S93-59
S
SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
MEMORANDUM
To:
?
Senate ?
From: ?
J.M. Munro, Chair
Senate Committee on
Academic Planning
Subject: ?
Faculty of Applied Sciences -
?
Date: ?
November 18, 1993
Graduate Curriculum Revisions
Action undertaken by the Senate Graduate Studies Committee and the Senate Committee
on Academic Planning gives rise to the following motion:
Motion
S"that Senate approve and recommend approval to the Board of Governors
the curriculum revisions for the Faculty of Applied Sciences as set forth in
S.93-59 as follows
?
S.93-59a
?
School of Computing Science
?
S.93-59b ?
School of Engineering Science
?
S.93-59c
?
School of Kinesiology"
f
S.93-59a
School of Computing Science
Summary of Graduate Curriculum Revisions
SGSC Reference: ?
Mtg. of October 25, 1993
SCAP Reference: ?
SCAP 93- 37a
Changes to the Graduate Program Regulations
.
.
I.
Proposed Revisions to the
?
Computing Science Graduate Program Regulations
• This document presents a proposal for major revision of the Computing Science Graduate Program Regulations. It is
the product of a series of joint meetings and consultations involving faculty and graduate students in the School of
Computing Science between May 1993 and August 1993. The regulations proposed here are endorsed by both the faculty
and the graduate students.
Over the last few years, dissatisfaction with the operation of the current regulations has been building within the
School. The dissatisfaction centered on the Ph.D. Breadth Requirement: Its intricate interweaving of breadth structure,
course offerings, and comprehensive examinations was causing distortions in the graduate program and was not able to
provide sufficient flexibility to respond to the growth in the body of knowledge comprising computing science or to the
School's desire to accommodate interdisciplinary work. This led the School to embark on a comprehensive review of the
Graduate Program Regulations, with the result presented here. ?
- -
?
- ?
•-• - - ?
- - -- --
Two changes are central to the proposed regulations:
The initial evaluation point for Ph.D. students has been shifted from an evaluation following completion of
comprehensive examinations to an evaluation following completion of a depth examination. In spirit, this
represents a change in the scope and focus of the evaluation, from an emphasis on breadth to an emphasis on
depth and research. This reflects the belief of the faculty and graduate students that original research is at the
heart of a Ph.D. degree, so that depth and research skill should be emphasised at important evaluation points
in the program.
A new, more flexible structure is used to define breadth requirements, affecting both the M.Sc. and Ph.D.
. breadth requirements. It is a hybrid structure based on the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
curriculum recommendations and the strengths of the School's faculty. It provides a mechanism for growth
within computing science and in interdisciplinary work.
1. Discussion of Current and Proposed Regulations
1.1. Admission
The current regulations were designed to make it effecitvely impossible to enter the Ph.D. program without comple-
tion of a Master's degree. The proposed regulations relax this, in line with the desire of the faculty to be more flexible in
this regard. The School is seeing an increasing number of qualified applicants and wants the regulations to show that
admission to the Ph.D. program before completion of a Master's is an option.
1.2. Breadth Structure
The current regulations use a breadth structure which is tied to the Ph.D. Breadth Requirement and comprehensive
examinations. It divides knowledge in computing science into 6 broad areas: Artificial Intelligence, Computer Design
and Organization, Computer Systems, Database Systems, Programming Languages and Systems, and Theoretical
Computing Science. Associated with each area is a survey course (the "700-level" course for the area).
A course breadth requirement for M.Sc. students is defined implicitly by requiring two 700-level courses (hence two
areas). At the Ph.D. level, the course breadth requirement is subsumed by the Ph.D. Breadth Requirement.
*
These area divisions are adequate for the purpose of defining a breadth distribution within computing science.
However, as the body of knowledge in computing science has grown, they have become too broad for the other purposes
U
they are made to serve: defining the scope of a comprehensive examination and the associated 700-level course. Nor d
they provide for subject areas outside of computing science which are essential for good interdisciplinary work.
The proposed regulations define a new structure which identifies three major areas: Formal Topics in Computing
Science, Computer Systems, and Knowledge and Information Systems. Within these three areas, subareas are defined.
The structure is a hybrid based on ACM curriculum recommendations [1,21 and the strengths of the School's faculty.
