S.94-56
Memo from Nick Heath
S
?
Director of Admissions
Simon Fraser University
To: Senate
Date: September 6, 1994
ISubiect: Admission - Diverse Qualifications ?
I
At Its meeting of 24 June 1994, the Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board accepted the
report of its ad hoc sub-committee and approved a proposal contained within that report.
An abridged version of the report is attached, entitled, 'Diverse Qualifications Admission
Policy'. This action gives rise to the following motion:
Motion
That Senate approve the proposed policy on admission based on diverse qualifications, as
described in the attached paper 'Diverse Qualifications Admission Policy.
Background and Purpose
With the increasing emphasis on high academic grades to gain general admission to the
University, there has been considerable discussion at SUAB as to desirability of our
current policies, which call for selection based on academic ranking only.
Many other universities have admission policies which use broader criteria, and report
that this is both beneficial to the institution and is seen to be fairer by the public.
S ?
Within this University, admission to certain programs, notably the Professional
Development Program in the Faculty of Education, is based already on multiple criteria,
such as relevant experience and personal qualities.
The purpose of the proposed policy is:
• to admit students who will contribute strongly to the University through
activities outside the classroom.
• to encourage achievement through recognition of excellence in academic and
non-academic fields.
• to respond to the reported decline in Interest in
extra-curricular
activities in
?
schools and colleges, resulting from Increased competition for admission.
SUAB held meetings on 22 February, 14 March and 29 March. At the last of these, a
three person sub-committee was struck, which presented its report on 24 June 1994.
Implementation
If approved, considerable lead time might be required for full implementation.
Admission materials for the academic year 1994-95 are already printed and
distributed. The earliest feasible semester for starting is 96-1.
nh Aug. 94
0
9 ?
Diverse Qualifications Admission Policy
Report of the Sub-Committee
At its meeting of 29 March 1994,
SUAB
considered paper
SLJAB
255, Modified Admission
Policy, - Proposal for Discussion, and a motion was approved to pursue the development of a
model for modified admission. SUAB established a sub-committee, consisting of Roland Case
(Associate Professor, Faculty of Education), Trevor Lord (Student Representative, Faculty of
Education) and Nick Heath (Director of Admissions) to develop this proposal and report back.
Policy statement
and principles
The sub-committee agreed on the following policy statement:
Simon Fraser University seeks to admit not only applicants who are academically very well-
qualified but also those who meet minimum admission standards and have
demonstrated commitment and/or excellence in other endeavours
and/or ?
• presented a clear and valid reason for attending Simon Fraser University
and/or ?
• have succeeded in their studies in spite of difficult circumstances.
The sub-committee agreed on the following:
1.
Name
The name of the policy shall be the Diverse Qualifications Admission Policy.
2.
Respect existing determination of admission proportions
Senate has approved admission targets for each semester, broken down into three broad
groups and into Science and non-Science faculties. These targets and the resulting mix should
not be 'changed as a result of this policy, which must provide an opportunity for prospective
new students regardless of origin, goals or age group.
3.
Recognize and respect the trimester nature of admissions
There are three main admission/registration cycles, for Spring, Summer and Fall.
Summer Session, starting July, is less significant and can be included with Summer semester
admissions. The policy must provide an opportunity for prospective new students regardless
of the semester in which they start.
4.
Two methods of determining admission shall be used
Two types of qualifications shall be used to determine admission. 'Straight' academic
qualifications, (i.e. the gpa or percent average based on the secondary or post-secondary record)
and Diverse Qualifications. (Currently, only academic qualifications are used and qualified
applicants are ranked in descending gpa. Offers are made in descending rank order until all
places are filled.)
ir.' ?
;iL1fl
!m
,1HiiT
5.
Academic qualifications alone shall be used for most decisions
Initially, it is recommended that 90% of admission decisions
be based
on academic criteria
alone, leaving the remaining 10%
to be
determined under the Diverse Qualifications policy.
These proportions might be changed in time, based on experience and could vary by basis of
admission, faculty or program.
For 93/94, this would give the following totals:
Admitted on Academic qualifications alone
?
4500 new students
Admitted under Diverse Qualifications
?
500 new students
6.
The Diverse Qualifications policy shall recognize-three other forms of qualification
The three other forms of qualification shall be:
• sense of purpose in attending university (and Simon Fraser University in particular);
• demonstrated excellence in a field (academic, social, athletic, artistic, professional);
• success in studies in the face of difficult circumstances (physical, psychological, social or
economic).
