Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

MEMORANDUM

To:

From: W.

Subject:

Enrollment Limitations for 1988/89

Date:

December 16, 1987

Action taken by the Senate Committee on Academic Planning at its meeting of

December 15, 1987 gives rise to the following motion:

MOTION

"That Senate approve and recommend approval to the Board of

Governors, asset forth in S..88-1 , that the Registrar be empowered

to limit the admission of new students by year level, based on their

admission G.P.A.s, so that the number of students registered does

not exceed a defined limit: that limit shall be based on an analysis

of resources, including any potential additional funding."

Vice-President, Academic Office

Simon Fraser University

To: Senate Committee on

From:

J.W. George Ivany,

Academic Planning ?

Chairman, Task Force on

University Size

Re: Enrolment Limitations

Date:

December 10, 1987

for 1988/89

As you are aware, the Task Force on University Size was struck as a

subcommittee of SCAP in the aftermath of a significant enrolment increase in

September. This increase of 8.7% follows successive increases over the past

several semesters (see table attached). Following on the heels of a long period

of restraint, from which we have barely begun to recover, this growth in the face

of reduced resources has finally created a sense of crisis on the campus. That

crisis has many aspects -- too few instructors, too large class sizes, too large

tutorials, insufficient class roomSpace, and a significant overload on support

services from parking to academic advice, from departmental assistance to

• registration and financial aid. Many felt that the crisis had become unbearable

and that lack of action to cope would be tantamount to immoral action. The

President asked me as Vice-President, Academic, to inquire into the problem of

university size. Thus the Task Force was created.

Senate will recall that this problem was anticipated in 1982 by the

President's Committee on Enrolment Limitation (report attached).

Unfortunately, the mechanisms proposed in that committee report were to be

triggered by an enrolment of 11,000 students. In retrospect, that number was

too high which is why the current crisis has befallen us.

The mandate of the new Task Force has three aspects as outlined in an

attached memo. This report to SOAP deals only with the first aspect, a

analysis of the problem can proceed.

The full analysis must take more time than is available if we are to inform

potential students, schools and parents of any possible changes to admissions

in a timely manner. A careful study must consider special approaches to

government for incremental resources (which have already begun). It would

need to examine our scheduling, our pedagogy, our system of admission and

registration, the effects of course, program and Faculty level enrolment caps. In

effect, it must examine the very concept we hold of education at Simon Fraser.

In the meantime, we cannot sit still and do nothing about the immediate

deterioration. While placing before government a request for special consider-

ations we must prepare a contingency plan such that the situation can be

brought under control if no relief resources can be found.

Therefore, we propose a plan to implement the authority and responsi-

bility which is specified as follows in the SFU Calendar

(p.

15). "The University

reserves the right to limit enrolment when it deems the facilities and resources

available are not adequate to provide for additional students." We suggest a

mechanism which would enable curtailment of new student registration, based

upon competency (as measured by high school, and/or college grades) to limit

the overall undergraduate student numbers to an appropriate maximum based

upon current resources plus any special incremental resources which can be

made available in a useful manner.

Motion

"That the Registrar be empowered to limit the admission of new students

by year level, based on their admission G.P.A.s, so that the number of

students registered does not exceed a defined limit: that limit shall be

based on an analysis of resources, including any potential additional

0 -

ZI-

Z CD

MEMORANDUM

To..... 

.

..,

enat 

..........................................

d

President's Committee on 

Enrolment Limitatlo. 

From ..... ...M.

Munro 

?

.

Date..... ? 

9.8.2

Action taken by the 

,

Sena.te Committee on Academic 

planning at its meeting of September 

22, 1982

and the Senate 

Undergraduate Admission Board at its meeting of October 

21,

1982

gives rise to the following motion. 

MOTION

That Senate approve and recommend approval to the Board of 

Governors the following recommendations concerning limitation 

of enrolment. 

A. General 

1.

