Undergraduate Program Self-Evaluation Report – … · Web viewAs well, researchers can easily access catalogs of national and international libraries from our Library webpage

Undergraduate Program Self-Evaluation Report (Name of the discipline)

CYCLICAL REVIEW OF UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAMS

(Name of discipline for programs being evaluated)

Prepared for External Evaluation

VOLUME I: SELF-EVALUATION REPORT

(Date)

Approved by the Departmental Assembly (Date)



Updated -November 2013

43

Preamble

1. Pages 3 to 5 are for information purposes only. Do not include them in the version you submit to the Office of the Vice-President Academic and Provost.

2. Do not include the template instructions in the version you submit to the Office of the Vice-President Academic and Provost.

3. Be sure the report is written in both official languages or, at the very least, the Summary or Introduction and Conclusion are in both languages.

4. Place tables with the corresponding text.

5. If the course is given in both French and English, include the course codes and names in both languages in Table 1.

6. Submit an electronic copy (preferably a MS Word document) and 4 double-sided paper copies of Volume 1 Self-evaluation Report.

7. Submit an electronic copy (preferably a MS Word document) and one double-sided paper copy of Volume II CVs of Regular Professors.

8. Submit 2 double-sided paper copies of the template and Volume III Selection of External Reviewers.

9. Do not include the checklist with the version you submit to the Office of the Vice-President Academic and Provost.

10. Include the Guidelines for University Undergraduate Degree Level Expectations (Ontario Council of Academic Vice-Presidents), as Appendix 2.

11. Include the library report in support of the programs of study, as Appendix 3. The Library will provide you with this report.

12. Consult the tools available at www.saea.uottawa.ca/cpu/ to help you prepare the self-evaluation report.

13. If you have any questions, please contact one of the individuals below.

Madeleine Boisvert, Coordinator, Evaluation of Programs and CoursesOffice of the Vice-President Academic and Provost

[email protected] (extension 1076)

Jovan Groen, Curriculum Design and Quality of Learning Specialist Centre for University Teaching (CUT)


Caroline Brisson, Executive Assistant, Management and ProjectsOffice of Institutional Research and Planning


Tony Horava, Associate University librarian University of Ottawa Library Network


Programs subject to the evaluation process

The evaluation process applies to all undergraduate programs that lead to a degree or a diploma from the University of Ottawa, whether they require prior university studies or not. Also subject to evaluation are programs offered by affiliated or federated institutions under collaborative agreements or partnerships with other colleges and universities.

Undergraduate programs are evaluated in turn every seven years, according to a pre-determined schedule. If exceptional circumstances require an evaluation be deferred, the Quality Council must be advised. The schedule takes into account evaluations required for graduate programs and evaluations conducted by professional accreditation bodies.

Programs that require professional accreditation can undergo both the cyclical review and the accreditation at the same time. The template for evaluating these programs is designed to meet the requirements of evaluations by professional bodies and the cyclical review. The schedule is determined by the requirements of the professional accreditation process; however, when accreditation visits take place every four years, cyclical reviews take place only every eight years.

Bidisciplinary programs and integrated programs are assessed discipline-by-discipline during the cyclical review of the disciplinary program (major, honours or honours with specialization).

General bachelors programs also undergo cyclical reviews, but these are conducted using a specifically designed template and do not involve an external review component.

For joint and other collaborative undergraduate programs, the cyclical review process will include a self-evaluation report that clearly explains how input was received from faculty, staff and students at each partner institution. The selection of reviewers involves participation by each partner institution, and the site visit involves all partner institutions preferably at all sites (with exceptions noted, as per Quality Assurance Framework). Reviewers consult faculty, staff and students at each partner institution, preferably in person.

A self-evaluation requires a concerted reflection on and a critical analysis of program strengths and weaknesses and, as such, points the way to how improvements can be made. The self-evaluation report must be not only descriptive but also analytical. The Universitys Office of Institutional Research and Planning provides academic units with the results of various surveys that may be used to enrich and support the analysis.

The Senate Committee on the Evaluation of Undergraduate Programs developed this template to facilitate the self-evaluation process and to standardize self-evaluation reports prepared by various academic units. Although the basic information on programs, student progress, faculty members and resources is common to all programs, adjustments may be needed to describe specific programs more accurately. Units may modify the template depending on their needs as long as they include the basic information in their report. The template is to be used in conjunction with the document Institutional Quality Assurance Process: Protocol for the Cyclical Review of Programs.

Evaluation of undergraduate programs takes into account the Quality Councils Framework, the Ontario Council of Academic Vice-Presidents (OCAV) guidelines for University Degree Level Expectations and the learning outcomes of both the program and the degree. These periodic reviews of undergraduate programs allow us to measure the degree to which programs:

have achieved program goals and learning outcomes;

meet students needs and provide students with a university experience that lives up to their high expectations;

help the University execute its academic plan and accomplish its mission;

have the quantity and quality of human, financial and material resources they need and

are viable and remain relevant.

Self-evaluation

The self-evaluation process allows us to critically analyze all aspects of a program, specifically, the curriculum, student population and faculty resources, as well as all other human, financial and material resources. It is an in-depth, forward-looking probe based on significant data and on quality indicators. The self-evaluation calls for the involvement of all professors in the academic unit, a representative number of studentsespecially those serving on the units assembly or standing committeesand administrative staff.

The self-evaluation report must include a specific description of educational goals and learning outcomes of the program under review. The goals refer to the programs purpose (specific profession and graduate studies, in-depth training in a specific discipline, prerequisite training for a related program, etc.), while the outcomes translate students expected learning in terms of knowledge, skills and attitudes. The report must make reference to the Guidelines for University Undergraduate Degree Level Expectations, approved by the Ontario Council of Academic Vice-Presidents (OCAV).

Information to be included in the self-evaluation report

The self-evaluation report must include the following.

a) A rationale indicating the programs goals, learning outcomes, undergraduate degree level expectations, student profile and enrollment

b) A detailed description of the programs structure and content (total number of credits; discipline, optional and elective courses; year-by-year course sequence), admission requirements and opportunities, including access to graduate studies

c) A statement on ways in which the curriculum addresses the current state of the discipline or area of study

d) A description of the program delivery methods, teaching evaluation and learning assessment

e) The administrative structure of the program

f) The language(s) of instruction of the program

g) The length of the program

h) Program-related data and measures of performance, including applicable provincial, national and professional standards (where applicable)

i) A comparison with similar programs offered elsewhere, ensuring that any innovative aspects or distinctive features of the program are highlighted, including the strengths of the academic unit, teaching staff, partnerships, etc.

j) An evaluation of resources (space, professorial, material and financial) required to offer the program as well as an indication of expected class sizes

k) An evaluation of academic services (library, co-op education, academic guidance, etc.)

l) Concerns and recommendations raised in previous reviews

m) Comments deemed relevant and useful received from others (e.g. graduates of the program; employers; representatives from industry, business, the professions or practical training programs) may also be included in the self-evaluation

The Senate Committee on the Evaluation of Undergraduate Programs (SCEUP) reviews the self-evaluation reports. The Committee then meets with the authors of the reports as well as with the chair of the academic unit concerned and asks for any necessary changes to be made. The revised self-evaluation report is then forwarded to the external reviewers.