7.
The Diverse Qualifications policy shall be applied only if-the candidate meets the published
admission requirements
An applicant whose gpa is below the published minimum, who lacks the required English test
score, who has insufficient credit for admission or in any other way has failed to meet the
minimum requirements shall be ineligible for consideration under the Diverse Qualifications
policy. Consequently, only those who are otherwise 'turnaways' from the University shall be
considered.
8.
Under the Diverse Qualifications policy, both academic qualifications and other
qualifications are to be considered, with appropriate weighting
The relative weights should permit selection of an applicant who has minimum acceptable
grades but excellent other qualifications or profound special circumstances over an applicant
who has grades which are at the 'cut-off margin but who has few or no other attributes.
9.
Applicant information shall be voluntary and self-reported
Applicants may choose whether or not they wish to provide detailed personal information for
consideration under the Diverse Qualifications policy. A Personal
Information
Profile shall be
'developed to provide the following information:
• a 300 word statement of the reasons for wishing to attend Simon Fraser University;
• a summary of notable activities and achievements;
• a summary with supporting information of any difficult circumstances;
• the names and addresses of two persons who could verify the information;
No letters of reference shall be requested. Confidential or open references are a source of
much additional work in schools, universities and colleges and are believed to not provide
sufficient valid information to justify the additional effort involved. Documentation must be
provided to support claims of exceptional situations.
.
.
page 2
•
?
10. Appeals ?
0
The Senate Appeals Board shall continue to hear admissions appeals where there are'
significant special circumstances. The Diverse Qualifications policy Is not intended to replace
appeals to the Senate Appeals Board. Disputes resulting from judgments involved in scoring
the personal data of candidates shall not be considered grounds for appeal.
11. Scholarships.
The use of applicant information for adjudicating entrance scholarships should be explored. It
is worth noting that, in 1994, all essays and other materials are being scored and evaluated only
by members of the selection committees. (Typically, applicants for entrance scholarships
submit a 1 page resume, a 1000 word autobiographical essay and 2 letters of reference.)
11 Scoring
A systematic scoring method should be used to generate consistent ranking of candidates. A
suggested format is given in Appendix 1.
13.
Interviews
Although interviews with candidates can offer further valid information, it is not proposed to
conduct applicant interviews. Issues surrounding interviews include time and cost
considerations, consistency of evaluation, fairness in access to interviews and the keeping of
interview notes which are later translated into some type of score. These notes could be
subject to external scrutiny under Freedom of Information laws and extensive training might
be required before interviewers could properly discharge their responsibilities.
.
Procedure
All applicants shall be invited to submit a Personal Information Profile with their
applications. It shall be made clear to applicants that reference will be made to the Personal
Information Profile only for determining admission cases, under the Diverse Qualifications
policy, unless the University should decide to also use the Personal Information Profile for
scholarship evaluation. Further, applicants shall be advised that admission under the Diverse
Qualifications policy is limited to 10% of admissions. Applicants who feel that their
applications might be marginal should submit a Personal Information Profile.. University staff
may offer general advice on the desirability of submitting a Personal Information Profile, but
will not give specific advice prior to a formal assessment of admissibility.
Applicants must submit the Personal Information Profile by the deadline for submitting an
application for admission. The University will not accept late submissions or changes.
Sufficient copies must be provided for the use of the selection committee.
The Personal Information Profile is recorded as a received admission document. It shall be
received by the Office of the Registrar and filed temporarily. Every Personal Information
Profile shall be destroyed according to the Registrar's document retention schedule. Currently,
this schedule requires destruction after three semesters, but consideration should be given to
• ?
destruction after the start of each semester, once all admission decisions have been made.
A suggested Personal Information Profile is attached as Appendix 1. It is derived from forms
developed by Queen's University and the University of Guelph.
page 3
Applications shall be assessed, as at present, on academic grades, and offers made to fill 90%of
the target. Normally, this will be achieved by:
30 June ?
Fall applications
31 October
?
Spring applications
28 February ?
Summer applications
At that time, determination will be made of the admission gpa (sometimes referred to as the
'cut-off gpa') for that semester, even though not
all
decisions will have been made.