Table 1 in the proposed regulations shows an initial set of subareas within computing science. It is expected that new
subareas will be identified and defined as the body of knowledge in computing science continues to grow. It is also
expected that interdisciplinary work will require the definition of subareas outside of computing science. The proposed
regulations provide for the approval of new subareas, when justified, by a Graduate Breadth Evaluation committee.
At both the M.Sc. and Ph.D. levels, the proposed regulations define course breadth requirements by specifying that
courses must span a minimum number of subareas, with a specific distribution among the three major areas.
1.3. Supervisory Committees
There is no corresponding section in the current regulations. This material is added to the proposed regulations to
make it clear that selection of a senior supervisor should be by mutual consent based on commonality of research
interests.
1.4. Research Topics Seminars
This seminar series has been used for several years to acquaint new graduate students with the research interests of
the faculty.
In the proposed regulations, it is expanded to include the thesis seminars that students are expected to give at the
completion. The hope is that this will increase research interaction among the graduate students, give new graduate
students an idea of what constitutes a thesis, and relieve some minor scheduling problems associated with thesis semi-
nars.
1.5. M.Sc. Program
The current regulations specify a course requirement of 6 courses, with a breadth requirement of two 700-level
courses. Research work culminating in the writing and defense of a thesis completes the degree.
The proposed regulations do not change the basic structure of the M.Sc. program. The number of courses is reduced
from 6 to 5, while the breadth required is increased slightly to a range roughly equivalent to three of the existing 700-level
courses. These changes remain well within the normal range of requirements for computing science Master's programs.
1.6. Ph.D. Program
The current regulations specify a Breadth Requirement composed of courses and comprehensive exams, and a course
requirement which is usually satisfied using the same courses as are applied toward the Breadth Requirement. Research
work culminating in the writing and defense of a thesis completes the degree.
The initial evaluation of a student in the Ph.D. program is for satisfaction of the Breadth Requirement.
Comprehensive examinations are held in late April, following the end of the Spring semester; the evaluation follow
immediately afterward. The faculty have become increasingly dissatisfied with the Breadth Requirement for m
reasons:
2 ?
3.
.SO
If any single quality can be identified as most important to successful completion of a Ph.D. degree, it is the.
ability to do original research. Performance over two semesters of courses and exams designed to measure
breadth can be used to predict research ability, but better evaluation methods are possible.
The notion of breadth at the Ph.D. level requires changes to accommodate growth in computing science and in
interdisciplinary work, but changes could not be made without also changing the structure of the Ph.D.
Breadth Requirement.
€ The absolute requirement to offer the 700-level courses once a year was consuming the School's graduate
teaching capacity, straining our ability to offer the advanced courses necessary for a top quality graduate
program.
The structure of the Ph.D. Breadth and course requirements (which allow students to use up to three 700-level
courses in lieu of comprehensive exams and double count them toward the Ph.D. course requirement),
together with the critical importance of satisfying the Breadth Requirement, led Ph.D. students to concentrate
entirely on survey courses and review .during their first two semesters in the program.
The importance of CGPA in university scholarship—competition-encouraged- students -to-devote maximum-
?
- -
- - effort to Obtainitg high marks in the three 700-level courses applied to satisfying the Ph.D. Breadth and course
requirements, and then discouraged them from risking that CGPA by taking advanced courses for credit.
In sum, the Ph.D. Breadth Requirement and its side-effects have introduced distortions into the graduate program which
the faculty feel are undesirable.
The proposed regulations change the structure of the Ph.D. program to address these concerns. First, the initial
evaluation is shifted to follow a depth exam which will normally occur before the end of the student's second year in the
program. This allows time for the student to develop depth in her/his chosen research area and gives the faculty time
,
and a base of experience with which to accurately evaluate the student's research potential as well as depth and breadth
knowledge. The Breadth Requirement of the current regulations is eliminated.
The Ph.D. course and breadth requirements in the proposed regulations are defined within the new structure outlined
in §1.2. This provides a more flexible structure in which the actual academic work required to provide breadth can be
tailored to the background and research plans of the student. The overall breadth required of Ph.D. students will remain
roughly the same. The ability to incorporate breadth areas revelant to interdisciplinary research and new developments
in computing science will be enhanced.
