'FOR INFORMATION S.89-34
we do not think it would make much difference to our* projections. 0
1. List of Submissions Considered by the Fraser Valle y Planning
2. Committee

'FOR INFORMATION

S.89-34

REPORT

of the

FRASER VALLEY PLANNING

COMMITTEE

September 1989

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

VICI-I'RISIDFNT, ACADEMIC

BURNABY,

BRITISH COLUMBIA

CANADA V5A 1S6

Telephone: (604) 291-4636

September 18, 1989

Dea

r Colleague:

I am pleased to present the Report of the Fraser Valley

Planning Committee as an internal discussion document for

consideration by the Simon Fraser University community. The

Committee's proposal represents one of several possible replies to

the Government of British Columbia's Access Strategy.

•

I invite written comments directed to my office by October 15,

1989. On that date, I have asked Dr. R.C. Brown to re-convene the

Fraser Valley Planning Committee in order to assist me review the

responses in the expectation that a final report can be presented to

the Senate Committee on Academic Planning by early November.

Short as it is, this time line is necessary if the reporting

obligation to government on Fraser

Valley access which SFU shares

with the region's colleges is to be met by year end. I thank you in

advance for any contribution you might wish to make.

Since ly,

Ll^

(J.W.G.

Ivany

Vice-President,

Academic

CONTENTS

Section

Page

Summary of Recommendations

111

Forward

SFU Fraser Valley

Introduction

Part I: Contextual Issues: Planning & Projections

Background

The Planning Process

Enrollment Projections

Part II: Programs and Structures

Campus Models

Admission Policies

Academic Mission and Orientation

D. Continuing Studies

Instructional Feaiures

Part III: Infrastructure and Services

Services

Location

Facilities

External Relationships

Part IV: Budget

Part V: Consultation and Further Planning

Appendices

111

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

A proposal has been developed for a new campus of Simon Fraser

University in the Fraser Valley (SFU-FV) with the following

recommendations:

1. The proposed campus should open in 1992-93 and grow to 6,000

VIE students in 1999/2000.

2. Simon Fraser University-Fraser Valley should have four

components:

several new Schools offering a full range of degree programs;

ii.

a teacher education consortium;

iii.

degree-completion programs in selected disciplines, and

iv.

new core degree programs in liberal arts and general science.

3. SFU-FV should be built on the south side of the Fraser River

between 30 and 60 minutes' drive from SFU-Bumaby Mountain

under normal driving conditions.

T he campus should:

operate under the same policies and conditions as exist at the

Burnaby and Harbour Centre campuses;

ii.

operate on the trimester system;

iii.

be designed and built as a full campus providing a wide range

of student services and amenities, including student

residences;

iv.

provide high quality academic support for teaching and

research.

An executive committee be established with membership from

SFU-FV and the Fraser Valley Community Colleges to deal with

matters of program and articulation.

6. Organizational relationships between SFU-FV and SFU-Burnaby

Mountain should be similar to those present at SFU-Harbour

Centre, i.e.,

a senior official should be appointed with the title Vice-

President, Fraser Valley, reporting to the Vice-President,

Academic;

ii.

two groups of faculty should be appointed. One group will

consist of those who are appointed to a School at SFU-FV.

The other group will consist of faculty who are appointed to

SFU-Burnaby Mountain departments;

iii. administrative and academic services should be provided

though counterpart departments at the Burnaby Mountain

campus.

7. Admissions standards should be identical to those at the other two

campuses.

8. The learning environment at SFU-FV should be designed to utilize

the latest in instructional methods and technologies, including

especially:

use of advances in information and educational technology,

including electronic library information and video discs;

ii.

maximum use of computers in instruction;

iii. co-operative education;

iv.

measures to deal comprehensively with student writing skills.

9. Consideration should be given to the possibility that SFU-FV

occupy a site contiguous to a new community college campus site

and with a public school.

10. A consultative process be implemented which would provide a

•

forum for discussion of the report prior to its consideration by the

Senate Committee on Academic Planning.