All applicants whose applications are complete and who are technically admissible, but who
have not been selected because their admission gpa falls below the 'cut-off gpa', (i.e. currently
coded as 'DL' -
Deferred Limited Enrolment) shall compete for the remaining 10% of places.
This pool of applicants is the total number of DL applicants and it shall include both those
who have and have not submitted a Personal Infol-mation Profile.
Normally, scoring, ranking and selection of applicants must take place within approx. 2-3
weeks to enable reasonable registration prospects for those selected and offered admission.
Registration typically begins about 10 days following the above dates and new students register
in order of their registration priority, based on gpa and credit hours completed, except that new
level 1 admissions will register first, starting 94-3. Therefore it is likely that those admitted
under the Diverse Qualifications policy will suffer some loss of registration priority as a result
of the delayed admission offer, but it is not easy
to
correct this unless all offers are processed
earlier or if scoring for all Personal Information Profiles is done on receipt. In the latter event,
a much larger number of Profiles must be scored, because the initial admission decision will
not yet be determined.
Adjudication of applications
The sub-committee briefly discussed a number of possible ways of evaluating applications. No
firm recommendation was made. Once the Director of Admissions has determined the
number of offers to be made under Diverse Qualifications policy for a particular admission
group and has determined the admission gpa for 'the semester, the following must happen in
the time frame indicated:
1)
The Personal Information Profile must be scored for all Deferred Limited Enrolment
applicants - (time required 2 weeks);
2)
The range of gpas must be matched with the range of Diverse Qualifications points and
relative weightings determined - (time required 1 day);
3)
The. Deferred Limited Enrolment applicants must be re-ranked using the combined
GPA/Diverse Qualifications factor.- (time required I day);
4)
The Director of Admissions must make sufficient offers to fill the remaining 10% of
places - (time required 1 week);
5)
Admissions staff must be able to notify candidates of their status and their relative
ranking, because there will be many inquiries from anxious applicants.
page 4
•
?
Who should
be involved?
The following principles apply:
• Profiles must be scored impartially and consistently
• Profiles must be scored quickly and to a tight deadline
• Faculties and departments must have input to the process, e.g. through an
adjudication committee
• Strict confidentiality must be maintained
• Costs should be minimized
Scoring the Personal Information Profile
The Personal Information Profile may be scored by either:
a)
a trained admission officer in the Office of the Registrar; or
b)
members of the Diverse Qualifications Policy selection committee; or
c)
representatives of each Faculty.
Of these options, a) is preferred. Unless the job of scoring is a paid, part-of load priority
function, it is unlikely that deadlines can be kept.
Adjudication of re-ranked candidates
A small adjudication committee, consisting of representatives from each faculty and from the
student body, is suggested.
,
If the Personal Information Profile scoring and the required
weighting and re-ranking have taken place prior to the meeting of the committee, the time
spent on adjudication can be minimized and the committee can focus on marginal cases,
exceptions and a review of the outcomes.
The resulting score and the academic average shall be combined to produce a composite score,
on which the candidates shall be ranked in descending order. These rankings, together with
the applicant's academic intentions shall be reviewed and adjudicated by a Diverse
Qualifications Policy selection committee, consisting of representatives from the Faculties,
Senate and from students. The sub-committee will make sufficient offers to fill the target with
registered students (yield ratios vary by faculty and Basis of Admission so this factor will
depend on the category of the applicant - in the case of BC Gr 12 graduates, yields of 30% to 45%
are common, requiring more than double the number of offers to be made, than there are
places to fill).
Hardship cases
Applicants who appear to have significant special circumstances and who are not selected may
be advised to submit appeals to the Senate Appeals Board. Selection decisions under the
Diverse Qualifications Policy shall not be determined solely on the basis of hardship.
Scoring Scheme - General
The range of possible Personal Information Profile scores is 0 - 17. A high score is considered
to be 9 or higher and a low score is 3 or less. When combined with the admission gpa to give a
composite admission index, the resulting index should provide a ranking in which the
applicant with a Personal Information Profile score of 9 is preferred over a candidate with a
Personal Information Profile score of 3 even though their admission gpas are at extremes of
the DL range. Since the DL range is variable in breadth, the relative weighting of the Personal
.
?
Information Profile versus the admission gpa must be determined by the Diverse
Qualifications Policy selection committee for each category and Basis of Admission.
page 5
An applicant who submits no Personal Information Profile shall receive a score of 0 on the
Personal Information Profile. This is combined with the admission gpa to give a composite
admission index.