The self-evaluation report is much more than a description of the aspects being evaluated. It must be the product of a thorough examination of the programs strengths and weaknesses; where applicable, it must also suggest how the program can be improved and what its future directions are.

To help units draft their self-evaluation reports, the University has developed a workshop and a detailed template (Template for the Self-Evaluation of Undergraduate Programs), available online at http://www.uottawa.ca/vr-etudes-academic/en/templates.html. Units can also call on the expertise of the Teaching and Learning Support Service. Finally, through the Office of Institutional Research and Planning (OIRP), they can also tap into a range of relevant statistics on the student population such as the number of applications, offers and acceptances; admission averages; registration figures; size and direction of cohorts; languages used; student age, sex, region of origin; withdrawal rates; graduation rates; length of study before graduation; grade distribution; grades in the final year of study; teaching evaluation results and number of registrations per class. OIPR also provides academic units with the results of surveys conducted among students registered in the program and students who have completed the program since the last review.

Self-evaluation reports are comprised of three volumes. The first volume is the evaluation itself. Volume two contains the CVs of all faculty members. The third volume includes the CVs of the suggested external reviewers.

It is important that some sections of the report be written in French and others in English. If, for some reason, a unilingual report is submitted, the Committee will ask to have the summary presented in the other official language.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.SUMMARY4

2.INTRODUCTION4

3.PROGRAM DESCRIPTION4

3.1Program evaluated4

3.2Disciplinary or professional goals and learning outcomes the program is expected to achieve4

3.3Program structure6

3.4 Comparison with other programs7

3.5Curriculum and modes of delivery8

3.6Grading8

3.7Progress since the last evaluation or program review process8

3.8Changes made to the program9

3.9 Bidisciplinary programs9

3.10 Interdepartmental, interfaculty, interuniversity and international contributions9

3.11 Contribution to the Universitys mission9

4.STUDENT POPULATION10

4.1Admission process10

4.2 Applications for admission, admission offers and registrations11

4.3 Registrations13

4.4 Progress through the program16

4.5 Student experience18

4.6Survey among graduates25

5. PROFESSORIAL RESOURCES26

5.1 Full-time teaching staff26

5.2 Part-time professors28

5.3 Ratio of regular / part-time professors29

5.4Evaluation of teaching and courses30

6.HUMAN, MATERIAL AND FINANCIAL RESOURCES30

7. CONCLUSION31

Checklist32

List of tables

TABLE 1

Program structure6

TABLE 2

Availability of disciplinary courses in French and English7

TABLE 3

Comparison of program structures with those of other universities7

TABLE 4a

Admission average of new students (entering directly from high school / final averages)10

TABLE 4b

Origin of new students11

TABLE 4c

Applications for admission, admission offers and registrations by program language11

TABLE 4d

Applications for admission, admission offers and registrations by citizenship status12

TABLE 5a

Full-time and part-time registrations by program (Fall)13

TABLE 5b

Full-time and part-time registrations in second study module (Fall)13

TABLE 6

Registration by origin in discipline courses (2012-13)14

TABLE 7

Breakdown of class size by course level and language of instruction14

TABLE 8

Registrations by language15

TABLE 9

Registrations by sex in all programs15

TABLE 10

Registrations by immigration status in all programs15

TABLE 11a

Progress of cohorts in the discipline (retention and graduation rates in the discipline)16

TABLE 11b

Progress of cohorts in the discipline (retention and graduation rates at the University)16

TABLE 11c

Progress of cohorts in the faculty (retention and graduation rates by faculty at the University)16

TABLE 12a

Degrees conferred (first discipline)17

TABLE 12b

Degrees conferred (second discipline)17

TABLE 13a

Percentage of students / graduates who report being very satisfied or satisfied with their experience in their program of study18

TABLE 13b

Percentage of students / graduates who strongly agree or agree with the following statements about their program of study19

TABLE 13c

Percentage of students / graduates who identify the items below as being a major obstacle to access courses20

TABLE 13d

Percentage of students who have participated in the following experiential learning activities21

TABLE 13e

Percentage of students / graduates who indicate that their experience at uOttawa (including in-class and out-of-class activities) contributed a lot or moderately to their learning and development in each of the following areas22

TABLE 14a

Summary of graduates employment situation25

TABLE 14b

Percentage of graduates who indicate that the following aspects of their program of study are very or moderately relevant to their current position26

TABLE 15

Full-time professors27

TABLE 16

Full-time professors: Areas of specialization (July 20xx)27

TABLE 17

Teaching load of regular and replacement professors28

TABLE 18

Undergraduate teaching / professors29

TABLE 19

Evaluation of courses (all professors)30

List of appendices

APPENDIX 1

Grade distribution for the last year34

APPENDIX 2

Guidelines for University Undergraduate Degree Level Expectations35

APPENDIX 3

Library support38

APPENDIX 4

Bidisciplinary programs42

1. SUMMARY

Summarize both the programs strengths and areas where improvement is needed.

Describe the process followed to prepare this self-evaluation (including the impact and involvement of full-time and part-time faculty and students, subcommittees, etc.) as well as the discussion forums used (meetings, retreats, study days, etc.).

2. INTRODUCTION

Present the history of the academic unit[footnoteRef:2] and of the discipline at the University of Ottawa (see previous reports). Provide a list of all the undergraduate programs offered by the unit and clearly identify them or those evaluated in the report. Give a brief summary of the report. [2: The term academic unit means a department, school, faculty, section (civil law, for instance) or program. ]

3. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

3.1Program evaluated

Provide the exact name of the program involved in the self-evaluation (include constituents if necessary).

3.2Disciplinary or professional goals and learning outcomes the program is expected to achieve

Describe very specifically the educational goals and learning outcomes of your program. The goals refer to the programs purpose (specific profession and graduate studies, in-depth training in a specific discipline, prerequisite training for a related program, etc.) while the outcomes indicate students expected learning in terms of knowledge, skills and attitudes.

Units can consult Jovan Groen, curriculum design and quality learning specialist at the Teaching and Learning Support Service, for assistance with the learning outcomes.

(http://www.saea.uottawa.ca/cpu/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&layout=item&id=38&Itemid=246&lang=en)

It is very important to clearly define the programs educational goals and learning outcomes because these parameters justify all aspects of and resources for the program.

Do not include this text box in the report.

Complete the table below for the program or programs being evaluated (see Appendix 2). If the program undergoes professional accreditation, replace this table with the table submitted for accreditation. However, be sure to indicate the accreditation element that corresponds to each of the categories in the table below and that each category is represented in the accreditation. If any categories are not included in the accreditation, include the missing elements in your table.

Learning outcomes

(If you have only one program, remove second column.)