FORWARD

This Report of the Fraser Valley Planning Committee outlines one

response to the recent initiative by the government of British Columbia to

increase access to post-secondary education throughout the Province; namely

the creation of an SFU campus in the Fraser Valley. Simon Fraser University

has been identified by government as an institution with a special role to play in

the provision of access in the Fraser Valley region, an area of high population

growth and projected increased participation rates in post-secondary

education.

It is obvious that Simon Fraser University must respond to the need for

- increased-access to post-secondary education and to the government's request

for early action. A vigorous and innovative response will be possible,

however, only after all the options have been appraised, their separate merits

considered and issues of academic quality and public interest thoughtfully

weighed.

This Committee's mandate was to propose a conceptual and operational

plan for an SFU Fraser Valley campus, not to argue for or against such a

campus or, for that matter, to examine alternatives. To place our proposal in

context, however, it will be important to at least identify these alternatives and

outline their advantages and disadvantages.

A New University: In 1963, the need to meet a rapid expansion of

demand for university education on the Lower Mainland was met by

creating Simon Fraser University. The same option is available to

government once again and a totally new university could be established

in the Fraser Valley. Its advantages would include the capacity to ensure

a wide range of educational programs, the ability to maintain its own

faculty and staff, and the prospect of a separate identity. Its

disadvantage centres on the absence of any economies of scale that other

options offer and more importantly, the benefits which accrue via

association with an established university.

2. Four-Year College: A

University College

could be established at

either Fraser Valley College or Kwantlen College, thus allowing for

degree completion opportunities at relatively low cost. This option's

shortcomings include the likelihood of generating a conflict with the

college's mandate for vocational and technical education, dislocating the

college's community orientation, and raising the problem of establishing

appropriate academic credibility in the absence of research programs.

. 3. Extension: It would be possible to extend SFU courses and programs

into Fraser Valley locations using the instructional model of SFU's

Evening Program. However, the success of that model on the Burnaby

Mountain campus is largely based on the direct link to an active, existing

campus and on integration with daytime programs. It is unlikely that

extension programs are a long-term solution in the Fraser Valley. They

are a temporary response to be replaced as soon as possible by one of the

other options.

4. Expansion on Burnaby Mountain: The present five-year plan for

expansion at the Burnaby campus will provide space for an additional

1200 FTE students. Theoretically, if the necessary funds were made

available, the campus could be expanded to accommodate the equivalent

number of students that will be absorbed by SFU-Fraser Vally(SFU-

FV). As well, economies of scale would be greater; capital costs

probably would be lower; and an expansion of the Burnaby Mountain

campus would substantially reduce the complexity of administration,

faculty relationships and student program planning which are

commonly associated with multi-campus institutions. While obviously

an attractive option from many perspectives, there are some important

drawbacks, including: the potential loss of the character and ethos of

Simon Fraser that would accompany rapid expansion on a single

campus; transportation difficulties and environmental problems caused

by a large increase in the number of commuting students; lack of

sufficient student residences and the poor prospects for adding more;

and the government's desire to provide for access in the Fraser Valley

itself.

Considering all these options and their limitations, the view of the

Committee is that a new Fraser Valley campus for SFU, while certainly not the

easiest path upon which to embark, is the most desirable one for achieving the

goals of improving access in the Valley, meeting the needs of students and

enhancing the academic resources and programs of Simon Fraser University.

SFU FRASER VALLEY

INTRODUCTION

The Fraser Valley Planning Committee has developed a proposal for a

new campus of Simon Fraser University in the Fraser Valley (SFU-FV). This

new campus, like that at Harbour Centre, will have a distinct mission and

identity, complementing the educational opportunities now provided by Simon

Fraser and by other post-secondary institutions -in the Province- of British -

Columbia.

There are four components to the proposal:

The creation of several

new schools,

providing university-level

instruction in subject areas central to the emerging needs of the

province. These new schools would be unique to Simon Fraser and to

the Province of British Columbia, and would extend considerably the

educational opportunities available in the province.

