Revisions to the Academic Operations Manual (AOM)
Policies and Procedures: Revisions to the AOM
Academic Operations Manual
Approving Authority: SJU Senate Council
Established: November 22, 2013
Date of Last Review/Revision: December 11, 2014, replaces November 22, 2013
Office of Accountability: Vice President Academic and Dean
Administrative Responsibility: Vice President Academic and Dean
Printer-friendly version (pdf)
1. Policy Statement
Content in the St. Jerome’s University Academic Operations Manual (AOM) may from time to time be revised. The final approval of University academic policies, procedures, guidelines, and all material included in the AOM is the responsibility of the St. Jerome’s University Senate Council (SJUSC) (see the SJUSC Terms of Reference, Article 3: Duties and Responsibilities of Senate Council).
Revisions to the AOM that have significant financial consequences must go the St. Jerome’s University Board of Governors for approval of the expenditure once academic approval has been granted by the SJUSC.
The approval process is a collegial one. Depending on the policy or AOM content, the approval process may include participation by the Vice President Academic and Dean, Associate Dean, the Registrar, academic departments, interdisciplinary programs, Academic Committee, other committees of the SJUSC, and ultimately the SJUSC.
At least once every five years the Governance Committee of the SJUSC must undertake a complete review of the AOM, submit a report of its findings to the SJUSC, and, if applicable, make recommendations to the SJUSC.
The approval process for AOM content, including academic policies, procedures, and guidelines, is as follows:
2.1 Initiation of Proposal
An SJUSC committee or an academic department submits to the Vice President Academic and Dean a proposal to revise AOM content. Such proposed revisions may include the establishment of a new academic policy, procedure, or guideline; amendments to existing academic policy, procedures, or guidelines; or deletions of AOM content.
The Vice President Academic and Dean may initiate a proposal to revise the AOM.
The Associate Dean and Registrar may initiate a proposal to revise the AOM through the Vice President Academic and Dean.
The SJUSC may, with a majority vote of members present, initiate a proposal to revise the AOM. (Any recommendations from the Governance Committee five-year review of the AOM fall in this category.)
2.2 Presentation of Proposal
All proposals initiated by Senate Council standing committees to revise or add to the AOM shall go directly to Senate Council for approval.
All other proposals shall be presented to Academic Committee.
After receiving a proposal to revise the AOM, the Vice President Academic and Dean presents the proposal to Academic Committee for discussion, possible revision, and a decision regarding recommendation.
Should Academic Committee reject the proposal, the Vice President Academic and Dean will inform the initiating committee or academic department of the decision, including reasons for the rejection and suggested revisions. Note: Academic Committee may not reject a proposal from the SJUSC—Academic Committee shall either revise the proposal or accept the proposal as presented (see 2.2.b.iii and iv).
Should Academic Committee make minor revisions to the proposal, Academic Committee will forward a recommendation to the SJUSC to accept the revised proposal. Except in cases involving a proposal initiated by the SJUSC, major revisions made by Academic Committee constitute a rejection of the proposal (see 2.2.b.ii). Academic Committee decides whether revisions are minor or major.
Should Academic Committee accept the proposal, Academic Committee will forward a recommendation to the SJUSC to approve the proposal.
2.3 Presentation of Recommendation before SJUSC
In accord with the SJU Policy on University Policies and Procedures, the Governance Committee of the SJUSC sends the recommended AOM revisions to members of the SJUSC fourteen (14) days prior to the meeting of SJUSC.
As a rule, all recommended AOM revisions to content require two readings. However, the Governance Committee of the SJUSC may declare a notice of motion to the SJUSC that one reading is sufficient. Reasons for recommending only one reading may include corrections to typos and minor grammatical changes; minor revisions to introductions, guidelines, or non-policy related content; or required changes (e.g., changes to University of Waterloo office names). The Governance Committee must make this notice of one-reading motion to SJUSC members fourteen (14) days prior the meeting of the SJUSC. If the Governance Committee makes no one-reading notice of motion, the recommended AOM revisions will have two readings.
The SJUSC may waive the two-reading rule only with a majority vote of members present approving the Governance Committee’s one-reading motion.
2.4 Vote on Recommendation
Upon the first of two readings, the SJUSC shall consider the recommendation and make any revisions. The recommendation shall be tabled until final reading.
Upon final reading, including a first-and-final reading, the recommendation shall be approved with a majority vote of members present at SJUSC.