CHAPTER ONE: STUDENT RESPONSIBILITIES - … ONE: STUDENT RESPONSIBILITIES Page 1.1 CHAPTER ONE:...

CHAPTER ONE: STUDENT RESPONSIBILITIES

.1


The findings for this portion of the evaluation are based on the input of 723 students registered in one of the three faculties or the two divisions of Continuing Education, 115 recent graduates of the College and 87 teachers in the winter of 2008 semester. Statistics from in-house sources and SRAM were also reviewed. More detailed results can be found in the working grid entitled “3.1 Student Responsibilities Working Grid” located in Appendix A9.

1.1 STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY 1: TO FOLLOW THE PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIC TO THEIR PROGRAMS OF STUDY TO ENSURE THE COMPLETION OF THEIR DEC OR AEC.

To ensure that students have an adequate understanding of program requirements and procedures, these are laid out in each course outline that is given to students during the first week of classes. Teachers usually explain these requirements in more detail in early in the semester and address any resulting questions.

For students having difficulty meeting these requirements, they can seek assistance from a variety of resources including: their teacher, the Learning Center, Student Services, various specific resource centers such as the Mathematics and Science Resource Center, peer tutoring services etc.

Finally, students can also obtain help from individual teachers when preparing for their comprehensive assessments. Also, workshops are conveniently offered each semester to assist students in preparing for the English Exit exam.

FINDINGS

Indicator 1: The majority of students responding to the student survey reporting that they follow the procedures and requirements specific to their program of study to ensure completion of their DEC or AEC.

The majority of survey respondents (91%) reported that they were aware of all or many of their program requirements and that they followed these requirements to ensure completion of their DEC or AEC.

Indicator 2: Graduation rates in prescribed time plus 2 years are similar to those of the Reseau.

If most students are following their program’s procedures and requirements to ensure the completion of their DEC or AEC then one could expect adequate graduation rates. For the purposes of this study, graduation rates throughout the Reseau were used as the standard measure of acceptable graduations rates. As Table 1.1 shows, the graduation rates of students at Vanier in the prescribed time plus two years (PSEP data extracted 2008-02-13, Populations A & B, any college, any program), were similar to those of students in the rest of the Reseau. It should be noted here that graduation rates are never completely true because some students never register that they have graduated (anecdotal evidence reported by Registrar).


Page 1.2

Table 1.1: Graduation Rates in the Prescribed Time plus Two Years (Populations A & B, any college, any program).

Cohort Average Graduation Rates In Prescribed Time + Two Years

Pre-university cohorts 1997-2002 • Vanier 64.6% • Reseau without Vanier 65.1% Technologies cohorts 1997-2001 • Vanier 56.2% • Reseau without Vanier 56.7%

Source: PSEP data extracted 2008-02-13

These results are quite impressive given the Vanier students’ lower incoming high school averages in comparison to the rest of the Reseau (pre-university: 2.2% lower and technologies: 1.4% lower (see Table 1.2 below). Although the lower high school averages of the Vanier students may not seem large, evidence presented by SRAM1

Cohort

indicates that each 3% difference in incoming high school average (MGS) typically translates into a 10 to 14% difference in the graduation rates. By extrapolation, this would suggest that Vanier’s graduation rates should be approximately 3 to 9% lower than the rest of the Reseau instead of the recorded 1.4 to 2.2%, a remarkable achievement!

The lower incoming averages of Vanier students may be due, at least in part to the non-English mother tongue of the majority of our students. In H’08, for example, 58% of the student population had a reported mother tongue that was not English, the language of instruction (Registrar Records extracted 2008-09-22).

Table 1.2: High School Averages (MGS, Populations A & B).

Average of High School Averages

Pre-university cohorts 1997-2002 • Vanier 77.0% • Reseau without Vanier 79.2% Technologies cohorts 1997-2001 • Vanier 74.2% • Reseau without Vanier 75.6%

Source: PSEP data extracted 2008-02-13

In-house data from the Continuing Education AEC Day Programs (extracted 2008-02-15) was available for graduation in the prescribed time and for the cohorts 2000-2006 only. Nevertheless, the average rate was 75.3%, quite high for graduation rates in the prescribed time.

1 SRAM - Service de recherché, Sept. 2005


Page 1.3

Due to the varied educational paths that students in the Continuing Education Evening division take, graduations rates by cohort could not be determined.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that students are following the procedures and requirements specific to their programs of study to ensure the completion of their DEC or AEC in accordance with the IPESA. The mechanisms in place to enable students to meet their program requirements are working remarkably well.


Page 1.4

1.2 STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY 2: TO COMPLY WITH THE COURSE REQUIREMENTS AS GIVEN ON COURSE OUTLINES.

The mechanisms in place at the College to assist students to comply with course requirements are similar to those mentioned in the previous section regarding program requirements. Course requirements are laid out in each course outline that is given to each student during the first week of classes. Teachers usually explain these requirements in more detail in class and answer any questions.

For students having difficulty meeting these requirements, they can seek assistance from a variety of resources including: their teacher, the Learning Center, Student Services, various specific resource centers such as the Mathematics and Science Resource Center, peer tutoring services etc.