The Ph.D. program structure proposed here is within the range typical for computing science Ph.D. programs.
References
[1]
Denning, P., Corner, D., Cries, D., Mulder, M., Tucker, A., Turner, A., Young, P.
Computing as a Discipline: Final Report of the ACM Task Force on the Core of Computer Science.
ACM Press. Association for Computing Machinery, 11 West 42
nd
Street, New York, New York, 10036, 1988.
ISBN 0-8791-293-4. -
[2]
Tucker, A., Barnes, B.
Flexible Design: A Summary
of Computing Curricula 1991.
Computer
24(11):56-66, November, 1991.
A similar summary article can be found in
Communications
of the ACM,
June, 1991.
LI.
C
U)
U)
0
4-.
0
Cl)
CC
0.4
E
0
C-)
0
U)
U)
E
-o
0
E
cu
1.4
0
1.4
1-4
U
I)
U
C,)
E
0
U
Cl)
0
0
1-4
U
Q) ?
a)
..-
C)C)
CC
•1CC
U)CC
U)CC
1..
C)Lr)
>0
CCO.
CCL?
0
,
C.)
CC
U)
C)0.
Cl)
.C)
C.)
C)'-.
0
- ?
C)
Cl) -
C)
(1)
?
C)
C)
0_
Cr)
_0
rr)
to
>
Cr) ?
U)
• 'a)
°
U)Q
cc "Z:
cc Z
0
-
()o
o.E
-
In
U)
cc
-.
C.)
CCCf
C)
?
•
C)
U)
2-o
.
CC
0..
?
cc
0
'VC)
Co
.
C)_._
CC0
cu
C)
cu
cc
W C)
.
0C)U)
!
0U)0
C)
bO
W
CC
CU
°
-o
C!) ?
0
-. 0
•U)
cc
-o
- ?
'
C) CC
CU) 0
.'
?
o
0.
- —
- ?
cu
?
cu
-
CC ?
0
cz ?
o
-o
E
CC
--o ?
0
C) C)
0 ?
- ?
C) ?
C)
?
-
C)
..-
cc
M
CCcc
CC
CC
CC
?
..
- ? oa
•• .4
cc
.
0•
C) 0
C)
u
C) C) Z I
- . 0
-
U) to
CC
U
ca ?
o
t
o
1.. Cl)U
Cl) ?
01..
' 4 -
- . -
-4
0
—
c
CC
- 0
co
co
•bOC)
-
—
C)
I - C)
.C)U)C)
C.) ?
I..
C-n
'.4
CC
U)
bO
C)
0
CC
.c
0 CJ
j-
- CC
0.bO
r.
CC CC -o
U) bD
?
—
?
C)
1-. ?
1
1 ?
>.
cc
CO
0
CCC)
QCCCCC) ?
C.)
0 w
r.
CC . ?
C)
-o -o
C)
.: E
- CC .0 CC
0•1bO ?
?
•
—Li
?
0
o
?
C)
?
CC ?
CC
?
0 IJ3
C) CC
?
CC
C-) ? I.- ?
J
0 1.. bD 0
C)
',oC)
cc
1.4
o 0..-4 C-)
?
?
C)U). .
?
C)
.0
CJ) ?
.
?
CCCC ?
bO
1..
?
0 ?
.:
Ln
0.4O
C) C.)
?
•-.
U) C)
.0
— ?
C) ?
CJ)
Ln
?
C) ?
C)
?
C) C)
?
C) '4-
4-
CC
0
0 -
I-.
.
-4
C) C)
.
?
.
?
.C) ?
CC0
?
c4
?
C) ?
cu
:,-.
tn
•:z
.2 .
CC 0
?
CC ?
cz
bO
' ?
C)
2 2
?
0.40 ?
U).—
?
C.)
Ci
:
.-
Cl)
0
Cl)
.-
E
4
-o
C)
U)
0
0.4
0
e
?
U)
C)
C-)
C)
C)
C.)
C)
0
C)
1
'4-
0
'4-
0
C.)
C)
C'-)
2
I-
0
4-
CC
'.4
I-
C)
4-
-
4
U)
i-
L(
?
