Queen’s Senate Meeting – Sept. 25th, 2025

The first Senate meeting of the academic year opened with the Secretariat providing an overview of governance at Queen’s. Queen’s has a tri-partite governance structure composed of Senate, Board of Trustees, and University Council. The Senate is the ‘highest academic body’ whose purpose is:

“to determine all matters of an academic character which affect the university as a whole, and to be concerned with all matters which affect the welfare of the University.”

Senate has 68 members, 56 of whom are elected (36 faculty, 17 students, and 3 staff). A list of all Senators can be found here.

The Board of Trustees oversees the business management of the institution. University Council, whose members are elected by and from alumni, has an ambassadorial role in the well-being and prosperity of the university. Further details on Queen’s governance can be found here.

The Principal’s Report made note of the Queen’s Bicentennial Vision draft document, which is open for feedback until Oct. 31st. Read the draft and provide feedback here. The Bicentennial Vision will be discussed more fully at the next Senate meeting (Oct. 30th) and presented to the Board of Trustees for final approval in December.

A faculty Senator asked the Principal to elaborate on a statement in the Bicentennial Vision that Queen’s will be guided by efforts to ‘Clarify collegial governance to support timely, high-quality decision-making without sacrificing academic integrity.’ He responded that there is nothing in the document suggesting ‘any type of fundamental change to governance structures’ at Queen’s, while noting that it will be necessary to look at ways ‘in which decision-making processes are aligned with visions within the document.’ When asked to operationalize this statement in terms of Senate’s role, he reiterated that the Bicentennial Vision is a high-level document that will be discussed in more detail at a later meeting.

The Principal’s verbal comments included concerns about Bill 33, Supporting Children and Students Act, which has gone through a 2nd reading at the Ontario Parliament. If passed, the Act would require colleges and universities to assess applicants based on ‘merit’ and to publish criteria for these merit assessments. As many people have noted, the policy could have negative ramifications, particularly for students following nontraditional education trajectories and for institutions that use pathway programs to build diverse and inclusive learning environments. When asked about plans to oppose the passage of Bill 33, the Principal responded that the issue is being discussed at the Council of Ontario Universities.

The Principal went on to describe the Red Tape Reduction package, a provincial initiative that will ostensibly ‘ensure that university governance is focused on student success and financial sustainability’. Over the summer, the Ontario government consulted with university Principals and Board chairs on ‘efficiencies’ in university governance, but there were few opportunities for faculty voices to be heard. For some institutions, this input would have been provided through a survey and invitation to attend consultation sessions that were sent to Senate Chairs who are often faculty members. At Queen’s, however, the Principal is also the Senate Chair. A faculty Senator submitted a question, prior to the meeting, requesting that Senate be provided with the university’s written submission to the provincial survey. The Provost responded on behalf of the Principal that survey details would not be shared because they contain ‘information that would be deleterious to the institution if it were to get into the hands of our competitors’. Returning to the question later in the meeting, the Senator asked specifically about recommendations that would impact the work and operations of Senate. The Provost replied that the survey included several sections on governance details, such as the makeup of Senate, but there were no recommendations provided on the role or function of Senate.

The Ontario Council of University Faculty Associations (OCUFA) has released a statement on Improving Governance Structures, emphasizing that university autonomy must be respected and that governance structures which leave academic decision making in the hands of elected Senate members provide the best protection for academic freedom and integrity.

The Provost’s Report included updates on recent administrative appointments and an announcement that Bader College would be reopening in 2026.

A question submitted in advance of the meeting asked the Provost to specify ‘What, if any, advice has Nous provided university leadership about a) governance matters in general, and the role of Senate in particular, and b) academic matters?’ He responded that Nous was hired by Queen’s to consult on the Renew Program, focused on ensuring the university’s professional services (such as HR, Finance, and Facilities) are operating effectively and efficiently. The firm then received an additional contract to prepare the Efficiency and Accountability Report, as mandated by the Government of Ontario. This report contains ‘recommendations on governance and academic matters’, although the specifics were not shared with Senate.

Another faculty Senator raised concerns about a lack of resources to support Indigenous teaching noting that, “Queen’s isn’t living up to its responsibilities [in] moving towards reconciliation”. Principal Deane turned the question to Vice-Principal (Culture, Equity, and Inclusion) Stephanie Simpson who responded that the issue should be brought to the new Associate Vice-Principle (Indigenous Initiatives), Lisa Maracle, and to the Indigenous Council, which advises the University on policy and governance related to Indigenous matters.

Queen’s Senate Meeting – Oct. 30, 2025

Consent Agenda

Senators opened questions at the October Senate meeting by asking who wrote the Queen’s University Board-Senate Advisory Committee (QUBSAC) report. This document recapped discussions from a Board-Senate meeting (Sept. 25th) that centered on Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI). One Senator pointed out that the statement, “a key consensus was that faculty need to become comfortable and confident with AI tools before students can be effectively engaged in their use,” did not reflect the discussion at all tables. Another noted that the overall tone of the report assumed that Queen’s had already adopted a position on GenAI, which is not the case. In the end, the Principal agreed that it was difficult to provide a summary of informal discussions, but trusted that everyone who attended the meeting would agree that the session was useful.