FINDINGS

Indicator 1: The majority of student respondents reporting that the course requirements, as given on the course outlines, are clear and that they comply with course requirements as given on course outlines.

The survey results showed that the majority of student respondents reported receiving their course outlines during the first week of classes for “all courses” or “most courses” (99.2%); that the requirements as given in the course outlines were clear in “all courses” or “most courses” (95.7%); and that they followed the requirements as given in the course outlines “always”, “usually” or “often” (95.0%).

CONCLUSION

The findings for this part of the study suggest that the majority of students are following their course requirements, and therefore the mechanisms in place to assist them to fulfill this responsibility are adequate.


Page 1.5

1.3 STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY3: TO RESPECT THE TEACHER'S RIGHT TO DETERMINE COURSE CONTENT, METHODOLOGY, EVALUATION PROCEDURES AND ATTENDANCE POLICIES WITHIN THE GUIDELINES SET BY THE MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND THE COLLEGE.

Several policies that explain teachers’ rights, including the IPESA, are made available to all students via the website, student agenda and College catalogue. Also, if a student disagrees with evaluation procedures etc. as set by a teacher of a particular course, besides discussing the issue with the teacher, they can also contest the action via formal mechanisms including Mediation and Grades Review.

FINDINGS

Indicator 1: The majority of student respondents reporting that they respect the teacher's right to determine course content, methodology, evaluation procedures, and attendance policies within the guidelines set by the Minister of education and the College

The survey results suggest that most students are meeting this responsibility. The majority of student respondents reported that they respect the teacher’s right to: determine course content (88%); determine teaching methods (83%); determine the evaluation procedures to be used in their courses (81%) and to determine course attendance requirements (76%).

Indicator 2: The majority of teacher respondents reporting that, in general, students respect the teacher's right to determine course content, methodology, evaluation procedures, and attendance policies within the guidelines set by the Minister of education and the College

Similarly the majority of teacher respondents reported that students respect their right as a teacher (“always”, “usually” or “often”) to determine: course content (97%); methodology (97%); evaluation procedures (98%); and attendance policies (90.8%). The teacher respondents appeared to be somewhat more positive with respect to these rights compared to the student respondents.

CONCLUSION

If we can assume that our samples are representative of the entire student and teacher population, then it appears that the majority of students are respecting the teachers’ rights to determine course content etc. Therefore, we can further assume that the mechanisms in place to ensure compliance with this responsibility are adequate.

In light of the competency-based nature of most programs, the Steering Committee felt that the responsibility concerning attendance will need to be reviewed to ensure compatibility with the competency-based approach.


Page 1.6

1.4 STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY4: TO TAKE ACTION TO SOLVE ACADEMIC PROBLEMS, WHICH THEY MAY ENCOUNTER IN THEIR COURSES, BY COMMUNICATING WITH THEIR TEACHERS OR BY SEEKING HELP THROUGH COLLEGE SERVICES SUCH AS THE LIBRARY, THE LEARNING CENTRE, COUNSELLING, RESOURCE CENTRES, ETC.

To encourage students to follow through with this responsibility, students are informed of their resources via their teachers, academic advisors, course outlines, web site, college catalogue, student agenda and various notices posted throughout the College.

FINDINGS

Indicator 1: The majority of student respondents reporting that they take action to solve academic problems, which they may encounter in their courses, by communicating with their teachers or by seeking help through College services such as the Student Advocate in Student Services, the Library, the Learning Centre, Counselling, Resource Centres, etc.

Ninety-one percent of the student respondents reported seeking help when they encounter an academic problem. For the 91% who reported seeking help, the most commonly cited resources were their teachers (87%), Library (29%), the Learning Center and Academic Advisors (21% each). The least frequently cited were Mediation Committees (1%), Student Advocate and Dean (both at 2%).

The most commonly cited sources of information about available academic resources were teachers (84%), friends (54%) and course outlines (53%). Interestingly, the web page and student agenda were only cited as information sources by 40 and 42% of the respondents respectively.

CONCLUSION

Not surprisingly, these findings demonstrate the crucial role that teachers are playing in acting as resources for their students in need and in making them aware of the other academic resources available to them both directly and via the course outlines. The results of this study should be shared with teachers to reinforce their understanding of this.

Recommendation: The Policy Revision Committee should consider revising the Course Outline policy to include a requirement in the course outline of a statement regarding the actions students should take if they encounter academic problems in their courses.


Page 1.7

1.5 STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY 5: TO BE HONEST AND TO REFRAIN FROM CHEATING, PLAGIARISM AND OTHER DISHONEST OR DECEPTIVE BEHAVIOURS.

In an attempt to ensure that students comply with this responsibility, teachers and the Registrar are compelled to comply with the Vanier College Policy on Cheating and Plagiarism (http://www.vaniercollege.qc.ca/acadean/policy/7210s31.pdf), which details how such behaviour can be prevented and the actions to be taken when it does. These actions include:

• It is the responsibility of all faculty members to announce this policy to their students and to define the meaning of cheating and plagiarism to the students

• In cases in which the teacher is convinced that the student is guilty of plagiarism or cheating , the penalty will be a grade of zero for that piece of work without the possibility of preparing an alternate assignment

• The faculty member must send the Registrar a letter indicating that cheating or plagiarism has taken place

• If there is a second instance of cheating or plagiarism, the Registrar will recommend to the Academic Dean the suspension or expulsion of the student

FINDINGS

Indicator 1: The majority of student respondents reporting that they are honest and refrain from cheating, plagiarism and other dishonest or deceptive behaviours.