CC to
LI
230
—
0
U)
m
co
?
I-
)
E
)
.
C.'
m
1
c
.CC0U)
)ti
o
LI
U)
C)
C)' ?
0
- -
- -
-E-
,.c
:
,
1-4
—
' ?
CC
?
0 ?
C)
1-4
SU) ?
(I)
o
U)0
C)
C)-..0
U)
C)
LI
0U)CC
If)
('1
U)
C)
LI
—
CC
bi)
U)
0
r.
C)
•—
•
LI
—
Ct)
to
-
C)
- ?
c
•
).
(C
0
S..
LI
CCQ
0
.L)
C)Q)
0
U0
U)CCU)
LI
.
(C
.fl
-
<
cZc'
um
(l)
?
CC
____
U)
CC
-C
U)
CC
—
—
U)
-'
Cl)
C)
•
-C
bI)
CC
0)
,
C)
cr:
CC
IS -.
tU)
bC)
0
-
CC
-U-
- ?
-
— ?
CC
-
bOE
0
-
--
OZ 00
C)
LI
•
U)
LI
to
LI
•
LI
CJLI
•
CC
—
0)
EL
Cf)
0b
E-'
CC
CC
CC
.C)
C)
U)
C)
U)
.-
bOCJ)
co
-bD
CC
-•.
C)
E
cz
bC
C)
I..
LI
5-.
(C
IS
0)
bO
IS
.23
0.
0
CC
cu ?
CC
0
LIU)
LI
ti Cf
CC
?
•
b 0
?
C)
U)
C)
-
CCU)
2-->a
'-I -
0
CCCC
••
CV ?
C)
0
--
2 ?
z
U) ?
0 ?
CZ
CU
? CZ
cl
E.'
.• U)-.
I-
aj
C)
U) LI
C) ?
:
(
I) ?
s-. .
CC
cu
C)
-
CC
cz
CEU) U CC
I
.23
C)
C)
U)
0
Lai
CC
CC
I-
C)
C)
I-
LI ?
.
U)
0
CC
C)
-C
C)
U)
0
1-.L4 • 'A
•0
td
Qq
0
0
LI
0
?
' •-
-N.
LI
LI ?
0
LI
I-
•
J•
'LI
,
?
•
L
0
U)
4-
0
co
C)
I
It9
U
U)
C)
C)
I-
C)
C)
U)
—
0
U
CC
CC
C)
U
C'-)
U)
C)
V
0
U
0
U)
C)
U)
I
9
C.)
4-
I
U)
C)
C)
a-
E
C
U
C
U)
>
I-
C)
(I)
C)
C)
I
E
0
U
0
C)C)."-
I..
?
C)
?
'C)
C)
a-
'
C)
a—
cCç)C
U)Q
C)"-
C
-
U)U)U
m
bO C)
2
C)
.P
'
a..
a-
?
U
C)
j
U) U)
C)UC)
CU
rj
-
?
—
bo
?
a-
.
C)C
cc
_a•
'a— ?
.-C)
a-U)C)
?
C)
1.. ?
0 ?
C) ?
-
?
..
tn-
?
U)
3
Ln
u-
UCC
o ?
.—.C)o0
-
'r,L.
6.
-U)
bo
C)
cu
cCC)
U)
C)U)UC
Ci
Oo-
'.4
cc
C - .
cc ?
E
.
Zm
LIflU
o3U)
0
w;-
o,
?
0
0
F-
ECa-0a..
_QC)U)
0C)U)
U
'.4
C)C)a—
U)UU)
-
i•fl
En
C) ?
CC
a-C)
"---
Lo
?
a•Q)
cn
?
>
?
fn
4
U)
0
0 ?
C)
U)
0
0
C..
0
CC
0
MEA
E
0
U
Ln
cJ)
Lo
ULt)
0 ?
CC
?
cc
co
CCCl)o
C)Cl)Q)
—
C)
0
Cl)
C)
'.-
3c') ?
C)
C)CC2.Cl)
OC)
00C)
?
j
ra.
o ?
••-
?
-r ?
Vs
cc cc
?
C)O.c
?
C) ?
o
C)
C)
CC .
?
Cl)
CC?
Cl)C)
_CCOO
C) ?