Name of degree

This degree is awarded to students who have demonstrated:

Name of degree


1. Depth and breadth of knowledge

2. Knowledge of methodologies

3. Application of knowledge

4. Communication skills

5. Awareness of limits of knowledge

6. Autonomy and professional capacity

3.3Program structure

Complete Table 1 and include a copy of the program, as it is presented in the Universitys calendar, as an Appendix. If the program offers the co-op option, attach the sequence of co-op terms as well.

TABLE 1Program structure

(If you have only one program, remove second column.)

Program name:

Program name:

Code:

Cr.

Title abbrev.:

Code:

Cr.

Title abbrev.:

Compulsory core courses[footnoteRef:3] [3: Core courses are designed to improve general knowledge and education (for instance, first-language, second-language, philosophy, mathematics courses); these courses contribute to the breadth of the training.]

Compulsory core courses

Subtotal:

Subtotal:

Compulsory courses in the discipline[footnoteRef:4] [4: If your program has a set number of compulsory credits instead of a specific course list, state this clearly. For example, Nine credits selected from the following courses:]

Compulsory courses in the discipline

Subtotal:

Subtotal:

Optional courses[footnoteRef:5] [5: Enter only the number of optional credits required in the discipline to complete the program.]

Optional courses

Total number of optional credits required:

Total number of optional credits required:

Number of credits at the 3000 level:



Elective courses[footnoteRef:6] [6: These are courses the student is free to choose. The credits are required for the degree but are not part of the program per se.]

Elective courses

Number of credits required:

Number of credits required:

Total credits:

Total credits:

i) Justify the structure of the program (core credits, disciplinary credits, compulsory and optional credits, elective courses, number of credits for each of the course groups, credit totals and areas of specialization).

ii) Show how the curriculum reflects the current state of the discipline or field of study and highlights the innovative and creative elements with respect to content that set the curriculum or program apart from similar ones.

iii) Discuss the availability of courses in French and English, taking into account the Universitys mission.

TABLE 2Availability of disciplinary courses in French and English

French

English

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

CMNxxxx

CMNxxxx

1. Courses offered in Fall and Winter sessions.

iv) Discuss French and English teaching material.

v) List the courses (codes and titles) that have not been offered for more than three years and indicate the reasons for the decision to not offer the courses.

3.4 Comparison with other programs

i) Compare your program structure as well as the orientation or areas of specialization with those at other universities, especially in Ontario (at least two Ontario institutions and others in Canada or elsewhere if relevant).

TABLE 3Comparison of program structures with those of other universities

Universities

Programs

Compulsory core credits

Compulsory credits in the discipline

Optional credits in the discipline

Electives credits

Total

Ottawa

ii) Discuss of the objectives and strengths of your program as well as the programs distinctive features and innovative aspects of the program structure, as compared with other programs.

iii) Explain how the program is consistent with the goals and strengths of the academic unit(s) in terms of teaching and research.

3.5Curriculum and modes of delivery

i) Briefly describe the main teaching methods used in the program (lectures, labs, practicums, internships, etc.).

ii) Indicate the main modes of delivery used (e.g., lecture format, distance, online).

iii) Explain how these teaching methods and modes of delivery help students reach the learning objectives of the program and if it would beneficial to consider other teaching methods or delivery modes in order to improve learning outcomes.

iv) Comment on how your unit gives professors a faculty-wide vision of the programs and how their courses fit within this context.

v) Are there any courses in other disciplines that were created for students in your program? If so, which ones, and describe the context. Are you involved in scheduling the courses or selecting professors or teaching materials for these courses?

vi) How are the special needs of different groups taken into consideration in developing course content (e.g., learning disability, visual impairment, hearing impairment, accommodations, etc.)?

3.6Grading

i) Briefly describe the main methods used to evaluate student progress in the program and explain the relevance and effectiveness of these methods.

ii) Is there a policy on grading in your unit? If so, provide a brief description (e.g., the specific number of assignments, weighting of evaluations, oral presentations cannot count for more than a certain percentage of the final mark).

iii) To what extent does the program, including the disciplinary or professional component, stress the importance of mastering ones first official language?

During their visit, external evaluators should have access to the work of students finishing the program to help them evaluate whether the competency levels and program learning outcomes are being met. Examples of such work include a terminal research paper, 4th-year thesis, poster presentation, clinical activities and practical exercises.

Do not include this text box in the report.

3.7Progress since the last evaluation or program review process

i) What concerns were raised in the last review and what has been done in response to the evaluators comments and recommendations?

3.8Changes made to the program

i) Describe any program changes planned for the coming years or any changes that have been implemented as part of the undergraduate program reform.

3.9 Bidisciplinary programs

(See table in Appendix 4)

The questions below apply to bidisciplinary programs only. Please answer the questions in consultation with the other discipline.

1. Describe the program structure. Include the requirements for each discipline.

1. What are the program objectives? How are they presented to students?

1. List the program learning outcomes.

1. What mechanisms are in place to integrate the content of the two disciplines?

1. How is the effect of having two disciplines measured? How is the program different from a double major in the same disciplines?

1. How does this program meet the need for both specialization and flexibility?

1. What support and supervision are offered to students (related to admission, course selection, problems and difficulties, career counselling, job opportunities, graduate studies options)? Describe the role professors and academic advisers play in supervising students.

1. What type of learning community support is offered specifically to students in this program (for example, cohort, student organization, groups of students taking two or three courses together)? How does it contribute to learning and knowledge development? How does it help create a sense of belonging?

1. Comment on program governance: Explain how the different academic units involved in offering this program interact. How are decisions made about program structure, curriculum consistency and course offerings?

1. Discuss what your unit does to ensure professors have an overview of your units courses and see how their courses fit in.

3.10 Interdepartmental, interfaculty, interuniversity and international contributions

i) Describe how your unit contributes to training students registered in other programs in your faculty or in other faculties.

ii) Describe any initiatives implemented in your academic unit to provide an international element to the program (e.g., lectures, seminars, workshops, internships, exchanges, etc.).

3.11 Contribution to the Universitys mission

i) Indicate the degree to which the programs learning outcomes are consistent with the Universitys mission and degree level expectations and the degree to which graduates of the program achieve these learning outcomes.

ii) Comment on how the program contributes to the Universitys mission and academic plan, specifically on:

the availability of programs of a national and international calibre, in both French and English;

the availability of programs and services that fulfill the needs of Ontarios francophone population;

how it supports and develops the Universitys bilingual character (e.g., knowledge of ones second official language);

how it supports and promotes interdisciplinarity and

opportunities for students to gain international experience.

4.STUDENT POPULATION

Please analyze all tables and comment on trends.

4.1 Admission process

i) Briefly describe the admission process and requirements (academic record, interviews, language tests, prerequisites, averages, etc.) and how they contribute positively to candidate selection.

ii) Is there sufficient explanation of any other requirements, such as minimum grade point average and additional languages or portfolios as well as how the program recognizes prior work or learning experience?

iii) Explain how admission requirements will help the student achieve learning outcomes.

iv) Compare the admission average of students admitted over the past eight years and comment on this information (see tables 4a and 4b).