Feasibility
If the proposal is approved by SUAB and receives Senate approval in early Fall 1994, all
application forms and liaison/admission information for the 1994/95 admission cycle (95-1, 95-
2 and 95-3) will already be printed and distributed. Hence the suggested implementation date
is January 1996.
The sub-committee did not attempt to estimate the costs of Implementation. If the PIP -is
scored by an admission officer, this will require approx. 0.5 additional professional staff
positions ($20,000). To handle the substantial increase in paper and documents in the Office of
the Registrar, plus the.added complexity of two
evaluation
processes rather than one, an
additional clerical position is indicated ($25,000). Additional printing, paper and distribution
costs are inevitable, in the order of $10,000 p.a. A more detailed estimate of costs should be
made before a decision is made to implement the policy.
Scoring the Personal Information Profile
An applicant who submits a Personal Information Profile shall receive 3 sub-scores, as follows,
which are summed to give the Personal Information Profile score, and which is later
combined with the. admission gpa to give a composite admission index.
The "other qualifications" sub-score (a total possible score of 17) will be based on:
sense of purpose ?
2
demonstrated excellence
?
10
difficult circumstances
?
5
Sense of purpose
Assessment of Sense of Purpose lis derived from comments in "statement of reasons" and, if
relevant, in "additional information" sections. Two considerations determine the Sense of
Purpose rating:
• quality of the reasons;
• quality of the writing.
The proposed rating scale for Sense of Purpose is as follows:1
+ 2 Impressive ?
Statement is well written and applicant clearly demonstrates
either:
a) rich understanding of the point of university study;
and/or ?
b) passion for, or sustained interest in, a
?
field 'or discipline;
and/or ?
c) compelling reasons for attending Simon Fraser University specifically.
0 Not notable
?
?
This is the default rating.
?
Applicant provides minimally
competent reason(s) with no glaring stylistic flaws.
1
Applicants who fall between these levels may be rated
+1
or -1.
page 6
. ?
-2 Discouraging ?
No "statement of reasons" is provided or statement is either:
a) poorly written or otherwise sloppily prepared;
and/or ?
b) shows a lack of understanding of the point of university study;
and/or ?
c) otherwise raises doubt that applicant is well-suited for university study.
Demonstrated excellence
Assessment of Demonstrated Excellence is derived from comments in "summary of activity"
and, if relevant, "additional information" sections. Three considerations determine the
Demonstrated Excellence rating:
• sphere of activity or performance (i.e., international/ national/ provincial/
community/ intra-community or -institution);2
• independent recognition of excellence or contribution (e.g., awards, rankings, elected to
office, formal review);
• degree (frequency, duration and intensity) of involvement.
The proposed rating scale for Demonstrated Excellence is as follows:3
+ 10
Outstanding ?
Activities or achievements must:
a) be at international or national level;
and
b) have been recognized by at least one outstanding award/ position/ rating,
or by a few highly regarded awards/ positions/ ratings;
and
c) reflect a significant amount of involvement at, or in direct preparation for,
•
the international or national level.
+8
Highly commendable ?
Activities or achievements must:
a) include some that are at the provincial level or higher;
b) have been recognized by at least one outstanding award/ position/ rating,
or by a few highly regarded awards/ positions/ ratings;
and
c) reflect a significant amount of involvement at, or in direct preparation for,
the provincial level or higher.
+6
Commendable ?
Activities or achievements must:
a) have been recognized in a several ways by awards/ positions/ ratings;
and
b) reflect a significant amount of involvement (i.e., numerous activities/
performances than span at least a few years).
+ 4 Moderate ?
Activities or achievements must:
a) have been recognized by at least one award/ position/ rating,
and ?
b) reflect more than passing or occasional involvement in, at least, a few
organized activities! performances.
2 The sphere of activity is relative to the regular locus of activity. A person who moves from
Canada to Zaire to work for a development agency which operates out of a regional capital is
workingat the "provincial" level. If the person became head of a pan-African organization, or
regularly consulted in various countries, she would be operating at the international level. A
Canadian musician who competes in a festival in the United States is operating at the
international level.
Applicants who fall between these levels may be rated 9, 7,
5,
3, or 1.
page 7
+ 2 Minimal
?