C) ? _
?
Cl)
CC
C) ?
I!) C.) — ?
_
C) .
-
Z
Z
Cl) ?
g3<
C)
?
0 u
Cl)
—
cc ?
w
20•
to a)
?
•C)
—
—CC)
—
C) '-
q ?
cu
cu
(u
?
cc
'
CCC)
.
C)
I--
cc
Cl)
.CC
?
C) ?
Cl)C)_
•
cc
CC
bcCo
cu
cu
?
cu
? ca w ?
w
?
w
—
?
CC
.r1 j
Cl)
0 ?
cu
0
ci
0
Cd)
N-
C.) ?
Cl) ?
Ln
?
0
?
C)
?
C) ?
C/)
'0
0 E
??
Cl)U ?
.
.
rn
CU
co
C)
?
.
? C)
?
0
.
?
2ucC ?
U.
X
2
-
o ?
-.-
?
C)CJ)Cl)
?
U)
CU Q)
?
0
?
CC1
. ? U)
.-C)C)cz
'un
W
-.
?
Q3• ?
Q
CD Od
- ?
.
L)
_
?
.
C)-UC)
• - CC
?
Cl) ?
C) ?
-. —
?
C)
?
J ?
CC
(J 0
?
In 10 ? CC ?
- ?
C) ?
C)
1.
.—- ?
.
OCC-
?
—
- ?
E--
?
o ?
)
?
U)
cu ?
U) U
CC
?
CC O CC
?
co
'
?
C) ?
CC
.U)CC ?
E ?
Cl)
CI)
(/DC
?
C) 0 .
?
-o
? .0
02
UCCC)bD0 ?
CCC
CC ?
U)
Cl)
U)
?
CC
?
U) ci-
Ct.-
0
?
Uu
-
C) •
In
U
?
En ?
cu
? Ln
U)U)0
0 CU
> ? o U)
E
Cl)
OE—CX
?
C)
?
Cl)
C)
?
0
CJCC ?
>
r -.-•
co
0
?
C)
?
C) ?
)
?
C)
1)
C)
C.;
cz
Cl) ?
0
?
•cu ?
wu,
C)C)
C)
c
?
c ?
E-
c- ?
d ?
*
U
E
bO
0
I-
0
I-
1
U) .
H
>C)WC)
U) ?
0
0
?
-. ?
C)
?
U
0 -
-. CJ
--- ?
CC1-0
?
C)
?
S.
C) ?
-
U)
1- ?
U)
-C)
?
0
0.
E
0
1- ?
CC
01-.
U ?
'-
?
C)
CL
0CC'..0
U0U
?
2a ?
1-Q)
I-
-
C)
o ?
C)
?
(CU ?
- ?
0 ?
.. ?
C3
V)
C)U)
t n
U)U
2
C) ?
C) ?
CC0U)
?
C)(C
' ?
-
2.—
?
CC ?
- ?
U)
. ?
- ?
- ?
- ?
. ?
- - ?
Ieq
C)E0-
- ?
-
?
2
C) C)
U)
U)c
?
Ur- ?
• to
?
1-0
-
o
?
• ?
Um
- ?
a
0 - - ?
-
Cl.
w -..
.0 CCC
to
2°
?
•
?
C)
CC ?
C)
C)
U)
-
C) 1-
cn
r-
0
?
8r.1
-
cc
E1
C) ?
-
CC2 ?
00
CC ?
?
C)C)u1w.
U)
?
CC ?
CC CC
.0 ?
0-00.
?
CC -
?
0 &.
•6
C) ?
,
C)C)O
2bO2o
C)
\28
?
800
$..
bO ?
C)C)b-0C)c.
?
C)>.. ?
C)
--
?
C) ?
O(C
co
CD w
2
U
(C_ ?
0-'-1-
U) U)
?
CC
()
_QCC
?
?
-• ?
C)
U°
?
?
E'0
1-
S.
o
rn ?
cc ?
to
E
cc
Ln
?
CC
?
0U;•-(CU)-
?
.- 1-U)
?
U)
)
C
0 ?
C)(f
C)
?
-r.
r.
u0 ?
2S
CC
U)•C ?
1-
?
U)
C)Q
C)
?