The creation of a

Teacher Education Consortium

involving school

districts and colleges in the Fraser Valley, focussing on professional

preparation of teachers, inservice and graduate programs and research

on teacher education and school-related issues.

3. The establishment of

two new degree programs,

a Bachelor of Liberal

Arts and a Bachelor of General Science. Each would offer a four year,

structured curriculum stressing interdisciplinary work and intellectual

community.

4. The provision of third and fourth year courses in selected disciplines

and areas of concentration, to complement course offerings at Simon

Fraser Burnaby Mountain and to permit

degree completion. This

would

be co-ordinated with existing and emerging university transfer

programs at the colleges and by first and second year. courses at Simon

Fraser Fraser Valley, where appropriate and in response to student

demand.

PART I. CONTEXTUAL ISSUES: PLANNING & PROJECTIONS

A. Background

In September 1988 the Minister of Advanced Education and Job

Training made public the Report of the Provincial Access, Committee

Access to

A dvanced Education and Job Training in British Columbia.' The

Report

noted that existing participation rates in the Province, are substantially lower

than the national average and:presented a

broad set of recommendations, all

focussed upon improving accessibility to post secondary edlication.. and raising

participation rates in colleges, institutes and universities across the Province.

1 Report of the Provincial Access Committee.

Access to

Advanced Education and Job Training in British

Columbia.

Ministry of Advanced Education and JobTraining, Victoria, B.C. 1988.

0—

According to the Report, degree completion accessibility was to be

improved regionally through the development of "university colleges" at

selected existing college sites outside the Lower Mainland and southern

Vancouver Island and overall participation was to be enhanced by further

development of the university transfer programs at the remaining colleges in

the system and by providing "predictable funds to allow institutions (the

universities) to maintain quality of programs and upgrade space and

equipment". The Report also contained a recommendation that there be

"further exploration of the potential of a distinctive 'University of the North'."

In March 1989, the Minister- announced that a number of the

recommendations in the Report were to be implemented. Specifically, it

became government policy to:

raise B.C. participation rates to the national average by

1995,

and in

order to achieve their objective, funding was approved to add 13,200

new full-time undergraduate students and 1800 new graduate students to

the post secondary system.

facilitate regional access by the creation of three "university colleges" in

Kelowna, Kamloops and Nanaimo and by improving university transfer

programs elsewhere. The three existing universities were offered

funding to assist the designated colleges in developing their third and

fourth year programming.

he SFU administration reacted quickly to the announcements by

pointing out to government that the Access Committee Report noted that

population

the Lower Fraser Valley was expected to grow more rapidly

than any Other

ara

of the Province and that, therefore the University could

contribute best to the access program by focussing its attention on that region.

April the Minister asked the Presidents of SFU, Douglas.College,

Kwantlen College and Fraser

lle

College to develop ajoint proposal no

latr than l3eember 1989 for the delivery of advanced education and job

training in the Valley. In April 1989, recognizing that one of the options

available t0 improve, accss in the Valley was for SFU to establish a campus

there, the Vice-President, Academic established The Fraser Valley Planning

Committee (FVPC).

The terms of reference for the Committee included the development of

academic and administrative proposals for an "S.F.tJ. satellite campus"

. The

Committee's responsibility was to develop a six-year plan which would

iñôlude:

An academic plan for the campus, including recommendations about

how it will bephased in;

The administrative structure neëessary to support the academic plan.

The Committee:also was, directed to take into account-the need for linkages

between the main campus and the new.campus and the relationships between

the new campus, local colleges and the local. communities.

2 See Appendix 2.

B. The Planning Process

he planning which led up to the presentation of this Report began in

May, 1989. During May and June, research was undertaken to develop

background information on other multi-campus universities in Canada and the

United States. Visits were made by members of the Committee to the

University of Toronto (St. Georges, Erindale and Scarborough campuses), the

- - -

University of Colorado (Boulder and Denver campuses) and Arizona State

University (Tempe and West Valley Campuses) where in addition to

documentary data, information was gathered on the successes and failures of

those institutions and advice was solicited about the best way to design a multi-

campus system.

