³ÉÈË´óƬ

University Animal Care Committee (UACC)

As per the CCAC policy: Pedagogical merit of live animal-based teaching and training (May 2016), CCAC certified institutions that conduct animal-based teaching or training must have a formal pedagogical merit review process. The pedagogical merit review is the responsibility of the senior administrator overseeing the institutional animal care and use program.

For the purposes of this policy, teaching refers to academic courses offered by the institution and training refers to sessions offered by the institution for the acquisition of a specific skillset (this includes biomethodology courses offered through the Office of the University Veterinarian and medical resident training). The teaching or training of individual students within a laboratory (e.g. as part of thesis development) is not mandated by this policy.

The University Animal Care Committee (UACC) must ensure that no animals are acquired or used for science, including teaching or training without prior approval of an animal use protocol. The animal use protocol (AUP) must indicate that satisfactory pedagogical merit review was undertaken prior to approval.

The purpose of the pedagogical merit review is to assess whether live animals need to be obtained to achieve successful learning outcomes for the teaching or training course in question. Two or more referees who have the technical expertise to assess the pedagogy of the animal use and are not in a conflict of interest (one of whom ideally has knowledge of replacement alternatives) will conduct the review. Reviewers will conclude whether adequate pedagogical merit has been provided to justify the use of animals. Reviewers are solely responsible for reviewing the pedagogy (not ethics) of animal use. A demonstration of pedagogical merit review must be received for every new teaching and training protocol submission (required upon initial submission and at full resubmission i.e.: every 4 years).

For certain competency-based teaching or training activities where the intended learning outcomes are prescribed or mandated by a third party such as a ministry of education, an institutional researcher/personnel training program or an accreditation or certification body, an expedited review process is available. In cases of expedited pedagogical merit review, only one review is required.

To assure that the pedagogical merit review is at arm’s length from the Principal Investigator (PI) and the UACC, the following terms and conditions for peer reviewers are required:

• Reviewers must be external to the course/laboratory for which the protocol will be undertaken and must not be directly involved in the course/laboratory design or implementation.
• Reviewers should have appropriate experience in the relevant field, discipline, or sub- discipline to adequately review the proposal.
• Reviewers should not be in any other potential or perceived conflict of interest (e.g. personal or financial).

In the event that a pedagogical merit review is rejected, and the investigator does not accept the decision, the investigator may request that the reviewer(s) reconsider the decision. This requires the submission and review of revised materials addressing reviewer concerns/comments. If this does not provide a satisfactory solution, the investigator may appeal to the Senior Administrator responsible for the animal care and use program (the Vice-Principal Research), who will then work with the protocol author to find a satisfactory solution and the UACC will be updated accordingly.

As a component of pedagogical merit review, surveys are distributed to course/laboratory participants to receive feedback on the use of animals in the teaching or training course. The aim of the survey is to facilitate the effective use of animals and laboratory design. The surveys are hosted electronically and distributed to instructors annually for student/trainee completion, with automated submission to the UACC Coordinator. A summary of the survey results is provided to the instructor for information and will be taken into consideration during subsequent protocol and pedagogical merit reviews.