Activities or achievements include either
a) participation in a few organized activities/ performances, but without
distinction or serious involvement; or
Wit
few informal activities/ interests that do not extend beyond the level of
casual hobby or recreational involvement.
o Not notable ?
No "summary of activities" provided or, at best, token
involvement in one or two activities.
Note that this sub-score depends both on the frequency and duration of the activity, and the
level and the degree of recognition received.
Difficult circumstances
Assessment of Difficult Circumstances is derived from comments in "summary of difficulty"
section, accompanying documentation and, if relevant, "additional information" section.
Three considerations determine the Difficult Circumstances rating:
• severity (intensity and duration) of the difficult circumstances which may be
physical, psychological, social or economic in nature;
• nexus between the diffic!llty and the applicant's performance in areas that Simon
Fraser University uses as criteria for admission;
• adequacy and reliability of the evidence in support of both the severity of the
difficulty and the nexus.
Compelling evidence will be required of the connection between the circumstances cited, and
the academic performance of the student.
The proposed rating scale for Difficult Circumstances is as follows:4
+ 5 Profound ?
The applicant provides compelling evidence that:
a)
the difficult circumstances are particularly severe both in intensity of hardship and in
duration, although the difficulty need not be permanent (e.g., legal blindness,
confined to a wheelchair, had chronic health problems that kept applicant from
school for extended periods of time, was in a long-term severely abusive situation);
and
b)
that the difficult circumstances adversely affected to a significant degree the applicant's
performance on criteria that Simon Fraser University uses to determine
admissibility.
+ 3 Serious ?
The applicant provides plausible evidence that:
a)
the difficult circumstances are severe in intensity of hardship and/ or in duration (e.g.,
considerable, but not total, impairment of a sense, confined to a wheelchair for a
considerable period of time, had a health problems that kept applicant from school
for an extended time, was in a long-term difficult situation); and
b)
the difficult circumstances adversely affected, at least to a modest degree, the applicant's
performance on criteria that Simon Fraser University uses to determine•
admissibility.
4 Applicants who fall between these levels may be rated 4, 2, of 0.5.
?
page 8
. ?
+ 1 Notable
?
The applicant provides plausible evidence that:
a)
the difficult circumstances are unusual in nature and are (or were) somewhat
debilitating; and
b)
the difficult circumstances adversely affected, at least to a modest degree, the applicant's
performance on criteria that Simon Fraser University uses to determine
admissibility.
o Not notable ?
No "statement of difficulty" is provided or, if provided, either:
a)
the difficult circumstances are not unusual in nature or are not particularly debilitating
(e.g., are the type of obstacles that most of us are likely to encounter from time to
time); and/or
b)
there is no evidence that the difficult circumstances adversely affected (to a non-trivial
degree) the applicant's performance on criteria that Simon Fraser University uses to
determine admissibility; and/ or
c)
because of significant
concerns
about the reliability of the evidence, there are reasonable
grounds to distrust the alleged severity of the difficult circumstances and/or the
nexus.
Determining the Diverse Qualifications score
As indicated above the Diverse Qualifications score is a combination of the applicant's CPA
and "other qualifications" rating.
The recommended formula for deciding the relative weighting of CPA and "other
qualifications" rating is to determine a multiplier factor (within each BOA group) such that:
[minimum university admission CPA] + [score of 9 on "other qualifications" rating] = [lowest
GPA for the BOA group] + [score of 2 on "other qualifications" rating]
Put another way, the recommended policy is:
Within each BOA group, multiply the "other qualifications" rating so that applicants with the
equivalent of
highly commendable
"other qualifications" (but with minimum university
admission CPA) would be accepted over
minimal
"other qualifications" applicants who fall
just short of the admission 'cut-off gpa'.
E
page 9
Personal Information Profile - (Draft)
?
Appendix'i
Application submitted previously / attached (indicate which)
Diverse Qualifications Policy.
Each semester, Simon Fraser University receives many more applications than can be
accepted. Academic performance is the main criterion for admission and is used exclusively
in 90% of cases. However, we recognize that some candidates have other attributes and
achievements which should be recognized in determining admission. Accordingly, Simon
Fraser University seeks to admit not only applicants who are academically very well-qualified
but also those who meet minimum admission standards and have:
demonstrated commitment and/or excellence in other endeavours
and/or. ?