C)C)UU)C)
?
0
cc ?
-o 1-1- -
CC
?
.C)C)U)CC<C)
?
U)L) ?
Ucc ?
CA
C)
C)
(C
U) U)
?
U) ?
-o ?
0 ?
2
?
C)O
?
C)
2oC)
C
CU(C-1-
C )
?
U)
1- 2
?
U)UC)
C'
?
C
?
?
CJj
-0 0
U) ?
CC bO U >•S
?
C)
?
U) ?
U)
C) 1-
CC
UC)
C)U
00U)
?
U)C) C)
U) - U
.'-xo ?
- ?
C)
C) ?
w
C)
?
U ?
-CCi0
• ?
U(C
?
- ?
--oo1-C)
•-bOC)U)
C'- ?
cz
C)
V3 Z 10.
C)1-
?
UbO.0
E ?
0.DC)C
U
E
a ?
u CC ?
bO .iS
?
CC
?
U)
CC Do U
0 ?
QCU ?
o
- ?
o
?
'-
?
co
0
?
CC
?
0
.? 0
bO
(- ?
CC ?
0
cc
C) ?
1
w ?
m c Z ?
V, "0
r-
?
,
?
-0
- C)1-
s-. '.-.
?
r. m , ?
(U
-h - ? '
60
-o C-.
ci ?
1.
U
C)CC
?
(4C)
>( . ?
-
?
>.'
cc
?
c
1-
U
cc
c
e
i
?
o C)bO ?
u
U)
0
CC
to
C)
C)
U)
0
0
1-.
to ()
?
')
?
C)
-
C)
CU
?
cu
CC
.—. ?
C)U)
5
(C
U)
bo
C)
C) (C
U)
?
U) ?
C) ?
U)
()
?
(C "
C) ?
a) ?
l(,)U)
;-
C)
?
-
?
C)
?
-
.E
'-
_
C)
> U)
(/D
U')•
e.
C)-
CC
?
-
2
2
.- .
E
C)
ccC)
U)
?
to
CI)
?
•... ?
-
?
C) ? .'.
.--
oE-
(I)
0
•.0
,.
(C ?
C)_
-
CC
UCCO
to
U) ?
to
C)C)
?
U)o
C)
C)
cu
C)
Io
C!;
U
Cl)
I.CC
U)2Q)C)
? ' 0' '0)
cc
o
'—
bOCCCC ?
c
0 ?
=
>•CC ?
-CCX ?
=
•—CC
?
3-
?
0)
0C) ? -
cc 0
bo ?
.-
?
0) 0)
C)
?
?L- ?
C) ?
'-
?
C)
2
i
C)
U)
C) ?
)
oo
C)
w ?
Az
?
U)2
C) ?
U)
—
?
04.3-0
?
-
0
U
?
— ?
cu
8
0 r. ?
Q ?
U) )
C) ?
CCC)
•
?
0)C)C)1g
-
?
.'.-
•0
?
• ?
E-
?
CZ
C)
bDU)o ?
QU)
C)
—
CC
0
3-
C)•_
'20)ci
?
cu
?
0-0
cc
E ?
to to
Cl)
U)
U)
?
CC ?
'C) ?
=
CC
?
C)
CC
. ?
x ?
0
cz ?
CZ 1.
?
0
U- ?
-
ci
U) C)
U
0:
2
-.U)
-
?
CCC)
2o
C)
?
Z ? CD
m
?
boll- ?
cu w U)
"- —•
i;
E ?
U)
C) C) CC
C)
CC
CCUCC
:
—
0.0 CC -. ?
Cl.
C
)
C) ?
.U) C) U
3- CC
?
C)
) 0 U) =
3-
CC
.•u••—o ?
3
U)
-
_ 0
0)
CC ?
3
C)
4-
C)
I-
-"-
C) ?
63-
0
C)
Q)
?
w
C)
?
3-
C) C)
?
0 Cl)C4
?
to
to
?
r4 =
0 .
i DII
cu
Cf
0
C'i
C) U
'0 U0
?
'0 •
ECC
O
U
3-C)0)
0) C)
?
0)
C)
C) U
C)
CC
0 I
U)
CC0
0
CC
—
'-
?
U) ?