All student surveyed reported that they understood the meaning of cheating and plagiarism either “completely” (93%) or “somewhat” (7%). Most respondents reported receiving explanations about this topic from their “teachers” (96%) and “course outlines” (82%).

Only 2% of the respondents (17 students) admitted to having cheated or plagiarized in a course at Vanier. Of those 17, 10 reported cheating or plagiarizing only once and 7, occasionally.

Indicator 2: The majority of teacher respondents reporting a low incidence of student cheating and/or plagiarism in their courses over the last five years.

The picture was somewhat different from the teachers’ perspective. Only 31% of the teacher respondents reported low incidences of cheating and plagiarism each semester over the last five years ranging from “never” to “rarely”. The majority, 69% reported incidences ranging from “once or twice per semester” (47%) to “3 to 5 times or more per semester” (32%).

Indicator 3: On average, each year over the last five years, there were a minimal number of cases of cheating and/or plagiarism reported to the Registrar.

Complete data on the number of cases of cheating and/or plagiarism reported to the Registrar are only available for the 2003 – 2004 to 2005 – 2006 academic years. The average number of cases per year was 94.7 out of approximately 7000 students each year, including Continuing Education, a rate of approximately 1.4%. This number is somewhat lower than the incidences of cheating and/or

http://www.vaniercollege.qc.ca/acadean/policy/7210s31.pdf�


Page 1.8

plagiarism reported by the teachers directly. Either a small group of students are responsible for a large number of incidences or many cases are not being reported to the Registrar, or both.

CONCLUSION

All student respondents reported understanding the concepts of cheating and plagiarism at least somewhat and only 2% reported ever having cheated or plagiarized at Vanier. However, 69% of the teacher respondents reported the incidence of cheating and plagiarism in their classes to be anywhere from once or twice per semester to five times or more, suggesting that a higher proportion of students are cheating or plagiarizing. Either the student respondents were under-reporting the amount of cheating and plagiarizing; most of the students that cheated or plagiarized did not respond to the survey; or the teachers were over-exaggerating. Considering that teachers would have no reason to over-inflate their statistics, it would seem that a significant number of students are still partaking in these activities, although the exact number is difficult to determine.

The findings of this study suggest that cheating and plagiarism are a problem at the College, as they are in many academic institutions across the country. As one teacher reported, students have told him/her that “the objective is to pass the class, not to learn the material so cheating is OK”.

The number of cases of cheating and/or plagiarism reported by teachers to the Registrar is low in comparison to the teacher’s responses in this survey suggesting that teachers may not be reporting all instances of cheating or plagiarism to the Registrar. This makes it difficult for the Registrar to track the number of infractions per individual and hence for the Academic Dean to take disciplinary action, contributing to the persistence of the behaviour. Teachers need to be aware of this responsibility, to be encouraged to report such cases and they need to be supported in dealing with the repercussions from students and their families when they do.

One partial solution would be the inclusion in a future version of the IPESA of an additional teacher responsibility specific to cheating and plagiarism and making reference to the Policy on Cheating and Plagiarism. Furthermore, as this issue is not specific to Vanier perhaps it could be discussed on an intercollegiate basis at the Academic Dean and Director General levels, with some sharing of ideas and best practices.

Recommendation: The Policy Revision Committee should consider revising the IPESA to include another teacher responsibility – “To define and communicate to students the meaning of cheating and plagiarism and to report all incidences of such behaviour in writing to the Registrar”.


Page 1.9

1.6 STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY 6: TO ARRIVE IN CLASS ON TIME AND REMAIN FOR THE DURATION OF SCHEDULED CLASS TIME.

Ensuring that students comply with this responsibility is left up to the individual teachers to address in their own manner. In addition, so students do not show up for cancelled classes, class cancellations are posted on monitors at various convenient points throughout the College as well as on the web site (http://www.vaniercollege.qc.ca/vaniertoday/classcan9.asp). With the introduction of the new online registration system and its associated modules, it will soon be possible to notify students of class cancellations directly via an automated telephone system.

FINDINGS

Indicator 1: The majority of student respondents reporting that they arrive on time for their classes and remain for the duration of scheduled class time.

When asked if they arrive to class on time, the majority of student respondents (92%) reported “always” or “usually”. When asked if they remain for the duration of the scheduled class time (98%) reported “always” or “usually”.

Indicator 2: The majority of teacher respondents reporting that over the last five years the majority of their students arrived on time for their classes and remained for the duration of scheduled class time.

Similarly, when asked if their students arrive to class on time,92% of the teacher respondents reported that over the last five years, “almost all” or “most” students did. When asked if their students remain for the duration of the class, 98% reported “all” to “most” of their students did.