. presented a clear and valid reason for attending Simon Fraser University
and/or ?
• have succeeded in their studies in spite of difficult circumstances.
We invite you to provide any additional information that could help us make a fair
admission. decision. We guarantee to respect:yo.ur personal privacy, as required by law, and we
shall destroy all copies of the Profile after admission decisions for the, semester have been -
made, whether or not you are admitted to the University.
INSTRUCFIONS
You are. advised to submit a Personal Information Profile if you have concern that you will
not be selected for admission, based on your academic record alone. University staff will be
able to advise you in general of the grade range in which the Personal Information Profile has
been relevant in past semesters, but cannot predict future demand for admission, so you will
have to judge whether completing this Profile to support you application is worthwhile.
What you write and how the information is presented may affect our admission decision, so
we urge you to review this Personal Information Profile carefully before responding. The
Profile must be completed neatly and legibly. You should answers all parts without assistance
from others. You may respond on a separate sheet but, if so, you must clearly identify and
number the points you wish to make, as shown on this Profile and you must limit the length
of each response to the number of words indicated on the Profile. The Profile must be
received by the University by the application deadline for the semester for which you are
applying. (Applicants for Summer Session must meet the Summer Semester deadline.)
page 10
0
Please list two people who could verify the information you have submitted. One should be
an educator (e.g. teacher, counsellor, college or university instructor or administrator) who
knows you well. The other reference could be someone from your community such as a
group leader, coach or individual who is aware of your personal situation. Letters of
recommendation may be submitted along with your Student Profile Form, but are not
required. Any letters submitted should support the statements you have made in your Profile
and should not be general character references.
Please note that Personal Information Profiles submitted without n copies or after the deadline date cannot be
considered
a. Name:
?
b. Name:
Position:
?
Position:
Address:_________________________
?
Address:
1,,
RETURN THIS PROFILE AND n COPIES OF IT, PLUS ANY SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION TO:
ADMISSIONS, OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR
Simon Fraser University
BURNABY, BC V5A 1S6
Please do
not submit the Profile by
FAX. ?
PLEASE TYPE (OR NEATLY PRINT) YOUR RESPONSES
All information and documentation submitted will be held in confidence and used solely for determining
admissibility.
1.
Why do you wish to study at Simon Fraser University? You should comment on your
choice of program or specialization and why you believe you will achieve academic
success. Do you have plans for a 'career after receiving an academic credential?
(300 words maximum)
2.
List your most significant interests and activities. For example, you may wish to include
clubs or organizations, athletics, community or volunteer work, career or professional
work and any other skills development or 'activity in which you have been involved.
Indicate the level (e.g. national or local) of activity and of commitment, if possible. Indicate
whether or how these activities have contributed to your personal growth. Does the
activity give you an opportunity to show leadership? If so, please describe how.
L
.
page 11
Activity ?
Nature] Level of Involvement
?
Time Commitment Time Period
?
.
(Hrs/wk)
?
(Calendar Years)
3.
List and describe any awards, honours or recognition that you: have received, for either
academic endeavours or other activities.
Award or Distinction Granting Body
?
Reason Granted
?
Calendar Year
/Organization
(150 words maximum)
4.
Have other factors, such as health problems, disabilities, economic or social conditions
affected your academic performance? If so, explain the situation and provide supporting
documentation and the name and address of a professional person who can verify the
information, such as a physician. Indicate when this condition started and ended or state if
it is continuing.
(150 words maximum)
Verification: (to be completed by a qualified professional practitioner, e.g. physician)
L
Signature of Professional
?
Date
If there are other factors which you consider to be highly significant, please indicate:
(150 words maximum)
I DECLARE THAT ALL THE INFORMATION THAT I HAVE PROVIDED IS ACCURATE
AND WAS PREPARED ENTIRELY BY ME. I understand that any misrepresentation may
result in cancellation of my admission or registration status.
Signature
?
Date
Freedom of information and protection ot privacy
The information on this form is collected under the authority of the University Act (R.S.B.C.
1979, c.419), and is collected to enable evaluation those applicants who wish to be considered
under the University's Diverse Qualifications Admission Policy. The information may be
used to evaluate and to verify non-academic factors which will be used to determine your
ranking for admission. If you have any questions about the collection and use of this
information, contact the Director of Admissions, Office of the Registrar, (604) 291-3224.
page 12