That any policies for limiting enrolment shall be based 

primarily on academic achievement and potential. 

2.

That any regulations involving University or department 

enrolment limitations shall be conveyed to students as 

early as possible. Since unforeseen circumstances may 

require special actions to control enrolments, a statement 

advising of this possibility shall be included in the 

University calendar. 

3.

That no action be taken on the specific recommendations 

regarding overall University enrolment limitation until 

a)

there has been discussion with the other two 

universities and other educational institutions; 

b)

the new UCBC grant allocation mechanism has been 

established. 

B. UniversitY Enrolment 

1. That, until additional space is made available and until 

the University's operating grant support reflects actual 

increases in the costs of operating the University, the 

undergraduate head count enrolment in the Fall semester 

shall be limited to 11,000 students. The determination 

of head count enrolment for this purpose shall exclude 

enrolment in the Directed Independent Study Course program 

and other programs funded through the Interior budget. 

cont . ? 

Page 

.

Page 2 

Senate 

November 23, 1982 

To implement this overall limitation, the following 

specific limitation measures shall be employed, in 

the order indicated. 

a)

Reconsideration of the 

international

student quota 

to ensure that this group of students bears an 

a p

propriate proportion of the reduction in total 

enrolment and that there is 

consistency

between 

the standards applied to this group and other 

admission categories. 

b)

The high school grade point average required to 

enter the University directly from B.C. high schools 

continue at 2.50 for all students, but with modifi- 

cation of the present review process for applicants 

below this level. 

c)

The regulations 

governing

the academic standing required 

for continuance as a student be made more 

stringent.

The

changes should concentrate on reducing the period of time 

• ? 

in which students with deficient GPAs may 

continue

as

students and on removing the authority of the Senate 

Appeals Board to re-admit students who are on "required 

to withdraw" or "permanent -withdrawal" status 

excet under

extenatirc circumstances

(NOTE:- The Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board has 

given 

consideration

to this matter and it is expected that 

specific recornrnendatioi-is will be brought forward to Senate 

shortly. It is intended that action in this area be under- 

taken as soon as possible because of academic standards, 

without reference to the enrolment limitation processes. 

The recommendations at present are at SCUS) 

d)

The admission of students under the mature student category 

be adjusted with more stringent conditions for continuance. 

consideration

(NOTE:- The Senate 

to this 

Undergraduate 

toDic and it 

Admissions 

is expected 

Board 

that 

has

specific 

given 

recommendations will come forward from that body to Senate 

shortly. The recommendations at present are at SCUS) 

.

cont . . . Page 3 

Senate 

November 23, 1982 

) The cumulative grade point average normally required 

for admission of students transferring from colleges 

and universities be set at 2.25 for Canadian institutions. 

The equivalent requirement for non-Canadian institutions 

shall be increased to 2.65. 

f) Limitation of enrolment beyond the levels achieved 

through a), b), c), and d), be accomolished by in- 

creasing the required level of academic achievement 

in some or all of the above areas. 

2. That, since part-time students constitute an increasing 

proportion of total undergraduate enrolment, a separate 

study be made to assess the implications of this trend on 

operating and capital costs and the character of the 

University. 

C. Departmental Enrolments 

1. That enrolment limitations for individual departments be 

considered when one of the following conditions prevails: 

a)

enrolment growth exceeds the department's ability to 

respond because of physical space constraints, the 

inability of the University to allocate more operating 

resources to the department, or the inability of the 

department to attract sufficient qualified faculty; 

b)

undergraduate enrolment in the department constitutes 

an excessive proportion Of the University's total 

undergraduate enrolment; 

c)

it is determined that the best interests of the 

department and the University in maintaining academic 

quality require that enrolment be limited. 

2. That policies for limiting departmental enrolments be 

uniform across the University, recognizing that unique 

situations may require special attention. 