CONCLUSION

Together, these findings suggest that the majority of students are meeting their responsibility to arrive on time for their classes and remain for the duration of their class. Findings from another section of this report, however, suggest that some students have difficulty getting from one class to the next on time, particularly when they have to change for a gym class or when the teacher of the first class goes over time. Therefore, although for the most part the mechanisms in place to ensure that students meet this responsibility are working well, perhaps teachers need reminding, on occasion, to permit enough time between classes.

http://www.vaniercollege.qc.ca/vaniertoday/classcan9.asp�


Page 1.10

1.7 STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY 7: TO WAIT FOR THE TEACHER FOR 15 MINUTES AFTER THE SCHEDULED BEGINNING OF A CLASS, UNLESS THEY HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED OTHERWISE.

There is no formal mechanism in the College to ensure that students meet this responsibility other than informing students of this responsibility via the IPESA.

FINDINGS

Indicator 1: The majority of students reporting that they wait for the teacher for 15 minutes after the scheduled beginning of the class, unless they have been notified otherwise.

Of the 723 student respondents, 98% reported that they “always” (93%) or “usually” (5%) wait at least 15 minutes if the teacher is late arriving to class.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that students are waiting the required 15 minutes for their teacher to arrive and therefore that the current practice of notifying the students of this responsibility is sufficient.


Page 1.11

1.8 STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY 8: TO BEHAVE RESPECTFULLY IN CLASS IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPROPRIATE CLASSROOM DEPORTMENT.

It is mainly the teacher’s responsibility to ensure that their students understand how they are expected to behave in class and to follow through with students who do not behave appropriately. Teachers are offered workshops at the College on classroom management and can seek the advice of more experienced teachers if necessary. Workshops for teachers on promoting appropriate classroom behaviour are always well attended.

When follow up is required teachers can also rely on their Faculty Dean as well as Student Services and the Human Rights Office. Disciplinary action can be taken and is tailored to the severity of the behaviour. Actions range from a discussion with the teacher outside of class to suspension from the College.

FINDINGS

Indicator 1: The majority of student respondents reporting that they behave respectfully in class in accordance with appropriate classroom deportment and that their teachers explain to them what acceptable classroom behaviour is.

Ninety-nine percent of the student respondents reported that they “always” or “usually” behaved appropriately in class. Eighty-six percent of student respondents reported that “all” or “most” of their teachers explained to them what acceptable classroom behaviour is.

Indicator 2: The majority of teacher respondents reporting that their students behave respectfully in class in accordance with appropriate classroom deportment and that they explain to their student what appropriate classroom behaviour is.

Similarly, when asked if their students behave respectfully in class in accordance with appropriated classroom deportment, 99 % of teacher respondents reported that “all” to “most” of their students did. Furthermore, 79% of teacher respondents said they explained what acceptable classroom behaviour is “all” or “most of the time”.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that student behaviour in the classroom may be more of an issue in some specific programs/courses, for example, some of the remedial courses. Teachers in these areas may require additional training to better enable them to work with these students.

Indicator 3: Minimal number of discipline reports (student services, deans) per year.

Over the last five years, the average number of student infractions of the Zero Tolerance Policy and other discipline problems were 71.5 and 49.3 respectively out of a student body of approximately 7000. This translates into approximately 1 infraction of the Zero Tolerance Policy per approximately every 100 students or about 1% of the student population and 1 infraction for the other types of discipline issues per every approximately 140 students or less than 1% of the student population.


Page 1.12

CONCLUSION

Aside from their family upbringing, the large proportion of students behaving appropriately in class may be due, at least part, to the work of many teachers who explain to students what appropriate behaviour in the classroom involves and follow through to ensure that this responsibility is respected. Current practices in this area should be continued with ongoing workshops for teachers on the topic, as well as disciplinary action for students who fail to comply.

There may be a few pockets where behaviour in the classroom is more of an issue. These areas should be explored to determine which courses are specifically involved as well as what is required to improve the situation.


Page 1.13

1.9 STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY 9: TO RESPECT THE RIGHTS OF ALL MEMBERS OF THE COLLEGE COMMUNITY.

The College attempts to ensure that students and other members of the College community respect the rights of all members of the College community in a variety of ways including: providing access to information on the topic via the Human Rights Office and the Human Rights Office web page (http://www.vaniercollege.qc.ca/respect-works/); the provision of the Human Rights Policy & Complaint Resolution Procedures (http://www.vaniercollege.qc.ca/policies/humanrightspolicy.pdf) (accessible via the Director General’s or Human Rights Office’s web pages; and access to the Human Rights Office. Complaints of this nature as well as discipline for infractions are addressed formally by Faculty and Academic Deans, Students Services and/or the Human Rights Officer.

FINDINGS

Indicator 1: The majority of student respondents reporting that they respect the rights of all members of the College community

The majority of student respondents (98%) reported that they always or usually respect the rights of all members of the college community. Vice versa, 92% of student respondents reported that other students “always” or “usually” respect them as an individual in the College. Questions regarding specific behaviours of bullying and violence toward others yielded similar responses i.e. 98% of respondents reported that they had never participated in such behaviour.

Indicator 2: The majority of teacher respondents reporting that they experience little or no disrespectful behaviour from students

When asked if they had ever experienced disrespectful behaviour from students over the last five years, 74% of teacher respondents reported that they had.