U)
U
3- CC 0
?
CC
U)
CC3-0CC
C)—
cu
v
'
--c
CC
4-3-
—
0
3-
t-
CC
0
U)Cl)
z-
ED
•
?
—
•CC
b0U
o
3-
C)0
C)4-
0.
0)0)
U)
'4—
—t -
"-a ?
CC
0#-'.
3-
E0
CC
CC
C)
—
U)..l3-C)
C)CC
•-
CC
0
•;
CU
•
•: ?
.
CC
U
00
Cj ?
CD
-
4—
U)
tO
co
O-2n
CC.
cu
CC
?
U)
cw)
CC '-
0
U)
—
I- ?
U)C)
00
-2C)E
3
0 0 CC2CJ)
X.
CC
>
U)CC
C)
3-
CO
C)
C)
C) CC
CC
_CCCC
C) CC
0
- ?
0
0
3-U)C)
4-
0
co
wO_
00) 3-
3--a
Ln
-
U
0)
3 -
?
.
4— 3- ?
U
aj
cc
cc
w
CCCCUC)
U)U)
?
4—
C)4—
C)
0
C) CC
3-
00)
C
CC ?
0 ? -
- ? ••
—
ft c.n
a'
o
C)
0)C)b
C)
0_
3-
C)C)U)DCCbOC)
—
C)•0)
U)C)
0'-
0
.0
C)
cn
c '4— 0
CC
Q
3-
0
C)C)
0
CC'U)CC0
3-3-
0)
QC)
L
r-j
n
?
(n
•U)CC
)
CCCC0Cl
CC.
U)U)Q)OQ)3-
—
It _4-ç
—
CZ
C) ?
0
Q)C)
0)
C)
C)
C) _ ?
• CC
04
3-
3-
w C4
'I
CC
3-
0
I-
0
CC
3-
to
0
3-
d
I-
C)
U)
0
0
0
I-
(I)
I
4-
C)
U
S.93-59b
School of Engineering Science
Summary of Graduate Curriculum Revisions
S
SGSC Reference:
?
Mtg. of October 25, 1993
SCAP Reference:
?
SCAM' 93- 37b
Changes to PhD Comprehensive Exams
S
/Q.
. ?
SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING SCIENCE
SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
MEMO
To: ?
Dr Parveen Bawa, Associate Dean and Chair, FAS Grad Committee
From: ?
John Jones, Chair, SES Graduate Committee
Date:
?
23 July 1993
Subject:
?
Changes to Comprehensive Exams
cc:
?
Lou Hafer, Linda Harasim, Michael McGonigle, Glen Tibbits
Here isahardcopy version of the proposed calendar changes concerning the SES comprehen-
sive exams. I will be in Texas on August 10, which would be our next meeting, so I would
like to request that we meet at some alternative date, early enough to get the changes to
Senate in time for the 94/95 calendar.
In two special meetings of the ENSC faculty, held on April 21 and May 26, the following
changes to the calendar entry describing the PhD comprehensive exams were passed:
Current Calendar Entry:
Degree Requirements
Course Work
The minimum course requirement is 6 semester hours of graduate course credit beyond
those taken for the Masters degree. No Special Topics or Directed Studies may be counted
towards this requiremnt. Courses are selected in consultation with the senior supervisor.
Some students may be required to supplement their graduate studies with undergraduate
courses, or to take more than 6 semester hours of graduate course credit.
13.
I
Qualifying Examination
The student will take a qualifying examination at a time determined by his/her Supervi-
sory Committee, normally between the 6th and 12th month from admission to the PhD
program. The student must demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of material nor-
mally associated with undergraduate and first level graduate studies. Written examinations
will be set in each of the following four subjects: communications, microelectronics, intel-
ligent systems and computing, robotics and control. The material for these examinations
will be determined by the departmental graduate committee. With the approval of the su-
pervisor committee, students select two subject areas from the four mentioned above: one
as a major, the other as a minor. The written examination in the major area is followed
shortly by an oral examination. The possible outcomes of the qualifying examination are
pass; marginal (student may be required to take more courses, and is permitted a second
and final opportunity to take the full qualifying exam within 12 months); fail (the student
withdraws from the PhD program.) The results are given for the full qualifying exam.
