Notes from meeting with CN
1. The two points: no ‘backward looking’ cuts in the rate of leaves granted, and no
facile translation of financial constraints into academic reasons via the budget
limits on replacements (term/sessional/lab assistants) and skepticism re. chairs’
statements about the ability to provide adequate support for the programme
without courses from those allocated leave.
2. The new point: variation about 8% is variation about 8%-- it allows for numbers
over 8% as well as under 8%. It would be unacceptable to insist on a hard cap at
8%. When a large number of meritorious applications are received, program
limitations may require a larger than normal level of rejection??? Nevertheless,
the total acceptance rate may well, and must be allowed to, exceed 8% if the
guidelines are actually being followed.