Eighty-four percent of the teacher respondents reported the incidence of disrespectful behaviour as occurring “rarely” or “sometimes”. Eight teachers reported that it occurs “often” and two reported that it occurs “almost every time I teach”. Ten teachers, in written comments noted that most of their students do behave respectfully and appropriately in class, there are just a few who do not.

Several teachers offered suggestions for “best practices” in this area, all involved providing the students with a detailed set of rules at the beginning of the semester, which could be done via course outlines, signed contracts or verbally.

Unfortunately, this question was not included on the surveys for staff and administrators.

Indicator 3 & 4: Acceptable Discipline Committee statistics

As reported in the previous section, over the last five years, the average number of student infractions of the Zero Tolerance Policy and other discipline problems were 71.5 and 49.3 respectively out of a student body of approximately 7000. This translates into approximately 1 infraction of the Zero Tolerance Policy per approximately every 100 students or about 1% of the student population and 1 infraction for the other types of discipline issues per every approximately 140 students or less than 1% of the student population.

http://www.vaniercollege.qc.ca/respect-works/�

http://www.vaniercollege.qc.ca/policies/humanrightspolicy.pdf�


Page 1.14

On average, approximately 5% of these students each year were disciplined by a suspension and about 1.4% per year were expelled. The remainder were disciplined in some other manner, which usually involved some type of community work within the College.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that the measures in place to ensure students respect the rights of all members of the college community are adequate. It would appear that disrespectful behaviour of students towards teachers is not a pervasive problem but one that some teachers may need assistance with. Although the data were not collected, the situation is probably similar for other College staff. In that regard, the Steering Committee has three recommendations.

The two policies addressed in this portion of the study i.e. the Human Rights Policy and the Zero Tolerance Policy were not easily found on the College web site, leading to another recommendation in this section:

The incidence of infractions of the Zero Tolerance Policy and cases of other inappropriate behaviour requiring disciplinary action were not as infrequent as desired. However, disciplinary

Recommendation: The College Professional Development Committee should continue to offer workshops to teachers on classroom management and continue its practice of pairing teachers in need of assistance with teachers with some expertise in this area.

Recommendation: The Academic Dean’s Office continue to promote the Master’s Teacher Program and in particular the stand alone course on classroom management.

Recommendation: The College Professional Development Committee should assess the needs of all College staff for further training in preventing and dealing with disrespectful behaviour on the part of students and provide training as required.

Recommendation: The College should consider revising the web site so that all college policies can be accessed from one site entitled “College Policies” no matter which jurisdiction they fall under e.g. Academic or Director General etc.


Page 1.15

action was taken in each case and the punishment was tailored to fit the type and severity of misconduct.


Page 1.16

1.10 STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY10: TO OBSERVE AND BE AWARE OF THE ZERO TOLERANCE POLICY REGARDING THE FOLLOWING: UNAUTHORIZED USE OF ALCOHOL/ILLEGAL DRUGS, VIOLENCE, POSSESSION OF WEAPONS, VERBAL ABUSE OR INTIMIDATION, AND GAMBLING.

To ensure that students are aware of this responsibility, the Zero Tolerance Policy is available to students on the back of their ID card, on the web site, in the college catalogue and in their student agenda. Their attention is drawn to this policy at the various orientation sessions for new students and many teachers address the policy in class or in their course outlines. Severe disciplinary action is taken for any infractions of this policy which can include suspension or even expulsion from the College.

FINDINGS

Indicator 1: The policy is on the back of all student ID cards, published in the College Catalogue and Student Agenda as well as the web page, posters, in weekly bulletins, etc.

A search for on-campus references to the Vanier College Zero Tolerance Policy was conducted with the following findings. An abbreviated version of the policy is published on the back of all student and staff ID cards, with a longer version in the college catalogue and Student Agenda and a full version on the College website http://www.vaniercollege.qc.ca/policies/7110s2.pdf.

There was only one mention of the Zero Tolerance policy in a review of the most recent volumes of the student weekly news bulletin “Vanier This Week” (Volume August, 2007 to August, 2008). Of the 99 Course Outlines reviewed, only two made reference to the Zero Tolerance Policy. It was noted, however, that there are some inconsistencies between the IPESA and the Course Outline Policy, such that the IPESA recommends mentioning the Zero Tolerance Policy in Course Outlines but the Course Outline Policy does not. A walk about of the main campus revealed that the majority of bulletin boards had posters addressing the Zero Tolerance policy. Two government posters were also found referring to the campus as a no-violence area.

Indicator 2: All new students receive a Student Agenda and College Catalogue with policies and regulations.

These documents are distributed to all students newly admitted to the College as part of their Admissions package. As well, returning students receive a copy of the College Catalogue prior to registration.

Indicator 3: The majority of student respondents reporting that they are aware of and observe the Zero Tolerance Policy regarding the following: unauthorized use of alcohol/illegal drugs, violence, possession of weapons, verbal abuse or intimidation, and gambling.

The majority of student respondents (96%) reported that they were aware of the Vanier College Zero Tolerance Policy. Most reported learning about this policy via their “teacher” (66%), “Student Agenda” (59%) and their “Course Outlines” (50%). Unfortunately, an option for “Student ID” was overlooked in designing this question on the student survey. However, 6 students did write independently that they had learned about the policy from this source.

http://www.vaniercollege.qc.ca/policies/7110s2.pdf�


Page 1.17

Students were not questioned specifically about whether they had ever gone against the specific rules addressed in the Zero Tolerance Policy as the Steering Committee felt this would be too uncomfortable for some students to answer honestly even though anonymity was assured.