Proposed New Calendar Entry:
Degree Requirements
Course Work
The minimum course requirement is 18 semester hours of credit beyond those taken for the
Masters degree. Six of these hours will be for prescribed courses in the option in which
the student is enrolled; alternatives can be substituted with the approval of the student's
supervisory committee. At most six credit hours can be for senior-level undergraduate
courses. At most six credit hours can be for directed studies. At least six of the credit
hours must be taken within Engineering Science.
Qualifying Examination
The student will take an oral qualifying examination at a time determined by his/her Su-
pervisory Committee, normally between the 6th and 12th month from admission to the
PhD program. The student must demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of material
in his/her major area of research, at a level normally associated with undergraduate and
first-year graduate studies. The possible outcomes of the qualifying examination are pass;
marginal (student may be required to take more courses, and is permitted a second and final
opportunity to take the qualifying exam within 12 months); fail (the student withdraws from
the PhD program.)
•1
S
A
M
?
S-93-59c
School of Kinesiology
Summary of Graduate Curriculum Revisions
SGSC Reference:
?
Mtg. of October 25, 1993
SCAP Reference:
?
SCAP 93- 37c
New courses:
?
KIN 807-3 Special Topics
KIN 808-3 Special Topics
r
.0
1c
SIMON FRASER
UNIVERSiTY
New Graduate Course Proposal Form
&NDAR INFORMATION:
Department:
?
SCHOOL OF KINESIOLOGY ?
Course Number: _807
Title:
?
Special Topics
Description: ?
Special topics in areas not currently covered within the graduate
program offerings. The course may be offered as a lecture or a siminar course.
Credit Hours: ?
3
?
Vector: ?
300 ?
Prerequisite(s) if any:
?
None
-
ENROLLMENT AND
SCHEDULING:
Estimated Enrollment:
?
4-8 ?
When
will the course first be offered: ?
1993-3
How often will the course be offered: Whenever there is the need to offer more than
one special topic
in
any given semester.
JUSTIFICATION:
The proposed additional course numbers for Special Topics would enable the School.,
in any given semester, to offer more than one identified Special Topic.
RESOURCES:
Which
Faculty
member
will
normally teach
the course:
?
-
What are
the budgetary implications for mounting the course:
?
None that can be
identified
Are there sufficient
Library
resources (append details):
?
-
Appended:
?
a) ?
Outline of the
Course
b) ?
An indication of the competence of the Faculty member to
give the course
C)
?
Library resources
Approved: Departmental Graduate Studies Committee:
;^ff
Date:
22
Faculty
oraauap
Studie C
om
mittee:
Faculty: ?
UJC
?
ft. ?
Date:
Senate Graduate Studies Coittee:Q
?
Date:
?
______
Senate: ?
Date:
lb.
Date:
Date
:?LQZJ
Faculty:
Senate Gradu
p
SIMON FRASER UNIVERSiTY
New Graduate Course Proposal Form
CALENDAR INFORMATION:
SCHOOL OF KINESIOLOGY ?
808
Department:
?
Course Number:________________
Title: ?
Special Topics
Description: ?
Special topics in areas not currently covered within the graduate
?
program offerings. The course may be offered as a lecture or a seminar course.
Credit Hours:
?
3
?
Vector:
?
3-0-0
?
Prerequisite(s) if any: None
ENROLLMENT AND SCHEDULING:
Estimated Enrollment: ?
4-8
?
When will the course first be offered:
?
1993-3
How often will the course be offered:
?
?
Whenever there is the need to offer more than
?
one Special Topic in any given semester.
JUSTIFICATION:
The proposed additional course numbers for Special Topics would enable the School,
in any given semester, to offer more than one identified Special Topic.
RESOURCES:
Which Faculty member will normally teach the course:
What are the budgetary implications for mounting the course:
?
?
None that can be
?
identified
Are there sufficient Library resources (append details):
Appended: ?
a)
?
Outline of the Course
b)
An indication of the competence of the Faculty member to give the course
c)
Library resources
Approved:
?
Departmental Graduate Studies Coittee:
?
Date:
Faculty Graduate
?
Du
?
dies Committee: ?
Date:
/3
Senate:
?
Date:
