Supervised Research Rules and Application Form

SUPERVISED RESEARCH RULES

1. Course Name:

Supervised Research 98-892

2. Purpose:

To encourage students to design and execute, under the supervision of a faculty member, a program of study primarily in subject matter areas not covered by the regular curriculum.

"Programs of Study" contemplated under the head of Supervised Study may include inter alia individual study and research, in depth, of selected topics with a goal of producing an original paper or report; group study or research, into special legal topics of common interest; directed reading, primarily in subject matter areas not covered by the regular curriculum; self-tutorial seminars enabling individual self instruction primarily in subject areas not covered by the regular curriculum. These examples are listed merely to suggest the potential range of programs contemplated and are not intended to limit the programs which might be approved.

3. Eligibility:

Students who have completed the first-year curriculum are eligible to apply for course credit for a program of Supervised Research.

4. Credit Limitations:

Normally, credit for Supervised Research may only be obtained once in each of the second and third years. Supervised Research projects may be for 1-4 credits.

5. Administration:

(a) To ensure the continuing academic quality of supervised research the Academic Program Committee of the Faculty of Law shall be responsible for the administration of all supervised research projects. The faculty supervisor of the study project shall be a member of the Academic Program Committee for that project. The student member of the Academic Program Committee may sit in deliberations on review and approval of programs but shall not sit in review and approval of grades assigned for such projects.

(b) The Committee shall:

(i) review proposed programs of study;

(ii) approve, with or without modifications, programs deemed meritorious including the number of credits to be awarded;

(iii) note the grade and at its discretion, review the completed programs of study and the student's final work upon which evaluation is made;

The grade assigned by the faculty supervisor will ordinarily become the final grade. If the committee members disagree, by two thirds majority vote of the committee, with the grade assigned by the faculty supervisor, the student's work shall be referred to another member of faculty for grading per Rule 8.

(iv) agree upon the grade to be assigned

(v) present an annual report to the faculty;

(vi) perform such other functions as necessary to effectively administer Supervised Research.

6. Procedure:

(a) The student shall submit a Supervised Research application form, completed and signed both the supervising professor and the student, by the last day of the first week of the term in which the Supervised Research project is to be undertaken. The application shall set out:

(i) the program of study contemplated and number of credits applied for;

(ii) anticipated benefits to be gained from the program;

(iii) a summary of previous work in subject area, if any;

(iv) the name of a faculty member who is tentatively agreeable to supervising his/her program;

(v) any other appropriate information. [See also Rule 7(c), following].

NOTE: The time limit [Rule 6(a)] for an application for Supervised Research does not apply to moot competitions as outlined in Rule 12.

(b) The Committee shall, upon receipt of the application, determine that:

(i) the faculty member named in the application recommends that sufficient benefit will be derived from this program to warrant the student devoting the necessary time to it;

(ii) the faculty member named is willing to supervise the program.

(c) The Committee shall approve of the Supervised Research option only if, in their view:

(i) the project is meritorious;
(ii) the student will benefit from the effort;
(iii) the faculty supervisor has sufficient time and expertise to adequately direct the student.

(d) The Committee has the power to alter time limits set out in these Rules with respect to mooting and other matters.

(e) Any substantial change in a Supervised Research proposal must be approved not only by the faculty supervisor and student involved, but also the Academic Program Committee.

(f) The Committee shall inform the student in writing, with reasons; as to the disposition of his/her application.

(g) Denial of an application is appealable to the Academic Program Committee for reconsideration.

7. Approved Programs:

(a) Students whose programs are approved will be expected to submit outlines, drafts of papers and progress reports to the supervising professor for review and discussion on a regular basis.

(b) An approved course in Supervised Research shall be completed in the term in which it is commenced. (Note that the supervisor must forward the grade to the Committee not later than one week prior to the Faculty Marks Committee meeting: Rule 8)

(c) The requirements of Supervised Research shall not be met by the submission of work which has been done in another context, such as other law school activities or summer employment. However, the course requirements may be satisfied by the submission of work representing a further development of work done in another context. In this latter instance, the student shall reach an explicit understanding with the supervising professor in order to avoid subsequent misunderstandings and conflicts.

By way of further clarification of the above and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, normally it is not appropriate for a Supervised Research project to involve for credit, activities for which financial reward is or was received. This is not to say that a further development (which is independent, substantive and meriting academic credit on its own account) of work done in another context (including for financial reward), is inappropriate. However, this must be clearly disclosed in the written proposal.

Secondly, it is very important that the student disclose in writing to the supervising professor and to the Chair of the Committee any and all of his/her past or present undergraduate, law school or other graduate courses or seminars and particularly papers or theses, as well as non_academic activities, which bear directly or substantially on the proposed study, duplicating to some degree the effort in Supervised Research. In indicating the past or present work, the degree and manner of duplication should be outlined. (Failure to do this may have ramifications for the academic grade assigned, as well as for discipline proceedings.)

