SLS organized a walk-in to voice student concerns and require administration to answer questions regarding changes to the ‘open book’ exam policy. Following the demonstration the Faculty Council heard a University Budget Presentation that revealed the University is now operating at a deficit with limited hope in relief.
On Wednesday, January 22, the Faculty Council held a meeting focused on the University Budget Presentation. The meeting began with a Students’ Law Society (SLS) organized walk-in to demonstrate opposition to the Faculty’s recent changes to the ‘open book’ exam policy. For more information on the stance that SLS maintains in relation to this policy, read Isabel Brisson’s (3L) most recent SLS update in this issue.
Under the new ‘open book’ exam policy, students are prohibited from accessing their hard drives during open book exams as written on the Examplify application, owned by ExamSoft. Open book exams, which were previously ‘semi-secure’ on Examplify, will now be ‘secure’, with computer access being locked down. The purpose of this policy is to prevent students from using generative AI software on their computers in the interest of academic integrity. The meeting was held in J140, which comfortably fit the Faculty Council’s regular attendees in addition to the student demonstrators.
Dean Jutta Brunnée began the meeting by commenting on the large student attendance in the room. She recognized the exceptional turnout was in relation to the ‘open book’ exam policy change. Dean Brunnée said she had told the University Budget Presentation speakers to come a bit later in anticipation of the walk in.
Dean Brunnée began by emphasizing that exam integrity is of the utmost importance at the Faculty and the change was made with this focus in mind.
The floor was then handed to SLS President Isabel Brisson (3L). Brisson began by affirming that the students who were present at the meeting had come to show collective opposition to the exam policy changes. She stated that while SLS agrees that academic integrity is essential, the potential impacts of the changes are too far reaching to be a proportionate response to the Faculty’s concerns. Isabel emphasized the lack of student consultation in the decision making process, the disproportionate impact on students with disabilities, and the financial burden of requiring students to purchase physical textbooks and print physical notes. In concluding, Brisson thanked the administration for demonstrating their willingness to listen to student concerns and feedback, and work with SLS to find a potential solution. meeting with the SLS and listening to concerns, albeit after the decision had been made. She emphasized that going forward, SLS wants to formalize student involvement in the decision-making process for changes to exam policies.
Carson Cook (3L) then spoke on behalf of the University of Toronto Law Union. He echoed many of the concerns expressed by Brisson, including financial burdens and disproportionate impact on students with accommodations. He called on Assistant Dean of Equity, Diversity & Inclusion (EDI) Ada Maxwell-Alleyne to support the removal of the policy. He called on Dean Brunnée to stand by her EDI promises. He concluded by calling on Associate Dean Christopher Essert and Associate Dean Sara Faherty to repeal the policy.
Dean Brunnée then opened up the floor to student questions.
A student asked if those who had already purchased a digital textbook would be required to purchase a physical textbook, which would double their textbook costs. Associate Dean Essert replied that the administration is working with the Bookstore to see if publishers would agree to permit students to return digital books with reimbursement before purchasing physical ones. He said they will have a final answer on the matter shortly.
Kabir Singh Dhillon (2L) asked if students will be required to bear the costs of integrity and if the administration can provide assurance that students who require accommodations will receive access to technology. Associate Dean Essert replied that the Faculty will continue to rely on the professionals associated with the accommodation committee to handle student accommodation requests and needs. Assistant Dean Faherty went on to explain that access to hard drives during exams is relatively new. Students with vision issues in the past were given access to their hard drives on a case-by-case basis. She also stated accessibility services are prepared for the potential wave of new accommodation requests as a result of this policy change.
Dhillon asked a follow-up question: Could you let us know what date you contacted accessibility services about this decision? Assistant Dean Faherty replied that Friday, January 17 was the first time Assistant Dean Faherty had specifically given accessibility services a heads up about the potential for additional requests associated with the exam policy changes.
Another student asked why this decision was not made through the Faculty Council. Associate Dean Essert explained that the administration of exams is not within the Faculty Council’s jurisdiction.
Emily Ernst (2L) asked for clarity on whether the new policy was set in stone or if the administration was open to repealing the policy should a viable alternative solution be found. Associate Dean Essert stressed that although nothing is set in stone, at this time, he sees no other viable option to resolve the concerns of generative AI. The focus on accommodations and economic considerations are the areas in which the Faculty will seek to work with students.
Dean Brunnée ended the session on the exam policy change due to time concerns. Subsequently, most of the attending students left.
The Graduate Law Student Association (GLSA) president Dimitrios Tsilikis spoke next. Tsilikis stated that the GLSA stands by the SLS president’s remarks and echoed Cook’s statements. He requested that the law school consider providing free printing, at least for this semester. Tsilikis finished with a few general announcements pertaining to the GLSA.
The meeting then proceeded to the University Budget Presentation. Dean Brunnée began by noting the continuing tuition freeze in effect since 2019 and the new international student restrictions has created a challenging time financially for U of T.
The University Budget Presentation was given by Scott Maybury, Vice-President of Operations and Real Estate Partnerships and Vice-Provost of Academic Operations and Jeff Lennon, the University’s Assistant Vice President of Planning and Budget.
Maybury began by sharing that despite the University of Toronto budget being down 5.5%, the school is in a much better position than most other universities. Universities as a whole are down 40% on average, with some Canadian universities facing declines of up to 70%in budgeting. The University of Toronto has been insulated financially by outcompeting other universities for the remaining international students. Maybury stated the cumulative value lost from the domestic tuition reduction and freeze has resulted in the loss of over 1 billion dollars on education.
The largest portion of the school’s expenditure, 62%, goes to paying faculty and staff salaries. Maybury emphasized that every dollar for the past five years that went to increases in Faculty salary has been paid by international students—every dollar.
Lennon spoke next on U of T’s Budget Model. Maybury chimed in that since 2006, there has never been an across-the-board budget cut. Now budgetary decisions are focused on individual divisions. The Faculty of Law has thrived under the modern Budget Model, much better than any other Faculty.
Maybury shared that the Faculty’s deficit currently sits at 2.4%. On the expenditure side, Student Aid can never be cut. This leaves limited options to reduce costs. Faculty and staff compensation is an obvious area to reduce costs, but discussions with the various unions have not been going great. If salary increases cannot be negotiated down, there will probably be cuts to the number of employees at the University in the near future.
Maybury believes that out-of-province tuition increases may be an avenue to increase the University’s revenue. Despite raising out-of-province tuition every year, enrollment rate of out-of-province students has continued to increase. This is a strong indicator that an increase in out-of-province tuition will likely not impact out-of-province applications.
Lennon commented on the current state of Student Aid. Tuition has grown annually by 1% since 2014. In the same period, financial aid has grown on average 6.2%. The net tuition paid by students at the law school has decreased from about $21,000 in 2014 to about $12,000 in 2023.
Maybury also shared that the University is also pursuing commercial ventures to generate more revenue. For example, the University is investing in housing. This housing will be offered to students below market, but will still generate a profit for the University.
The presentation concluded with a question and answer period. One student asked whether the increases in compensation costs were to the existing Faculty or to hire new Faculty. Maybury replied that, basically, increases were for existing Faculty and staff. The average U of T Faculty member’s salary increased 11% this year. Dean Brunnée stepped in to explain this was in response to the compensation freeze and that average increase was approximately 5%.
If you are interested in viewing previous Faculty Council meeting agendas, minutes, reports, and schedules, check out the e.Legal Faculty Council page. The next Faculty Council meeting will be in February. All students may and are encouraged to attend.