Indicator 4: None or only a few student and teacher respondents reporting that they had experienced abuse or intimidation from students.

When questioned about abuse and intimidation from other students, 10 and 13% of student respondents respectively, reported experiencing these types of abuse. In response to a similar question, 32% of teacher respondents reported student abuse or intimidation either verbally or by other means such as email.

Indicator 5: Each year, for the last 5 years, a low and acceptable average number of student infractions of the Zero Tolerance Policy.

As mentioned in the previous section of this chapter, over the last five years, the average number of student infractions of the Zero Tolerance Policy was 71.5 out of a student body of approximately 7000. This translates into approximately 1 infraction of the Zero Tolerance Policy per approximately every 100 students. Disciplinary action included suspension, expulsion or some other form of punishment, which usually involved some type of community work within the College.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study suggest that most students are aware of their responsibilities as addressed in the Zero Tolerance Policy but that a few are not respecting the rules. The number of teachers reporting abuse or intimidation from students is too high. Obviously further action is required here, with the most useful course probably being education of teachers regarding methods to prevent this behaviour and deal with it effectively when it occurs. The Steering Committee agreed that the same recommendations as for those for disrespectful behaviour apply here as well. In addition, the Steering Committee felt that the Zero Tolerance Policy may need to be expanded to include theft, cyber bullying and violence against persons or property.

Recommendation: the College Professional Development Committee continue to offer workshops to teachers on classroom management and continue its practice of pairing teachers in need of assistance with teachers with some expertise in this area.

Recommendation: The continued promotion of the Master’s Teacher Program1 and in particular the stand alone course on classroom management.

Recommendation: The College assess the needs of all College staff for further training in preventing and dealing with abusive & violent behaviour on the part of students and provide training as required.


Page 1.18

1.11 STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY11: TO TURN OFF ALL ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION DEVICES (E.G., CELL PHONES, PAGERS, ETC.) WHILE IN CLASS OR LEAVE THEM OUTSIDE OF CLASS.

Although some classrooms display “No Cell Phone” posters, most of the responsibility to ensure that students respect this rule falls to the individual teachers.

FINDINGS

Indicator 1: The majority of student respondents reporting that they turn off all electronic communication devices (e.g., cell phones, pagers, etc.) while in class or leave them outside of class.

Only 54% of student respondents reported that they “always” turn off all electronic communication devices (e.g. cell phones, pagers, etc.) while in class or “leave them outside of class”. The number of students reportedly turning on these devices “more or less frequently“ (46%), then, could lead to a significant number of disruptions in the classroom.

Indicator 2: The majority of teacher respondents reporting that students usually turn off all electronic communication devices (e.g., cell phones, pagers, etc.) while in class or leave them outside of class.

The picture is even more dramatic from the teachers’ perspective. Only 13% of teacher respondents reported that “all students” turn off cell phones while in class and 66% reported that “some students” are using computers or other electronic devices in class for purposed unrelated to the class content. Eleven teachers offered additional comments in relation to this topic. These responses indicated that most of this behaviour was adequately dealt with by having clear guidelines describing what was and was not acceptable.

CONCLUSION

The number and variety of electronic communication devices available to students is mushrooming. These include not only cell phones but laptop computers as well as desktop computers in many laboratories. The distractions are endless. As several teachers suggested, the inappropriate use of electronic communication devices in class can be adequately addressed by providing the students with clear guidelines describing what is and is not acceptable. The Steering Committee recommends the following:

Recommendation: An Ad Hoc committee should be struck to develop of a set of guidelines regarding the appropriate and inappropriate use of electronic communication devices in the College. The guidelines should be shared with students, teachers and any staff that deal with students on a regular basis. Recommendation: The College should post “No Unauthorized Electronic Devices" signs in all classrooms and laboratories. These notices should indicate that only electronic devices specifically indicated by teachers will be acceptable. Recommendation: The Policy Revision Committee should consider revising the IPESA to expand the restriction on electronic devices to other areas besides the classroom as required.


Page 1.19

1.12 STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY 12: TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE MATERIAL COVERED IN THE CLASSES AND LABS THEY MISS.

Again, most of the responsibility to ensure that students respect this rule falls to the individual teachers.

FINDINGS

Indicator 1: The majority of student respondents reporting that they take responsibility for the material covered in the classes and labs they miss.

The majority of student respondents (93%) reported that they take responsibility for the material covered in the classes and labs they miss.

Indicator 2: The majority of teacher respondents reporting that most to all of their students take responsibility for the material covered in the classes and labs they miss.

The majority of teacher respondents (78%) reported that most to all of their students take responsibility for the material covered in the classes and labs they miss.

CONCLUSION

It is difficult to determine to what extent students are meeting this responsibility other than to ask them. The evidence from the student respondents suggests that most students are taking responsibility for the material covered in the classes and labs they miss.