TABLE 4aAdmission average of new students (entering directly from high school / final averages)

Name of program

University of Ottawa or faculty

Number

Below 72%

72% to 85%

Above 85%

Number

Below 72%

72% to 85%

Higher than 85%

2005-2006

%

%

%

%

%

%

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2008-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

1. For direct-entry faculties, includes only full-time, first-year undergraduate students entering directly from high school who are registered in a bachelors program on November 1 of the year in question. For professional faculties (Medicine, Law and Education), all candidates are included.

2. Includes enrollment in the first program of study only since this is the basis of admission to the University.

3. Excludes students enrolled in bidisciplinary, minor and general programs in this discipline.

TABLE 4bOrigin of new students

Candidate type

2005-06

2006-07

2007-08

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

High school

Ontario

Quebec - Secondary V

Other Canadian

International

CEGEP (Yr 1-Yr 2)

College transfers

Ontario

Other Canadian

International

University transfers

Canadian

International

Mature applicants

Other

Special students

Home schooled

Postsecondary

Grand total

4.2 Applications for admission, admission offers and registrations

Comment on trends reflected by the statistics provided in the following tables.

TABLE 4c Applications for admission, admission offers and registrations by program language

Name of program

University of Ottawa or faculty

Year

Applications (excluding internal transfers)

Offers

Percentage of offers

Registrations

Percentage of registrations


Offers


Registrations


English

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

French

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

TABLE 4dApplications for admission, admission offers and registrations by citizenship status

Year


Offers


Registrations



Offers


Registrations


Canadian or permanent resident

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

International students

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

(These note apply to tables 4b, 4c and 4d)

1.Includes applicants for the Fall session only. Internal transfers are excluded in order to measure the appeal of the program to prospective students.

2.Includes applications to the first discipline only since this is the basis of admission to the University.

3. Includes registrations as of November 1 of each year in the same program as the one for which the students were admitted.

4.Applicants for immersion programs are grouped with applicants for English programs.

5.Excludes enrollments in bidisciplinary, minor and general programs.

4.3 Registrations

i) Describe the general trends for full- and part-time registration, as shown by tables 5a and 5b.

TABLE 5aFull-time and part-time registrations by program (Fall)

Program type

FT/PT

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

Professional, Specialization or equivalent

FT

PT

Honours bachelor: 2 majors or 1 major + 1 minor

FT

PT

General (4 years): 1 major or 2 minors

FT

PT

General (3 years): with or without minor

FT

PT

Total

FT

PT

Grand total

1. Professional includes bachelors programs offered by the faculties of Law, Education and Medicine. Equivalent to an honours includes bachelors programs offered by the faculties of Engineering and Health Sciences as well as Telfer.

TABLE 5bFull-time and part-time registrations in second study module (Fall)

Program type

Year

FT/PT

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

Major

FT

PT

Minor

FT

PT

(These notes apply to tables 5a and 5b)

1. Includes registrations as of November 1 of each year.

2. Table 5a includes undergraduate students enrolled in this program of study via their first discipline.

Excludes students registered bidisciplinary programs.

3. Table 5b includes students enrolled in this discipline via a minor program.

ii) Comment on the region of origin in your discipline courses, according to data in Table 6.

TABLE 6Registration by origin in discipline courses (2012-13)

Course code

CMN

Other 1

Other 2

Other 3

Other 4

Other 5

Residual

CMNXXXX

CMNXXXX

CMNXXXX

CMNXXXX

CMNXXXX

Note: The top five disciplines are presented separately above; the others are included under residual.

(These notes apply to table 6)

1. Includes undergraduate courses in the Fall, Winter and Summer sessions. Excludes LPR (Letter of permission), TRF (Transfer) and CAR (Carleton) courses.

2. Includes course registrations of undergraduate students enrolled in this program of study via their first discipline. Excludes students enrolled bidisciplinary programs.

iii) Comment on the class size by course level, according to data in Table 7.

TABLE 7Breakdown of class size by course level and language of instruction

2005-2006

2012-13

Course level / Registrations

Number

1-29

30-60

61-100

101-250

251+

Number

1-29

30-60

61-100

101-250

251+

English

Level 1000

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

Level 2000

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

Level 3000

Level 4000

French

Level 1000

Level 2000

Level 3000

Level 4000

iv) Comment on changes in makeup of student population according to language, sex and immigration status (tables 8 to 10).

TABLE 8Registrations by language

Language of use

Language of study

Year

F

E

F

E

I

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

TABLE 9Registrations by sex in all programs

2005-

2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-

2012

2012-

2013

Men

Women

Total

% women

TABLE 10Registrations by immigration status in all programs

2005-

2006

2006-2007

2007-

2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-

2012

2012-

2013

Canadians and permanent residents

International students

Total

% international students

(These notes apply to tables 9 and 10)

1. Includes registrations as of November 1 of each year.

2. Includes only undergraduate students enrolled in this program via their first discipline.

3. Excludes special students and students enrolled in this discipline via a minor program.

4.4 Progress through the program

i) Comment on the progress of cohorts listed in Table 11.

ii) Comment on the length of studies (including the proportion of students requiring more than 4 or 5 years in the case of co-op).

iii) How do the rates of graduation, withdrawal and transfer to other established programs within the academic unit concerned compare with those of the University on the whole?

TABLE 11aProgress of cohorts in the discipline (retention and graduation rates in the discipline)

Cohort

Enrollment

% Cont.

2nd year

% Cont. 3rd year

% Grad. in 4 years

% Cont. 5th year

% Grad. in 5 years

% Cont. 6th year

% Grad. in 6 years

% Cont. 7th year

% Grad. in 7 years

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

TABLE 11bProgress of cohorts in the discipline (retention and graduation rates at the University)

Cohort

Enrollment

% Cont.

2nd year

% Cont. 3rd year

% Grad. in 4 years

% Cont. 5th year

% Grad. in 5 years

% Cont. 6th year

% Grad. in 6 years

% Cont. 7th year

% Grad. in 7 years

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

TABLE 11cProgress of cohorts in the faculty (retention and graduation rates by faculty at the University)

Cohort

Enrollment

% Cont.

2nd year

% Cont. 3rd year

% Grad. in 4 years

% Cont. 5th year

% Grad. in 5 years

% Cont. 6th year

% Grad. in 6 years

% Cont. 7th year

% Grad. in 7 years

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

(These notes apply to tables 11a, 11b and 11 c)

0. For direct-entry faculties, includes only full-time, first-year undergraduate students coming directly from high school. For professional faculties and Saint Paul University, all new first-year, full-time students are included.

0. Table 11a and 11b exclude bidisciplinary programs.

TABLE 12aDegrees conferred (first discipline)

Calendar year

Sex

Language of study

Immigration status

Total

Men

Women

French

English

Immersion

Canadian or permanent resident

International student

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Annual average

%

1. Includes only degrees granted to undergraduate students who were enrolled in this program of study via their first discipline. Excludes students enrolled in bidisciplinary programs.