Also in May, consultation was initiated in the Valley through meetings

with Presidents and Deans in the local colleges, School District Super-

intendents, and local planning authorities. At the outset of this planning, it was

decided that collaboration with the region's colleges and school districts was

essential in order to be sensitive to their concerns, in particular that the unique

character and mission of the colleges should not be jeopardized. It seemed

essential that the proposal be developed through consultation with groups and

individuals in the region to be served. The Committee has been impressed by

the enthusiasm and support SFU-FV has received from everyone consulted in

the Valley.

A parallel process of consultation was initiated by members of the

Committee inside the University Community. Meetings were scheduled with

individual members of faculty, Deans' Advisory Committees, several

departments, the Faculty Association, and senior members of the

Administration both to inform the community about the project and to solicit

ideas and assistance. The internal consultation process was very helpful to the

Committee. The many full and frank discussions served to articulate the

problems facing the proposed campus and to provide suggestions for new

programming which might be developed. Finally, a number of excellent

position papers were prepared by academic and administrative support unit

directors which provided guidance on systems and services necessary to

develop SFU-FV and to link it to the Burnaby campus.

In May, Dr. John Pierce. of SFU's. Geography Department was appointed

as a consultant to work with a "Demographic Task Force" which included as

members the Analytical Studies officers from SFU, Kwantlen College, Fraser

Valley College and Douglas College. The purpose of that study was to provide

a synopsis of population forecasts and participation rates in higher education

for the Lower Mainland of B.C. with special attention paid to. the growth

performance of municipalities of the Fraser Valley.

The report of the "Task

Force" was received by the Committee in late June.

The Demographic Task

Force's conclusion is that "demands for educational services, are expected to

expand greatly in the Fraser Valley as it captures a larger share of younger age

classes of the population and participation levels 'converge' with respect to

Vancouver and its environs."

3 In this report the Fraser Valley area (FV) includcs'thefollowing school districts: Delta, Surrey, Langley,

Abbotsford, Agassiz-Harrison, Chilliwack, Maple Ridge, and Mission. The area definition was based on the

assumption that the SFU-Fraser Valley (SFU-FV) campus would be located south of the Fraser River and

that a bridge would be built across the River near Haney/Fort Langley sometime in the 1999s.

4 J.T.Pierce, "Demographic Survey of the Lower Mainland of British Columbia," A Report Prepared For The

Demographic Task Force; SFU Office of Analytical Studies, June 1989.

C. Enrollment Projections

The prospective enrollment at SFU-FV is a very important starting

point for our planning outline. The most important factor in initiating this

planning effort was the perceived need to serve a growing student population

in the Lower Fraser Valley. Thus, we begin with an analysis of the prospective

size of a Fraser Valley campus.

The Committee's projections of SFU-FV enrollment are based on the

Report by John Pierce and further analysis by Walter Wattamaniuk, Director

of Analytical Studies at SFU. The projections indicate that the targets of 2500

FTE students in 1994/95 and 5000 FTE students in 1999/2000 specified in the

Committee's terms of reference can be met, if the Fraser Valley campus:

offers a four year academic program;

is successful in increasing university participation rates in the Fraser

Valley to approximately the Burnaby level by 1999, and:

is able to attract students from outside the Fraser Valley area to

study in the unique programs which will be offered at the campus.

In addition to the above three points, it is assumed that growth at SFU-Burnaby

Mountain will be held to the presently planned 1200 FTE undergraduate

students in the period 1989 through 1995. A summary of the enrollment

projections is shown below:5

5 A full discussion of the methodology used to generate these numbers is included as Appendix 3.

[i]

Grade 12 and

College Transfer

Over-24

Total

1995199419931992

2003

15961113

586

1377136313681334

3380

2959

2481

1920

19971996

2595

2271

1404

1391

3999

3662

19991998

3371

2935

1430

1418

4801

4353

PART II. PROGRAMS AND STRUCTURES

A. Campus Models

The Committee has spent a substantial amount of its time considering the

relationships between SU-FV and the rest of the University. This topic has

also been prominent in discussions of SFU-FV within the University and was

emphasized in the field visits made by members of the Committee to other

campuses. While the precise nature of SFU-FV's relationship to the University

would be determined in the course of its operation, it is important to

recommend several essential features of the organizational and operational

parameters of SFU-FV at the outset because they transcend any particular

program structure that SFU-FV would develop.