Principal’s Report

The Principal’s report included details of research and teaching events on campus. A follow up question requested details on provincial policies including the Red Tape Reduction package. As part of this initiative, the Ontario government sought input from university Principals on ‘efficiencies’ in university governance. At the previous Senate meeting, Senators requested access to the Principal’s responses to the survey; he confirmed that the document would be circulated within the week. QUFA received a copy of Queen’s responses to the Improving College and University Governance Structures survey, which is posted here:

The Principal had no updates on Bill 33, Supporting Children and Students Act, which is expected to go a final vote in late November. School boards, student groups, and faculty associations are united in opposing Bill 33, which includes regulatory oversight that could impose restrictions on collegial governance. A statement from the Ontario Confederation of University Faculty Associations (OCUFA) summarizes many of these concerns.

The Principal reported that the Prime Minister recently gave a talk at U Ottawa that emphasized human resource development and skills training, proposing ‘a new talent strategy for the next generation of scientists and innovators.’ Based on this, he expressed some hope that the upcoming federal budget will a sign that government sees the university sector as central to its platform. One of our faculty members in Biology, Diane Orihel, wrote a compelling analysis of the opportunities provided by the federal government’s commitment to research investment, along with concerns that these may be squandered by the Ontario government.

One Senator requested details on the Presidential Roundtable hosted by the American Association of Colleges and Universities (AACU), specifically whether there will be a statement issued in response to threats to university autonomy from the current USA administration. The Principal noted that university presidents are reluctant to make public statements on academic freedom in the current political climate and that academic freedom will be a topic of the Magna Charta Observatory meeting in London, UK next month.

Bicentennial Vision

Senate Vice Chair, Dr. Kelley Packalen, chaired the discussion of the Principal’s Bicentennial Vision. QUFA President Karen Rudie opened the questions by pointing out two statements in the document that have the potential to violate the Collective Agreement (CA) between QUFA and the university:

• Collective agreements must be updated through collaborative processes with faculty and staff to enable nimbleness within the institution.
• Academic and hiring governance will be reformed to enable strategic agility, faculty rejuvenation, and innovation across units.

As Dr. Rudie noted, the CA can only be “updated” through collective bargaining and the hiring of academic staff is governed by the Collective Agreement so it cannot be reformed for any purpose except through the process of collective bargaining. The Principal responded that there is no intention to subvert the CA and wants negotiations on issues like faculty renewal to be collaborative.

Other Faculty Senators asked general questions, such as how feedback from the Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences working group was incorporated into the document, what is meant by terms like ‘world class’ and ‘academic excellence’ that are repeated several times in the document, and what are the parameters for ‘what we do best’ and who decides what these are? The Principal responded that the Bicentennial Vision is a high level document and that details will be apparent in operationalization of the vision and planning framework. He agreed that the language should be more precise and pointed out that identification of priority research areas is reflected in Queen’s Strategic Research Plan approved last year by Senate.

Following up on a comment from the previous meeting, one Senator criticized the conflation of reconciliation, inclusion, and sustainability in the Bicentennial Vision, asking why reference to equity and diversity was removed. The Principal acknowledged that these conceptual categories may not be compatible; sustainability, in particular, should be separated. Associate Vice Principal of Indigenous Initiatives, Lisa Maracle, picked up on the issue noting that reconciliation and indigenous knowledge should not be siloed and must be integrated across the institution.

In response to a question about Academic Freedom, the Principal agreed that the Bicentennial Vision should include an uncompromising statement on this issue, particularly given the current political climate. Finally, the Dean Graduate Studies pointed out that the Bicentennial Vision, in its current form, is a missed opportunity to articulate the value of higher education at a time when the public are questioning the value of a university education. The Principal agreed that the model of university and social value of what we do is in question although has some faith that this is moving in a positive direction.

Provost Report

The Provost’s reports included details of his recent trip to Asia with the Deans to discuss joint degrees with institutions in China and Hong Kong, to recruit undergraduate and exchange students, and to meet with Queen’s alumni. He plans to continue these visits in the future, when they will expand to other regions that provide opportunities for revenue generation in the form of international tuition fees. One Senator questioned the economic payoff these trips, given the financial costs of transporting so many individuals to distance locations for extended periods of time. The Provost responded that Queen’s has ~ 500 international student spots that are unfilled and that China and India are the best options to build up student recruitment. At the same time, he acknowledged that the economic payoff of this strategy is unknown.

In response to a question about the Teaching and Learning Space Framework, the Provost confirmed that Queen’s lacks large classrooms that can accommodate ever growing class sizes. The steering committee is discussing options to address this need, including turning smaller classrooms into larger ones or building new spaces with larger classrooms.

A Senator asked for an update on staff positions at the Centre for Teaching and Learning (CTL) related to indigenous education and human rights. The Vice Provost Teaching and Learning confirmed that these positions could not be filled because of budget cuts, but indicated that discussions and collaborations are occurring across offices that continue this work.

Question Period

During Question period, a faculty Senator asked whether any policies that are developed on GenAI would come through Senate. The Provost responded that all policies impacting academics are required to come through Senate. He went on to note the need for a policy that deals with the principles, not just the practicalities, of GenAI and said that these issues are being discussed at SCADP. He added that the general tenor of these discussions focuses on developing ways to use GenAI responsibly rather than forbidding its use. The Senator reminded the Provost that tools are not neutral and that decision making bodies should be questioning some of the foundational principles of GenAI.

One committee vacancy for a faculty member, who does not have to be a Senator, is on the Senate Library Committee.