TABLE 12bDegrees conferred (second discipline)

Calendar year

Sex

Language of study

Immigration status

Total

Men

Women

French

English

Immersion

Canadian permanent resident

International student

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Annual average

%

1. Includes only degrees granted to undergraduate students who were enrolled in this program of study via their first discipline. Excludes students enrolled in bidisciplinary and minor programs.

iv) Comment on the number of degrees conferred each year (give figures for last eight years).

v) Comment on number of withdrawals from program after one year of study.

vi) Grade distribution (by course and for the previous year). Analyze grade distributions in different courses (append the table provided by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning). Highlight differences between sections of a single course, between same-level courses but with different languages of instruction, etc. (see Appendix 1).

4.5 Student experience

i) Are the program objectives clearly conveyed to students? Are course descriptions clear and available to students at course selection time?

ii) How are students provided with advice and guidance during their studies (related to admissions, course selection, crises or other difficulties, career path, discipline-specific opportunities, choosing schools for graduate studies, etc.)? Describe the role of professors and academic advisors in student guidance.

iii) When teaching takes place in very large groups, indicate what measures are implemented to adequately address potential problems.

iv) Describe special guidance efforts and other means used, when needed, to improve student retention and graduation rates.

v) Describe student participate in your unit or faculty committees as well as how you maintain links with student associations.

vi) Do undergraduates have access to complementary events like lectures, seminars and debates that can provide a source of intellectual stimulation in program-related topics? Do professors from your unit take part in these events?

vii) Comment on any other aspects of the student survey regarding students University experience that are not explored in items 4.5 i) to 4.5 vi).

viii) Discuss students satisfaction with their program as it relates to objectives and scorecard indicators (end-of-program survey results).

Students

Graduates

Your program

Faculty average

Your program

Faculty average

Response rate

Number of respondents

TABLE 13aPercentage of students / graduates who report being very satisfied or satisfied with their experience in their program of study

Students

Graduates

Your program

Faculty average

Your program

Faculty average

Very satisfied

Satisfied

Students: Question 7, End-of-Program Survey 2013

Graduates: Question 3, Undergraduate Alumni Survey 2013

TABLE 13b

Percentage of students / graduates who strongly agree or agree with the following statements about their program of study

Students

Your program

Faculty average

I believe this program offers high-quality training in my field of studies.

Strongly agree

Agree

The courses offered cover a broad range of topics.

Strongly agree

Agree

The courses offered allow for a good integration between theory and practice.

Strongly agree

Agree

The courses offered allow me to gain an international perspective on my field of studies.

Strongly agree

Agree

Program objectives are clearly conveyed to students.

Strongly agree

Agree

Program requirements are clearly conveyed to students.

Strongly agree

Agree

The course sequence seems well structured to me (e.g. courses at a lower level, especially prerequisite courses, are a good preparation for higher-level courses).

Strongly Agree

Agree

Course timetables are generally reasonable.

Strongly agree

Agree

Initiatives are undertaken to foster a sense of belonging to the program (i.e. people feel that they are part of a group sharing with common interests, goals, values and experiences).

Strongly agree

Agree


TABLE 13c

Percentage of students / graduates who identify the items below as being a major obstacle to access courses

Students

Your program

Faculty average

Compulsory courses

Limited course offerings (courses not offered for several consecutive sessions)

Availability of the course in your preferred language

Limited space in the courses offered

Scheduling conflicts

Optional courses





Elective courses





Students: Questions 9 to 11, End-of-Program Survey 2013

TABLE 13d

Percentage of students who have participated in the following experiential learning activities

Students

Your program

Faculty Average

Participated in the Universitys Co-operative Education Program (CO-OP)

Participated in work integrated-learning experiences other than CO-OP (e.g. practicum, internship, clinical placements)

Worked on campus as part of the Universitys Work-Study Program

Worked on campus outside of the University Work-Study Program

Worked for an organization associated with the University

Participated in the Universitys Community Service Learning (CSL) program

Obtained a Co-Curricular Record from the Centre for Global and Community Engagement for participating in volunteer experiences other than CSL placements

Worked on a research project with a faculty member as part of a course or program requirement

Participated in the Undergraduate Research Opportunity Program (UROP)

Worked on a research project with a faculty member outside of a course or program requirement (other than UROP).

Participated in the Universitys International Exchange Program

Participated in an experience abroad other than the International Exchange Program (e.g. practicum, seminar, conference, research project or field-work)

Participated in a culminating academic experience (e.g. capstone course, senior project or thesis, honours research project, final-year seminar, etc.)

Was part of a learning community organized by the University (e.g. groups of students taking two or more classes together, participants of a seminar or a workshop, study groups, etc.)

Participated in a practical experience as part of a course of my program (e.g. lab work, field experiences, trips to historical or cultural venues such as museums)

Participated in a university competition or simulation on topics related to my program of study

Participated in a mentoring program organized by the University or in collaboration with the University

Was part of a student association or club that affiliated with the Student Federation of the University of Ottawa (SFUO), or my faculty or department

Was an active member of a University, faculty or department committee

Students: Question 14 - End-of-Program Survey 2013

TABLE 13e

Percentage of students / graduates who indicate that their experience at uOttawa (including in-class and out-of-class activities) contributed a lot or moderately to their learning and development in each of the following areas

Students

Graduates

Your program

Faculty average

Your program

Faculty average

Acquiring knowledge

A thorough comprehension of the core concepts and principles taught in your program

Contributed a lot

Contributed moderately

Work-related knowledge and skills

Contributed a lot


Prepare for further studies

Contributed a lot


A broad knowledge base

Contributed a lot


Understanding of the limits of the knowledge acquired

Contributed a lot


Applying and developing knowledge

Undertake research

Contributed a lot


Planning and completing projects

Contributed a lot


Using academic publications and other primary data sources

Contributed a lot


Using current technologies in my field of study

Contributed a lot


Use quantitative methods

Contributed a lot


Use qualitative methods

Contributed a lot


Judging the value of information

Contributed a lot


Analysis and problem solving

Critical and analytical thinking

Contributed a lot


Defining and solving problems

Contributed a lot


Demonstrating creativity

Contributed a lot


Communication skills

Writing clearly and effectively

Contributed a lot


Speaking clearly and effectively

Contributed a lot


Crafting convincing arguments

Contributed a lot


Teamwork, autonomy and leadership skills

Working effectively with others

Contributed

a lot


Working independently

Contributed

a lot


Making decisions

Contributed

a lot


Exercising leadership

Contributed

a lot


Learning skills

Acquiring effective study and learning skills

Contributed

a lot


Identifying training needs

Contributed

a lot


Personal growth

Achieving personal growth

Contributed

a lot


Building self-confidence

Contributed

a lot


Developing integrity and a code of ethics

Contributed

a lot


Developing social responsibility

Contributed

a lot


Developing sensitivity and tolerance toward different views, cultures and ways of life

Contributed

a lot




4.6Survey among graduates

i) Present and analyze the following aspects (include the relevant tables):

Employment rate six months and two years after graduation

Admission to graduate studies

Areas of employment

Type of employment (permanent, etc.)