Based on the interviews conducted on other campuses, the Committee

concluded that multi-campus universities are most successful when:

each campus has some programming which is unique and which has

strong research and graduate programs in addition to undergraduate

programs;

programs are not simply an extension of general programming from the

"main" campus;

all campuses .have the same standards and expectations for faculty and

students;

• 4. all components (campuses) are perceived to be equal partners in the

multi-campus consortium;

each campus has a full range of student, staff and faculty facilities,

including student residences.

The interviews at other campuses also showed clearly that in cases where a

satellite campus was limited strictly to the extension of programs which were

also offered on the 'main' campus, the satellite unit inevitably was

characterized as being inferior. This was especially true in cases where

different standards of admission for students were employed and faculty

without active research programs were transferred from the 'main' campus to

teach at the newer satellite campus.

In order to avoid these problems SFU-FV must be an integral part of

Simon Fraser University whose faculty and staff work under the same policies

and conditions as in the rest of the University and whose governance 'structures

are connected to those of the rest of the University.

This will mean, for example, that:

SFU-FV not have its own Senate or Board of Governors, although it

should have its own convocation ceremonies;

SFU-FV operate on the trimester system and its programs be related to

those of SFU-Burnaby;

The campus of SFU-FV be designed and built as a full campus providing

a wide range of student services and amenities, including student

residences and recreational facilities;

SFU-FV also provide high quality academic support for teaching and

research.

These features are essential if SFU-FV is to appeal to students,. faculty, and

staff as a place to study and work and it must do this if it is to be an operation of

quality.

Organiz ationally,

SFU-Habour Centre provides: an attractive model,

although the greater size and scope of SFU-FV means that its organizational

relationships will have to include more independence for many administrative

and academic functions. The senior official at SFU-FV should be' given the

title of Vice-President, Fraser Valley with a reporting relationship to the Vice-

President, Academic. This Vice-President will have administrative

responsibility for all

aspects of the SFU-FV campus and will have whatever

academic responsibility is required to deliver the programs and other aspects

of the academic operation of the campus. With respect to programs which are

operated only at SFU-FV,.the Vice-President will function as a Faculty Dean.

Faculty members

who work at SFU-FV will fall into two groups, one

group consisting of those who are appointed to a School at SFU-FV. We

envisage that SFU-FV Schools will be staffed entirely by faculty appointed to

SFU-FV and will be headed by Directors who will report to the Vice-

President, Fraser Valley in his/her role as Faculty Dean. The other group

consists of faculty who are appointed to regular SFU departments. These

faculty will have a dual reporting relationship - to their Department Chair and

Dean at SFU with respect to performance evaluation and other contractual

matters and to the Vice-President, Fraser Valley with respect to their assigned

work in SFU-FV teaching programs. While this arrangement may appear

cumbersome, we believe it is necessary to create a strong relationship between

the main SFU campus and SFU-FV. This will contribute to hiring success at a

time when a shortage of good applicants for faculty positions is expected as

universities across Canada begin to replace retiring faculty hired during the

1960's expansion.

Some courses may be offered on an extension basis by faculty provided

from the Burnaby Mountain campus or by sessional instructors, with

administrative and financial arrangements similar to those in effect in other

extension programs, such as Harbour Centre. Care should be taken to ensure

that only a limited number of courses at SFU-FV could be offered on this basis

12.

in order to avoid the problems associated with excessive re1ianceor the

extension model.

A dministrative and academic services will

be provided through

counterpart departments at the Burnaby Mountain campus Jn'.most:casesthe

head of the operation at SFU-FV should report to

: the head Of the appropriate

SFU department. For example, the person in charge of the library

, at SFU-FV

should have a direct reporting relationship to the University Librarian.