3. That the policy for limiting departmental enrolments take 

the following form: 

a)

determination by the department, in conjunction with 

the Faculty Dean, of the number of students which it 

can accommodate in its honors, major, minor and other 

programs. 

b)

establishment of a minimum cumulative G.P.A. for accep- 

tance into departmental programs. The cumulative G.P.A. 

will be set at a level which is expected to enrol the 

number of students determined in a) 

to remain in a department's program, the student shall be 

expected to maintain a cumulative G.P.A. at a level to 

be determined at the time that the enrolment limitation 

Polic 

y

is established; 

--

Page. 4 

Senate 

November 23, 1982 

. ?

d) students who are not accepted into departmental programs 

but who wish to take upper division courses in the 

department, shall be governed by the cumulative G.P.A. 

required at the time they wish to register in these 

courses. 

Approval by Senate and Board of Governors would be required 

in each case. 

D.

Scheduling and Flexibility_ 

That the recommendations of the Senate Committee on University 

Budget in its report "Enrolment Growth: The Effect on Instructional 

Facilities", relating to the feasibility of assigning courses to 

individual rooms after the completion of in-person registration, 

spreading of courses more evenly across the five-day week, more 

effective scheduling of evening courses, and more efficient use 

of large lecture theatres be considered for implementation. 

E.

Future Review 

That the Senate Committee on Academic Planning be given 

responsibility for monitoring the impact of enrolment 

limitation measures and recommending appropriate changes to 

Senate for its consideration. 

RATIONALE 

The report of the President's Committee on Enrolment Limitation 

is attached for information, and provides rationale for the 

proposed motion. The report and its recommendations were considered 

by the Senate Committee on Academic Planning and, in addition, 

section C of those recommendations, dealing with university 

enrolment, has received consideration by the Senate Undergraduate 

Admissions Board, with specific recommendations from that Board 

expected to come forward shortly to Senate. The motion now 

proposed for Senate consideration is based on the actions of the 

two Senate committees. 

MI.

Munro 

/d s 

Memorandum

from the

Vice-President, Academic

Simon Fraser University

To: Task Force on University Size

From:

J.W. George Ivany

Subject:

Mandate ?

Date:

89-10-6

As I see it we have three sets of objectives to achieve.

Description of the problem and definition of possible

crisis responses.

We shalt analyse and discuss data and anecdotes related to the

perceived problems of student overload. This will involve data

relating to student counts, faculty-student ratios, ratios of

sessional to regular faculty and our "turnaway" rate. Other

important data related to support services will be scrutinized. The

data will be compared across programs, Departments and Faculties

and across recent years.

Such "quick-fix" ideas as may suggest themselves may become

one-time, emergency bandaids to be imposed by administrative

action or may involve longer term changes. We should consider

enrolment caps on courses and programs, admission standards,

continuance standards, etc. We should consider administrative

support levels as well as faculty complement needs.

Deadline: December 31, 1987.

Analysis of current

capacity.

We shall attempt to define the current, optimum capacity of

the University given present resource levels in order that the

quality of our instructional and research programs be preserved.

We must examine certain of our beliefs about Simon Fraser, e.g.,

the accessibility mandate, or the tutorial concept, to name just

two. This should be done across the entire spectrum of our

curriculum. The result should be a statement of preferred total

•

size, a profile of student distributions afforded among

Departments and Faculties, recommendations with respect to the

historic proportions of graduate to undergraduate students, part-

time to full-time students and high school entrants to college

transfers or mature entrants. In dealing fully with these issues

we shall have to consider admissions standards and policies,

curriculum and pedagogy, space and scheduling across the day, the

week and the year.

Our target is a set of recommendations which will stimulate a

full Senate debate on these important issues of capacity, resources

and quality.

Deadline: April 30, 1988.

3. A Proposal for government incremental support for

growth at Simon Fraser University.

Using the data and analyses from 2 above and considering both

our historic niche in the University system of British Columbia and

•

the demographics of our catchment region we wish to table a

concrete proposal for incremental growth for the consideration of