Relevance of training for the labour market

Graduates overall satisfaction with their program of studies, with their training at the University and with the Universitys objectives

* The survey conducted among students contains information on some of the items in this section.

Graduates

Your program

Faculty average

Response rate

Number of respondents

TABLE 14a

Summary of graduates employment situation

Graduates

Questions

Your program

Faculty average

% of graduates who enrolled in a graduate program

Q8

Of these, % of graduates who attended uOttawa

Q9

% of graduates currently employed

Q12

Of these, % with a full-time position

Q13

% with a permanent position

Q14

% who report job is very much / moderately related to field of study

Q20

% very satisfied / satisfied with employment

Q21

Graduates: Undergraduate Alumni Survey 2013. See table above for reference to specific questions.

TABLE 14b

Percentage of graduates who indicate that the following aspects of their program of study are very or moderately relevant to their current position

Graduates

Your program

Faculty average

Program content

Very relevant

Moderately

relevant

Specific skills learned (e.g. lab techniques, translating, computer programming)

Very relevant

Moderately relevant

General skills learned (e.g. written/oral communication, analytical thinking, problem-solving, decision-making, leadership)

Very relevant

Moderately relevant


5. PROFESSORIAL RESOURCES

5.1 Full-time teaching staff

NOTE: For interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary programs not connected to a home unit, provide information based on the compulsory courses of the programs.

i) Comment on how the regular teaching staff has changed yearly since the last review (number of regular positions, resignations, retirements, prolonged absences, hirings, replacement professors).

ii) Indicate the number of women and members of a visible minority the regular teaching staff comprises and comment on these numbers.

iii) Comment on the level of bilingualism among professors.

iv) Comment on the training and areas of specialization of the faculty members as they relate to the program structure.

v) Comment on professors training and skills, awards and distinctions; percentage of courses taught by regular professors and contract professors; number of professors; number of courses taught; training and skills of part-time professors.

TABLE 15Full-time professors

Year

Number of regular positions

Retirements and vacant positions[footnoteRef:7] [7: Number of retired professors and number of vacant positions as of July 1. For example, for the 2005-2006 academic year, this is July 1, 2005.]

Prolonged absences[footnoteRef:8] [8: Includes sick leave, disability without pay but not sabbaticals or parental leave. ]

Replacement professors

Hirings (tenure track)[footnoteRef:9] [9: Hirings as of July 1. For example, for the 2005-2006 academic year, this is July 1, 2005. ]

Total

contingent[footnoteRef:10] [10: Total contingent includes all regular and all replacement professors; excludes positions that remain vacant (because of retirement, illness, long-term absence, etc.).]

Sex

W

M

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

TABLE 16Full-time professors: Areas of specialization (July 20xx)

Last name, first name

M / W

Rank

Year of hiring

Areas of specialization

(links to the program content and structure)

vi) Comment on the ratio of the full-time students to regular professors and changes over time.

TABLE 17 Teaching load of regular and replacement professors

Professor

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

Enter course code

Enter course code

Enter course code

1. Clearly indicate if a replacement professor. Mention sabbaticals and release time (reduced load) when giving teaching load figures.

vii) Comment on teaching loadsthe contribution of regular and replacement professors over the last three years (differentiate between course levels and include graduate-level courses). Indicate release time (reduced load), full and partial sabbaticals, administrative responsibilities (e.g. chair, program head, etc.).

viii) Discuss the number of retirements forecast over the coming years and what recruitment strategies the unit will use to maintain program quality.

5.2 Part-time professors

i) Comment on the number of part-time professors and the number of sections taught by part-time professors over the last three years.

ii) What qualifications are expected of part-time professors?

iii) Comment on the percentage of sections / undergraduate courses taught by part-time professors, broken down by year levels.

iv) What measures have you implemented to facilitate the integration of part-time professors and their participation in activities of the academic unit?

v) Do part-time professors make a particular contribution to the program?

vi) What resources are available to part-time professors (office, email, telephone, photocopiers, etc.)?

5.3 Ratio of regular / part-time professors

i)Discuss the ratio of teaching done by regular and part-time professors over the last three years.

TABLE 18Undergraduate teaching / professors

Level

Total number of sections / courses taught in the program[footnoteRef:11] [11: If a course has more than a section, count each section separately. ]

Courses taught by APUO professors

Courses taught by APTPUO professors

Courses taught by other professors

Number

%

Number

%

Number

%

1000

2010-2012

2011-2012

2012-2013

2000

2010-2012

2011-2012

2012-2013

3000

2010-2012

2011-2012

2012-2013

4000

2010-2012

2011-2012

2012-2013

Total of all levels

2010-2012

2011-2012

2012-2013

1. Includes data for Fall and Winter sessions only.

5.4Evaluation of teaching and courses

i) Summarize the course evaluation results over the last three years and compare them with those of similar disciplines (please specify discipline) and with the faculty average.

ii) List prizes and distinctions received by the units professors.

TABLE 19Evaluation of courses (all professors)

Questions

Year

Unit evaluated

Faculty average

Question 1

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

Question 4

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

Question 9

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

Source: University of Ottawa Office of Institutional Research and Planning.

1I find the professor well prepared for class

Almost always (5), often (4), sometimes (3), rarely (2), almost never (1)

4 I think the professor conveys the subject matter effectively

Almost always (5), often (4), sometimes (3), rarely (2), almost never (1)

9 I find that the professor as a teacher is

Excellent (5), good (4), acceptable (3), poor (2), very poor (1)

6.HUMAN, MATERIAL AND FINANCIAL RESOURCES

The proper and effective use of the human resources (e.g. number and quality of faculty members), financial resources and material resources (e.g. space, library and laboratory resources, access to computers, email and the Internet) allocated to the program. In making this assessment, reviewers must recognize the institutions autonomy in determining priorities for funding, space and faculty allocation.

i) Do you have a policy on teaching assistantships? If yes, please include it. How do you see the role of TAs and markers?

ii) Describe your resources in terms of lab assistants, clinical supervisors, internship or practicum settings, where applicable.

iii) Describe your support staff contingent.

iv) Comment on the condition of facilities and equipment such as laboratories, classrooms and computer equipment.

v) Describe and comment on the condition of the library collection in terms of your program (Appendix 3). Do any gaps exist?

vi) Comment on financial resources.

7. CONCLUSION

Please describe the degree to which programs:

achieve their goals and learning outcomes;

meet students needs and provide students with a university experience that lives up to their high expectations;

help the University execute its academic plans and accomplish its mission;

have the quantity and quality of human, financial and material resources they need and

are viable and remain relevant.

i) What are the strengths of the program?

ii) What are the areas that need improvement and what plans are in place to do so?