Particular aspects of some services are discussed below in the Services section.

AdmissiOn Policies

It is imperative that Fraser Valley not become a second tier of Simon

Fraser University. Fr this reason, admissions standards will be identical at all

three campuses of Simon Fraser University, Birnaby Mountain, Harbour

Centre and Fraser Valley. Demand at each site is likely to be equally pressing,

as excellent faculty

Will

be attracted to the Fraser Valley canipu by the

combination of specialized offerings, graduate program opportunities and

research facilities. Students will be encouragedta pursue theii'studies ata

single campus because of the different missions and curricula- offered at each.

Academic Mission and

Oriëntatioñ

T he Fraser Valley campus will have a-unique mission and structure:of

course offerings consisting of four components:

(1) the creation of several new schools, providing university level

instruction to meet emerging needs of the Province of British Columbia;

(2)

the creation of a Teacher Education Consortium, with schools and

colleges in the Fraser Valley, providing professional teacher

preparation, inservice and graduate programs, and research on teacher

education and school-related issues;

(3)

the provision of degree completion programming in selected disciplines

and areas of concentration; and

(4)

the establishment of two new degree programs, a Bachelor of Liberal

Studies and a Bachelor of General Science, each offering a structured

curriculum stressing interdisciplinary work and intellectual community.

The Creation of New Schools:

Such schools would have a thematic focus on a specific topic or problem,

drawing together expertise from several disciplines and establishing strong

relationships with government, industry and members of the community.

A number of proposals for such schools have been presented to the

planning committee, including the following: (a) Environmental Studies;

(b) Health Services; (c) Aerospace Engineering; (d) Small Business

Administration and Community Economic Development; (e) Applied

Social Policy; (f) Journalism Education; (g) Information Systems;

(h) Earth Sciences.

he committee has neither developed nor evaluated these proposals, but

several can be described briefly to give a picture of-what is intended by this

initiative.

(a)

School

Environmental Studies:

A recent comment by a faculty member makes an eloquent Statement

about the need for a School of Environmental Studies. 'He 'says,

There can be little doubt that the growing concern about the deleterious

effects

of human activity on the environment will become one of the

most important scientific and social issues of the new century. Already

we see signs that the persistent voices of environmental scientists slowly

are being recognized and that a new political will to address

environmental problems is beginning to emerge here in Canada and

elsewhere. The expression of international concern is a particularly

significant development because many of the environmental problems

we face are world problems requiring global solutions. ... The

University must play a central part in the effort to develop and sustain

among its graduates a heightened awareness of the critical nature of

these environmental problems.6

There are programs or faculties of Environmental Studies at York

and Waterloo

, but no similar initiative in the Western, Provinces.

Some planning has been done at Simon Fraser by the Departments of

Geography, Biological Sciences, Chemistry and Natural Resource

Management. As well the Department of Philosophy and the Institute

for the Humanities at Simon Fraser have both done work in the area of

environmental ethics, as has the Department of Economics in the

design of:environmental policies.

Ted Hickën to Roger Hayter, 6 June 1989.

School of Health Services:

The demand for a wide range of health services is growing at an even

faster rate than the population, and there are well documented

problems with providing adequate training for health services

personnel and administrators. The proposed School of Health

Services will complement the professional programs at the colleges

and universities in the province. In particular, it will draw upon

expertise at Simon. Fraser in Kinesiology and Gerontology, and upon

the experience of the Faculties of Business and Continuing Studies

with special programs designed for health service administrators.

(c)

School of A erospace Engineering:

None of the British Columbia universities has programs in

Aeronautical or Aerospace Engineering, yet industries that depend

upon these disciplines are increasingly important in the province and

the region. This situation provides an excellent opportunity for a

partnership of Simon Fraser's Department of Physics and its School

of Engineering with a number of private companies now providing

equipment and services for aerospace development.

