/UT GRADING PRACTICES
68 SUMMER 2005 / FALL/WINTER 2005-2006 www.oise.utoronto.ca/aq
meeting. The Divisional Appeals Committee will hear sub-missions, review the case, and communicate its decision and rationale, in writing, through the Dean of the faculty, to the parties concerned.
A.5The student may make final appeal to the Academic Appeals Board of the Governing Council of the university.
An appeal to the Academic Appeals Board shall, except in exceptional circumstances, be commenced by filing a notice of appeal with the Secretary of the Board no later than nine-ty (90) days after receipt of the divisional decision from the Dean of the faculty.
B. APPLICABILITY OF FACULTY REGULATIONS
The Registrar’s Office normally handles matters regarding the applicability of faculty regulations. A student petitioning the applicability of faculty regulations will present to the Registrar a written statement detailing the grounds of the request and the resolution sought. The Registrar, in consulta-tion with the Dean, will provide the student with a written statement giving the rationale for granting or denying the request.
OISE/UT GRADING PRACTICES
www.oise.utoronto.ca/aq SUMMER 2005 / FALL/WINTER 2005-2006 69
OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRAM
Each part of the program is 125 hours, and Part 1 has an additional 60-hour practicum component. Both parts involve some online study and participation. The Summer 2005 sessions include both a partially online component and an in-class component.
PQP PART 1
Part One of the program follows the PQP guideline from the Ontario College of Teachers (Leadership and School Operation). Study modules include:
What it means to be a principal Students with exceptionalities
Decision-making and problem-solving Human resources
Legal issues
Leadership and school operations.
The practicum is a required leadership and educational experience that involves a 20-hour observation component and a 40-hour practical leadership project. Successful com-pletion of the practicum is a prerequisite for admission to Part 2 of the PQP.
PQP PART 2
Part Two continues to follow the College of Teachers guide-line. Modules in this part include:
The new dynamics of educational leadership Dealing with change
Human resources
School program and instructional leadership Assessment, evaluation and reporting Forging bonds with the community.
WHERE:
At this time, the PQP programs are held in Toronto at OISE/UT (fall and winter sessions) and in a designated school location in the Greater Toronto Area (summer).
WHEN
Next session offerings are Summer 2005, Fall 2005, and Winter 2006.
SUMMER 2005
This session involves both on-line and in-class components:
courses begin in June 2005 with the online portion followed with in-class sessions from July 11-22, 2005.
FALL 2005
Tentative dates for the Fall 2005 session will be held over six weekends:
October 1-2 October 15-16 October 29-30 November 12-13 November 26-27 December 10-11.
For further information, check the following web site in late summer: www.oise.utoronto.ca/aq/pqp.
WINTER 2006
Session dates will be announced in the fall of 2005.
ADMISSION REQUIREMENTS
The admission requirements for the Principal’s Qualification Program can be found on our website at: www.oise.utoron-to.ca/aq/pqp/requirements.html
DEADLINE TO APPLY FOR SUMMER 2005
June 3, 2005.
APPLICATIONS
Download applications from the OISE/UT web site:
www.oise.utoronto.ca/aq/pqp.
QUESTIONS
For further specific information about the program please contact [email protected]
Inquires related to admission can be directed to the Registrar’s Office at OISE/UT:
By e-mail: [email protected] By telephone: 416 926 4762
By fax: 416 923 7834