Checklist

1. To help the Senate Committee on the Evaluation of Undergraduate Programs study your report, please ensure that your request meets all of the criteria for evaluating program quality, and that all of the items listed below are covered.

You have defined clearly and precisely the goals and learning objectives of your program and those of the degree.

- You have shown their links to the program content and structure;

- You have shown their links to admission requirements;

-You have shown their links to evaluation methods and to both teaching and learning objectives;

-You have explained how students' learning achievements match program and degree objectives.

You have examined how your program supports the University's academic plans and mission.

You have assessed how your program reflects your unit's goals and strengths in terms of teaching and research.

You have examined both the quantity and quality of human, financial and material resources made available to the program.

You have analyzed the indicators that demonstrate the faculty quality, student demand (applications and registrations), student quality, program results (graduation rates, length of studies before graduation, etc.) and the attainment of program and degree goals and learning objectives.

2. The report has been produced with the:

- involvement of full-time professors

- involvement of part-time professors

- involvement of students

3.The report is written in both official languages.

4.The report's conclusion presents:

- the strengths of the program

- the weaknesses of the program

- the improvements that will be made

-the plan for the future of the program

5.All tables have been analyzed or commented on.

6.A list of at least three bilingual external evaluators has been provided. Evaluators must not be associated with the department. A description of their areas of expertise and a brief rsum must be provided (rank, publications, etc.).

7.These items are included in the appendix of volume I:

-a photocopy of the calendar pages for your program (unit, program description and course list)

-a table on grade distribution

8. This item is included in the appendix of volume II:

-the rsums of the full-time teaching staff

9.You must respect the deadline.

APPENDIX 1

Grade distribution for the last year

Grade Count

Grade

Session

Course Code

Course Section

A+

A

A-

B+

B

C+

C

D+

D

E

F

DR

INC

ABS

AUD

Fall 2012

Winter 2013

Summer

2013

Frequency Distribution

Grade

Session

Course Code

Course Section

A+

A

A-

B+

B

C+

C

D+

D

E

F

DR

INC

ABS

AUD

Fall 2012

Winter 2013

Summer

2013

(These notes apply to both tables)

1. Includes Fall, Winter and Summer session undergraduate courses. LPR (Letter of permission), TRF (Transfer) and CAR (Carleton) courses are excluded.

2. Includes grade distribution of undergraduate students enrolled in these courses regardless of study or discipline of origin. Includes special students.

APPENDIX 2

Guidelines for University Undergraduate Degree Level Expectations

Ontario Council of Academic Vice-Presidents (OCAV)

Baccalaureate/Bachelors Degree


Baccalaureate/Bachelors Degree: Honours


1. Depth and Breadth of Knowledge

a) a general knowledge and understanding of many key concepts, methodologies, theoretical approaches and assumptions in a discipline

b) a broad understanding of some of the major fields in a discipline, including, where appropriate, from an interdisciplinary perspective, and how the fields may intersect with fields in related disciplines

c) an ability to gather, review, evaluate and interpret information relevant to one or more of the major fields in a discipline

d) some detailed knowledge in an area of the discipline

e) critical thinking and analytical skills inside and outside the discipline

f) the ability to apply learning from one or more areas outside the discipline

a) a developed knowledge and critical understanding of the key concepts, methodologies, current advances, theoretical approaches and assumptions in a discipline overall, as well as in a specialized area of a discipline

b) a developed understanding of many of the major fields in a discipline, including, where appropriate, from an interdisciplinary perspective, and how the fields may intersect with fields in related disciplines

c) a developed ability to: i) gather, review, evaluate and interpret information; and ii) compare the merits of alternate hypotheses or creative options, relevant to one or more of the major fields in a discipline

d) a developed, detailed knowledge of and experience in research in an area of the discipline

e) developed critical thinking and analytical skills inside and outside the discipline

f) the ability to apply learning from one or more areas outside the discipline

2. Knowledge of Methodologies

an understanding of methods of enquiry or creative activity, or both, in their primary area of study that enables the student to:

evaluate the appropriateness of different approaches to solving problems using well established ideas and techniques; and

devise and sustain arguments or solve problems using these methods.

an understanding of methods of enquiry or creative activity, or both, in their primary area of study that enables the student to:

evaluate the appropriateness of different approaches to solving problems using well established ideas and techniques;

devise and sustain arguments or solve problems using these methods; and describe and comment upon particular aspects of current research or equivalent advanced scholarship.

3. Application of Knowledge

a) the ability to review, present, and interpret quantitative and qualitative information to:

i) develop lines of argument;

ii) make sound judgments in accordance with the major theories, concepts and methods of the subject(s) of study; and

b) the ability to use a basic range of established techniques to:

i) analyse information;

ii) evaluate the appropriateness of different approaches to solving problems related to their area(s) of study;

iii) propose solutions; and

c) the ability to make use of scholarly reviews and primary sources.

a) the ability to review, present and critically evaluate qualitative and quantitative information to:

i) develop lines of argument;

ii) make sound judgments in accordance with the major theories, concepts and methods of the subject(s) of study;

iii) apply underlying concepts, principles, and techniques of analysis, both within and outside the discipline;

iv) where appropriate use this knowledge in the creative process; and

b) the ability to use a range of established techniques to:

i) initiate and undertake critical evaluation of arguments, assumptions, abstract concepts and information;

ii) propose solutions;

iii) frame appropriate questions for the purpose of solving a problem;

iv) solve a problem or create a new work; and

c) the ability to make critical use of scholarly reviews and primary sources.

4. Communication Skills

the ability to communicate accurately and reliably, orally and in writing to a range of audiences.

the ability to communicate information, arguments, and analyses accurately and reliably, orally and in writing to a range of audiences.

5. Awareness of Limits of Knowledge

an understanding of the limits to their own knowledge and how this might influence their analyses and interpretations.

an understanding of the limits to their own knowledge and ability, and an appreciation of the uncertainty, ambiguity and limits to knowledge and how this might influence analyses and interpretations.

6. Autonomy and Professional Capacity

a) qualities and transferable skills necessary for further study, employment, community involvement and other activities requiring:

the exercise of personal responsibility and decision-making;

working effectively with others;

b) the ability to identify and address their own learning needs in changing circumstances and to select an appropriate program of further study; and

c) behaviour consistent with academic integrity and social responsibility.

a) qualities and transferable skills necessary for further study, employment, community involvement and other activities requiring:

the exercise of initiative, personal responsibility and accountability in both personal and group contexts;

working effectively with others;

decision-making in complex contexts;

b) the ability to manage their own learning in changing circumstances, both within and outside the discipline and to select an appropriate program of further study; and

c) behaviour consistent with academic integrity and social responsibility.

APPENDIX 3

LIBRARY SUPPORT (UNDERGRADUATE)

Ontario Universities Council on Quality Assurance

Library support

University of Ottawa

Introduction

This report has been prepared in the context of the quality assurance system for university undergraduate programs in Ontario the Quality Assurance Framework. This report describes how the Library will address learning outcomes to support Undergraduate Level Expectations.