Each of the approved schools might reasonably be expected to offer

undergraduate courses in conjunction with the Burnaby Mountain campus;

specialized courses at Fraser Valley; graduate courses; and a sustained

program of world class research capable of attracting students from across

the province and throughout Western Canada.

2. The Creation of a Teacher Education Consortium:

Two developments will require an expansion by the Faculty of

Education and the Fraser Valley provides a desirable setting for this to

occur. First, it is anticipated that the demand for new teachers will increase

rapidly and, second, new programs will be required in conjunction with the

implementation of the curriculum triggered by the recent Royal

Commission on Education. To meet these needs, a teacher education

consortium is proposed,, involving the school districts and colleges in the

Fraser Valley and the Faculty of Education and appropriate Arts and

Science departments. at Simon Fraser.

The teacher education consortium builds upon expertise that the Faculty

of Education has developed with several similar programs, including the:

Alaska Highway Consortium on Teacher Education and the Surrey/SFU

Secondary. program. Unlike these initiatives however, the Fraser Valley

teacher education consortium will include a research and development

component.

The consortium will develop and implement new programs across the

entire continuum from the academic and professional preparation of

teachers (and possibly paraprofessionals), through inservice and graduate

programs and it will include research on teacher education and school

related issues.

Anticipated features of the consortium would include:.

(a) a joint governance structure cOrn

posed of representatives from the

school districts, colleges and Simon Fraser University;

(b)

clustering of student teachers in selected schools, which would

function as teacher education "labs";

(c)

new opportunities for training and support of sponsor teachers; and

(d)

the creation of a 'field centre' for the implementation of new

curricula and in-service programming. Research and development

initiatives would maximize the impact of investment in educational

research for the benefit of consortium members, and facilitate the

establishment of a research base which would serve as an integral

part of educational analysis and decision making.

Degree Completion in Selected Undergraduate Disciplines:

For first and second year courses, Simon Fraser would draw

extensively upon the existing and emerging university transfer programs at

the colleges. Simon Fraser would complement these offerings and respond

to student demand where it was warranted by also providing instruction at

the lower levels.

Courses would be offered at the third and fourth year level in selected

disciplines and areas of concentration. Such courses would permit

coordination with university transfer programs and degree completion at

Fraser Valley.

18'

The E

stablishment

of Two New Degree Programs:'

The proposed programs 'ar&a BachelOrMf Liberal 'ShidiCs and a

Bacheloiof General Scieñcè. Each would-'offer afàuryear;.structured:

curriculum stressing interdisciplinatywork andintellëctuat community.

There are' several rationales for thes programs,. each

is unique.

to British Columbiä First, they are well suited to a' serni-urbanuniversity

campus in which it is possible to foster a strong. sense of community..

Second, as interdisciplinary programs each is intended to be responsive to

the new global envirohrnent, which requires people to be adaptable to

changes in the economy, job profiles, and technologies. Third, these are

programs that can be mounted with a small number of faculty and a limited

number of electives. Finally, and perhaps most important, these programs

add an important intellectual dimension to the university curriculum,

depending as they do On the integration of disciplines and development of

capacities for critical thought.

A third degree program might be added at some future point to the list"

namely, a Bachelor of Technology. This would give students in selected

college technology

programs a degree program into which 'they could

transfer at least sOme of their technology -courses. Again, :the:ernphasis in

this program would be on the provision of a structured curriculum, with a

limited number of electives, drawing upon a variety of disciplines and areas

of expertise at Simon Fraser University.

Continuing Studies

Continuing education programs will be an important part of the

academic activities at SFU-FV. These programs will centre on four areas:

Support for Schools. Continuing Studies will support the projected new

areas of academic development via professional development courses,

seminars and conferences and by assisting faculty in building networks

in the specialized communities being served by these new areas (e.g.

environmental groups, planners, health workers, engineers).

Professional Development Programs - Develop and administer a series

of professional development programs which build on the academic

expertise of the University, reflect the interests and needs of the Fraser

Valley community and complement the continuing education programs

of the colleges.