Page 1.20

1.13 CHAPTER SUMMARY

This chapter presents the evidence to support student compliance with their responsibilities as described in the Vanier College IPESA. According to the IPESA, students have twelve responsibilities:

1. To follow the procedures and requirements specific to their programs of study to ensure the completion of their DEC or AEC.

2. To comply with the course requirements as given on course outlines.

3. To respect the teacher's right to determine course content, methodology, evaluation procedures and attendance policies within the guidelines set by the ministry of education and the college.

4. To take action to solve academic problems, which they may encounter in their courses, by communicating with their teachers or by seeking help through college services such as the library, the learning centre, counselling, resource centres, etc.

5. To be honest and to refrain from cheating, plagiarism and other dishonest or deceptive behaviours.

6. To arrive in class on time and remain for the duration of scheduled class time.

7. To wait for the teacher for 15 minutes after the scheduled beginning of a class, unless they have been notified otherwise.

8. To behave respectfully in class in accordance with appropriate classroom deportment.

9. To respect the rights of all members of the college community.

10. To observe and be aware of the zero tolerance policy regarding the following: unauthorized use of alcohol/illegal drugs, violence, possession of weapons, verbal abuse or intimidation, and gambling.

11. To turn off all electronic communication devices (e.g., cell phones, pagers, etc.) While in class or leave them outside of class.

12. To take responsibility for the material covered in the classes and labs they miss.

The findings of this study suggest that the majority of students were exercising their responsibilities in accordance with policy requirements. However, for some responsibilities the majority of students were in compliance but a smaller, yet significant proportion of the population were not.

Responsibility 1: To follow the procedures and requirements specific to their programs of study to ensure the completion of their DEC or AEC.

The results of this study suggest that students are meeting this responsibility in accordance with the IPESA and the mechanisms that are in place to enable students to meet their program requirements are working remarkably well. In fact, graduation rates in the prescribed time plus two years are quite impressive given the Vanier students’ generally lower incoming high school averages in comparison to the rest of the Reseau.


Page 1.21

Responsibility 2: To comply with the course requirements as given on course outlines.

The findings for this part of the study suggest that the majority of students are following their course requirements, and therefore the mechanisms in place to assist them to fulfill this responsibility are adequate.

Responsibility 3: To respect the teacher's right to determine course content, methodology, evaluation procedures and attendance policies within the guidelines set by the ministry of education and the college.

If we can assume that our samples are representative of the entire student and teacher population, then it appears that the majority of students are respecting the teachers’ rights to determine course content etc. Therefore, we can further assume that the mechanisms in place to ensure compliance with this responsibility are adequate.

In light of the newly developed College guidelines concerning attendance, the Steering Committee felt that this responsibility will need to be reviewed to ensure compatibility with the new guidelines.

Responsibility 4: To take action to solve academic problems, which they may encounter in their courses, by communicating with their teachers or by seeking help through college services such as the Student Advocate in Student Services, the Library, the Learning Centre, Counselling, Resource Centres, etc.

Students in this study reported most often, by far, that they obtained information about available academic resources from their teachers. Friends and course outlines were a distant second. These findings demonstrate the crucial role that teachers are playing in both acting as resources for their students in need and in making them aware of the other academic resources available to them both directly and via the course outlines. The results of this study should be shared with teachers to reinforce their understanding of this.

Responsibility 5: To be honest and to refrain from cheating, plagiarism and other dishonest or deceptive behaviours.

The findings of this study suggest that cheating and plagiarism are a problem at the College, as they are in many academic institutions across the country. Evidence from this study suggests that a significant number of students are cheating or plagiarizing in their courses, although the exact number is difficult to determine.

Via the surveys, not surprisingly, the rates reported by students were lower than those reported by teachers. However, the rates reported to the Registrar by teachers are lower than the rates reported by teachers on the survey, suggesting that perhaps not all teachers are reporting every case of cheating or plagiarism to the Registrar. According to the policy on Cheating and Plagiarism, in such cases the student should receive an automatic zero for the work and the teacher should send a letter to the Registrar. Underreporting makes it difficult for the Registrar to track the number of infractions per individual and hence for the Academic Dean to take disciplinary action, contributing to the persistence of the behaviour.

The reasons for underreporting of incidences of cheating and plagiarism to the Registrar are speculative. Perhaps some teachers are not aware of their responsibility in this area or perhaps they may be reluctant to take action in case of reprisals. It is the College’s responsibility then to


Page 1.22

ensure that all teachers are aware of this responsibility, are encouraged to report such cases and that they are supported in dealing with the repercussions from students and their families when they do.

Responsibility 6: To arrive in class on time and remain for the duration of scheduled class time.

Together, these findings suggest that the majority of students are meeting their responsibility to arrive on time for their classes and remain for the duration of their class. Findings from another section of this report, however, suggest that some students have difficulty getting from one class to the next on time, particularly when the classes are in different buildings, they have to change for a gym class or the teacher of the first class goes over time. Therefore, although for the most part the mechanisms in place to ensure that students meet this responsibility are working well, perhaps teachers need reminding on occasion to permit enough time between classes.

Responsibility 7: To wait for the teacher for 15 minutes after the scheduled beginning of a class, unless they have been notified otherwise.

The findings suggest that students are waiting the required 15 minutes for their teacher to arrive and therefore that current practice of notifying the students of this responsibility are sufficient.