The Library will provide support for the program in ________ by virtue of its collections, its instructional and information services; and through resource sharing. Each of these areas involves significant resources and commitment on an ongoing basis.

Library Services

Library services for the __________ are provided primarily through the Morisset Library. The subject librarian for _________ has established good relations with the faculty in collection building, assisting with research, and providing in-class lectures and workshops.

Access

The Morisset Library provides access and services more than 127 hours a week in term-time, and 66.5 hours a week during the summer months. The Librarys reference desk is staffed 60.5 hours a week in the fall and winter sessions by professional librarians and library technicians, and is supplemented by phone, chat and email services.

The Librarys online catalogue allows for sophisticated search techniques and the user can place holds and renew books from his own computer. Faculty and graduate students may borrow material for the entire semester. A reserve service is available for materials that all students need to read for their assignments

The Library has been making a strategic transition from print to electronic resources and provides access to 94,045 e-journals and 727,610 e-books. The Library provides direct links from the databases to its holdings using a web application that not only links to the catalogue records, but also gives direct access to full text e-journals. The Library also has access to a collection of core digital resources (journals, books, databases, and data products) available via Scholars Portal, a service managed by Ontario university libraries as a gateway for supporting research, learning, and teaching activities.

RefWorks

The Library has been an early adopter of RefWorks, a web-based citation management software which allows users to track and store references and to prepare bibliographies in the style guide of their choice. RefWorks can also be used to share bibliographies with colleagues and students.

Wireless

Wireless internet may be accessed throughout Morisset Library by users with their own computers. Wired workstations are available. As well, students can borrow laptops from the circulation desk. A computer lab is also located on the main floor of Morisset Library, in the Health Sciences Library and in the Brian Dickson Law Library. Technical support is provided at Morisset Library by Computing Services, who share the Reference desk with library staff.

Off-site storage

The Library Annex, an offsite storage facility, provides storage space for those print journals that are available electronically as well as those items from the general collection which have low projected use, or for which additional copies or later editions are available in the Library. Users can easily borrow titles from the Annex by placing a hold in the library catalogue and these items are delivered to the library within 24 hours. Journal articles and book chapters are scanned and sent to the user electronically.

The sixth floor of Morisset Library includes a dedicated study area for graduate students, with 316 study carrels, 30 computers and seminar rooms. Each fall, graduate students can apply for a study carrel.

Collection Support

The collections are developed to ensure the availability of resources to support the curriculum in all degree and diploma areas, and to support the research needs of faculty members. Most of the material relevant to ___________ is housed in the Morisset Library.

Process

The subject librarian for _____________ ensures that scholarly material for the collection is acquired in a timely manner, liaising with faculty members for the purposes of developing the collection. The librarian takes into consideration the guidelines in the collection development policy and ensures that a bilingual collection is maintained.

Consortial purchases

The University of Ottawa Library is a member of several academic consortia: the Ontario Council of University Libraries (OCUL); the Canadian Research Knowledge Network (CRKN); the Consortium of Academic Health Libraries (COAHL); Consortia Canada; and the Conference des Recteurs et Principaux du Qubec (CREPUQ). The Library benefits enormously from consortium-based purchases of many electronic resources, such as research databases, electronic journal collections, and online reference tools. These agreements lead to affordable costs, deeper content, and better terms and conditions such as multi-year agreements.

Library Collection Statistics (updated 16/05/2013)

Collection Type

Number of Items

Print books

2,247,148

E-Books

727,610

Journal Subscriptions

25,095

Accessible E-Journals (many of which are included in subscriptions)

94,045

Databases

636

Government Publications

953,420

Microforms

1,930,721

Maps

419,741

Audiovisual Items

17,433

Slides

251,327

Music Items (non-book)

63,041

Manuscripts and Archives (linear metres)

5,217

Library Collection budget (2012-13 figures)

Expenditure of $17,670,435

This includes $9,185,596 for journals, $8,484,839 for books

45,028 books and other items purchased

Instruction and Assistance

Both formal and informal training in the use of library resources and services are offered through orientation and information literacy programs. The Library has seminar rooms for orientation and training. The subject librarian for _______ works with faculty members in order to facilitate the linking to resources from courseware.

Morisset Library orientation sessions for new users are posted on the library web page. At the request of faculty or a group of graduate students, the subject librarian will offer lectures and workshops on the use of information sources tailored to the needs of a specific class.

The subject librarian for _______________ encourages and facilitates questions from students and professors. (He/ She) is available during regular office hours; evening meetings can be arranged. Drop-in /email / telephone questions or referrals from the reference desk will be answered as soon as possible.

Scholarly Communications Support

The Library supports scholarly communications and research dissemination by:

Assisting in the development, promotion and maintenance of open access journals created by members of the University community;

Preserving research material (created by our researchers) in the Universitys institutional repository (uOResearch) and allowing for free access.

Helping our researchers to increase visibility and the impact of their research, as well as to defray publishers fees for material to be made available in Open Access journals (via the available Author Fund)

Resource Sharing

Graduate students and professors may borrow directly from other universities in Ontario and Quebec, returning the material through their home library. As well, researchers can easily access catalogs of national and international libraries from our Library webpage and they can borrow this material for free through our interlibrary loans service, by filling out the electronic form RACER (Rapid Access to Collections through Electronic Requesting).

The Sm@rtlibrary agreement allows users to search and find locations of items at seven libraries in the National Capital Region (including Carleton University, CISTI, Ottawa Public Library, Library and Archives Canada, and Gatineau Public Library) and for UOttawa faculty, staff and students to borrow directly from the other participating libraries.

The Library is an associate member of the Center of Research Libraries (Chicago) where extensive international collections of newspapers, dissertations, journals, manuscripts, archives, etc. are available, either in digital form for direct access, or in print format for extended loan.

The Library is a member of the Association of Research Libraries, a non-profit organization of one hundred and twenty five libraries in the US and Canada that share similar research missions, aspirations, and achievements.

Tony Horava

Associate University Librarian (Collections)

3 July 2013

APPENDIX 4

Bidisciplinary programs

(Each grouping includes both program entry points, e.g., POL-SOC includes POL-SOC and SOC-POL)

Table x

a) Admissions

Program

Year


Offers


Registrations


POL - SOC

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

POL - HIS

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

POL - xxx

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

Table x1

b) Registrations

Program

Year

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

POL-SOC

POL-HIS

POL-xxx

Table x2

a) Graduation

Program

Year

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

POL-SOC

POL-HIS

POL-xxx

Table x3

Progress of cohorts in bidisciplinary programs (retention and graduation rates in the same program)

Cohort

Enrollment

% Cont.

2nd year

% Cont. 3rd year

% Grad. in 4 years

% Cont. 5th year

% Grad. in 5 years

% Cont. 6th year

% Grad. in 6 years

% Cont. 7th year

% Grad. in 7 years

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Documents

Undergraduate Program Self-Evaluation Report – … · Web viewAs well, researchers can easily access catalogs of national and international libraries from our Library webpage