8. Evaluation:

The course in Supervised Research shall be evaluated by the supervising professor, subject to the following:

(a) Where evaluation of the course is based on a research paper or written examination:

(i) the standard of an A grade shall be a paper which indicates exceptional performance with strong evidence of thorough research, original thinking, good organization, and capacity to organize and synthesize;

(ii) the supervising professor shall evaluate the student's work and submit a copy of the research paper or examination and examination paper, and the grade assigned to the Academic Program Committee not later than one week prior to the Faculty Marks Committee meeting;

(iii) the Committee may review the research paper or examination and examination paper and at its option, request that the student appear before the Committee to make an oral presentation;

(iv) the Committee:

(1) If it ratifies the grade assigned by the supervising faculty member, shall recommend to the Faculty Marks Committee that the grade be finally approved.

(2) If two thirds of the Committee disagrees with the supervising faculty member, believing the grade assigned is too high or too low, the Committee shall send the student's work and the approved proposal previously submitted to another faculty member for grading, who shall not be a member of the Committee. The Committee shall first discuss the disagreement with the supervising faculty member, requesting that s/he make an appropriate adjustment. The grade of the second faculty member shall be the grade forwarded to the Faculty Marks Committee for final approval.

(b) Where evaluation of the course is based on some effort other than a research paper or an examination:

(i) the standard of an A grade indicates exceptional performance with strong evidence of thorough research; original thinking, good organization, and capacity to organize and synthesize;

(ii) the student shall present to the supervising professor, and through him/her to the Committee, an outline, bibliography and summary of the work completed;

(iii) after receiving these materials, the Committee may require the student to appear before it to make an oral presentation on the scope and the results of his/her effort, or the Committee may make reasonable alternative arrangements for an oral examination. In the latter case, the student's prior consent is required;

(iv) on the basis of this oral presentation, as well as other accomplishments related to the course, the faculty supervisor shall assign a grade for the course and shall forward that grade to the Academic Program Committee at least one week prior to the Faculty Marks Committee meeting;

(v) after this oral presentation and receipt of the grade assigned by the faculty supervisor, the Committee:

(1) If it ratifies the grade assigned by the supervising faculty member, shall recommend to the Faculty Marks Committee that the grade be finally approved.

(2) If two-thirds of the Committee disagrees with the supervising faculty member believing the grade assigned is too high or too low, the Committee shall obtain the evaluation of another faculty member who was present at the oral presentation or other basis for evaluation. The Committee shall first discuss the disagreement with the supervising faculty member, requesting that s/he make an appropriate adjustment. The grade of the second faculty member shall be the grade forwarded to the Faculty Marks Committee for final approval. If no other Faculty member was present at the oral presentation or other basis for evaluation, the Committee and supervising faculty members shall attempt to resolve the disagreement. If no resolution can be reached, the disagreement shall be resolved by the Dean and the Associate Dean.

9. Appeals:

Student appeals shall be in accord with the Senate by-laws. Please consult the Regulations on Academic Status of the Faculty of Law for the appropriate procedure.

Appeals of a grade assigned on the basis of an oral examination for a final grade/but not including a presentation according to Rules 8(a) or 8(b) shall be according to the rules regarding appeals, of the Senate, and the general rules, regarding appeals, of the Faculty of Law. Where applicable, the appeal shall be based upon an audio tape recording of the proceedings.

10. Other Rules:

(a) No member of the faculty shall convert the fruit of student Supervised Research to his/her own use without the expressed consent of that student and, further, if student work is, with permission, subsequently used by the faculty member, proper acknowledgment shall be given.

(b) The course in Supervised Research shall not be used as a device to provide research assistance as an alternative to paid research assistants.

(c) Violations of (a) and (b) above shall be subject to appropriate professional sanctions.

12. Moot Competitions:

That the participants in the Gale Moot Court Competition, the Jessup International Moot Court Competition, the Niagara Moot Court Competition, the Laskin Moot Court Competition, the Corporate/Securities Moot Court Competition, and the Arnup Cup Trial Advocacy Competition, receive 3 credits for such activity subject to their completion of a formal written requirement to be approved by the Academic Program Committee.

Community Legal Aid Director(s)

That the Directors of Community Legal Aid be given a course credit on a pass/fail basis, in recognition of their work in supervising and administering Community Legal Aid. Fifteen credits are allocated for Community Legal Aid, to be allotted amongst the executive members, no individual to receive more than 3 credits. Application for CLA credit must be made to the Academic Program Committee in the normal fashion.

The Academic Program Committee will entertain applications for Community Legal Aid Directors for additional Supervised Research projects involving written papers, etc. dealing with substantive matters over which CLA has jurisdiction.

Supervised Research Rules Application