Responsibility 8: Behave respectfully in class in accordance with appropriate classroom deportment

Findings from this study suggest that by far, the majority of students are aware of what constitutes appropriate behaviour in the classroom and are behaving appropriately. However, anecdotal information suggests that there may be a few pockets where behaviour in the classroom is more of an issue, especially in remedial courses. These areas should be explored to determine which courses are specifically involved, as well as what is required to improve the situation. Perhaps some additional teacher training may be required.

Responsibility 9: To respect the rights of all members of the college community

Again, the study findings suggest this is a responsibility that by far, the majority of students are respecting. However, the fact that even a small proportion of the college community reported obvious difficulty in this area (8 teachers out of the 87 who responded to our survey reported experiencing disrespectful behaviour from students that occurs “often” and 2 reported that it occurs “almost every time I teach”), suggests that there is a need for improvement.

It would appear that disrespectful behaviour of students towards teachers is not a pervasive problem but one that some teachers may need assistance with. Although the data were not collected, the situation is probably similar for other College staff. In that regard, the Steering Committee suggests that the College: continue to offer workshops to teachers on classroom management and continue its practice of pairing teachers in need of assistance with teachers with some expertise in this area; continue to promote the Master’s Teacher Program1 and in particular the stand alone course on classroom management; and assess the needs of all College staff for further training in preventing and dealing with disrespectful behaviour on the part of students.


Page 1.23

Responsibility 10: To observe and be aware of the Zero Tolerance Policy regarding the following: unauthorized use of alcohol/illegal drugs, violence, possession of weapons, verbal abuse or intimidation, and gambling

The findings of this study suggest that most students are aware of their responsibilities as addressed in the Zero Tolerance policy but that a few are not respecting the rules. The number of teachers reporting abuse or intimidation from students is too high. Obviously further action is required here, with the most useful course probably being education of faculty and staff regarding methods to prevent this behaviour and deal with it effectively when it occurs.

The Steering Committee agreed that the same recommendations as for those for disrespectful behaviour apply here as well i.e. that the College: continue to offer workshops to teachers on classroom management and continue its practice of pairing teachers in need of assistance with teachers with some expertise in this area; continue to promote the Master’s Teacher Program1

Responsibility 11: To turn off all electronic communication devices (e.g., cell phones, pagers, etc.) while in class or leave them outside of class.

and in particular the stand alone course on classroom management; and assess the needs of all College staff for further training in preventing and dealing with disrespectful behaviour on the part of students.

The number and variety of electronic communication devices available to students is mushrooming. These include not only cell phones but laptop computers as well as desktop computers in many laboratories. The distractions are endless. As several teachers suggested, the inappropriate use of electronic communication devices in class can be adequately addressed by providing the students with clear guidelines describing what is and is not acceptable. The Steering Committee recommended that: a basic set of guidelines regarding the appropriate and inappropriate use of electronic devices in the classroom be developed and shared with all teachers; “No Unauthorized Electronic Devices" signs be posted in all classrooms and laboratories; and the IPESA Revision Committee consider expanding this responsibility to include other areas besides classrooms, for example, the library and other study areas.

Responsibility 12: To take responsibility for the material covered in the classes and labs they miss.

It is difficult to determine to what extent students are meeting this responsibility other than to ask them. The evidence from the student respondents suggests that most students are taking responsibility for the material covered in the classes and labs they miss.


Page 1.24

1.14 CHAPTER RECOMMENDATIONS

The Steering Committee made the following recommendations as a result of the information presented in this chapter of the report:

1. A Policy Revision Committee should be struck and should consider revising the IPESA and the Course Outline policy to include a requirement in the course outline of a statement regarding the actions students should take if they encounter academic problems in their courses.

2. An IPESA Revision Committee should consider revising the IPESA to:

• Include another teacher responsibility – “To define and communicate to students the meaning of cheating and plagiarism and to report all incidences of such behaviour in writing to the Registrar”

• Expand the restriction on electronic communication devices to other areas besides the classroom as required.

3. The College Professional Development Committee should:

• Continue to offer workshops to teachers on classroom management and continue its practice of pairing teachers in need of assistance with teachers with some expertise in this area.

• Assess the needs of all College staff for further training in preventing and dealing with disrespectful behaviour on the part of students and provide training as required.

4. The Academic Dean’s Office continue to promote the Master’s Teacher Program.

5. The College should consider revising the web site so that all college policies can be accessed from one site entitled “College Policies” no matter which jurisdiction they fall under e.g. Academic or Director General etc.

6. An ad hoc committee should be struck to develop of a set of guidelines regarding the appropriate and inappropriate use of electronic communication devices in the College. The guidelines should be shared with all teachers and any staff that deal with students on a regular basis.

7. The College should post “No Unauthorized Electronic Devices" signs in all classrooms and laboratories.

CHAPTER ONE: STUDENT RESPONSIBILITIES - … ONE: STUDENT RESPONSIBILITIES Page 1.1 CHAPTER ONE:...

Documents

Transcript of CHAPTER ONE: STUDENT RESPONSIBILITIES - … ONE: STUDENT RESPONSIBILITIES Page 1.1 CHAPTER ONE:...