Part-Time Study - Coordinate and support efforts by SFU-FV to supply

courses and programs for part-time and adult students and, when

necessary, act as the advocate within the institution for the needs and

interests of these and other groups of non-traditional students.

Conference Services and Marketing - Administer conferences, seminars

and symposia for the University and the community, and provide

coordination and support for general marketing and promotion needs

for the Fraser Valley campus.

Instructional Features

The learning environment at SFU-FV should be designed to utilize the latest

in instructional methods and technologies. We should take advantage of the

opportunity to build in capabilities and features which are beyond the ability of

a 25-year old campus to make full use of because of physical and human

constraints. Our preliminary thinking has identified the following features

which should be considered for SFU-FV:

Use of advances in information and educational technology including

electronic library information and videodisc.

Maximum use of computers in instruction.

Co-operative education available in all programs, although not

compulsory across SFU-FV.

Measures to deal comprehensively with student writing skills.

PART III. INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES

Services

The Committee received many useful submissions from academic and

administrative service departments. These offered advice -on how best to

provide services at a smaller remote campus while stilltakingadvantage of the

economies of scale which are available through combining the provision of

services at all SFU locations. More detailed consideration of how to manage

this will be required in the future but the following summary reflecting input

from the Library, Academic Advice Centre, Registrar's Office and the

Instructional Media Centre will give some indication of the issues and

problems involved.

1. Library:

The establishment and maintenance of a core book collection at

the Fraser Valley site will undoubtedly constitute one of the largest initial as

well as on-going costs that the university will have to undertake. These costs

will be unavoidable if the Fraser Valley campus is to develop into a quality

academic institution and attain an equal partnership with the other Simon

Fraser Campuses.

Some economies of scale will be achievable if the library is able to

institute electronic catalogue and search systems across all three campuses

(Burnaby, Harbour Centre and Fraser Valley). This is because the

substantial capital costs of these systems can be spread across a larger

number of students at the three sites. The computer systems will

additionally allow some savings by helping to reduce the need for

duplication of library materials in a multi-campus structure.

2. Academic Advice:

While some minor economies of scale might be expected

from expanding Academic Advice over a greater number of students, there

will ultimately be a significant net increase in costs for this service.

Operating costs can also be expected to rise not simply because of a larger

user base but as a result of advising requirements associated with the

increase in program opportunities.

3. Registrar:

Significant expenditures associated with establishing a

registration system at the Fraser Valley site are unavoidable. Two issues

however deserve further investigation as a means of mitigating these costs

to a limited degree:

(a)

A telephone registration system might be a justifiable expense if it

was implemented across all three campuses because the larger student

base would help to lower the costs of delivery per user. A main

advantage would also be in avoiding some of the costs associated with

establishing a full registration infrastructure at the Fraser Valley

campus.

(b)

The Registrar's Office is currently near capacity. Further demands

on the system may entail afternoon/evening shifts because additions to

the Burnaby facility's physical plant would be difficult. Given a fully

interactive registration system, some functions could be moved to the

Fraser Valley facility where additions to physical plant might be made

more easily.

4. Instructional Media Centre:

Instructional media costs will represent a

significant front endcapital expenditure. This is because most of the

equipment is site specific and must be made available even though initial

usage can be expected to. fall short of maximum capacity utilization. While

some capital expenditures can be limited by omitting photographic, audio,

technical and TV services from the Fraser Valley site a note of caution is in

order because:

(a)

the presence of on site faculty, graduate students and flag-ship

programs often place significant demands on these services and;

(b)

facilities and equipment to provide these services are most

economically installed in the construction phase.

5. Other Services:

It might also be useful to touch on the provision of various

administrative services

at SFU-FV. The basic model for such services as

Finance, Personnel, and Facilities Management should be to provide a high

•

quality of service at SFU-FV using as much contribution from the Burnaby

Mountain campus as is consistent with the promotion of SFU-FV as a

campus in its own right. In the case of these and similar services, this may

mean operatingonly small branch operations at SFU-FV. In this way the

economies of scale which are associated with the provision of these

administrative services can more readily be realized.

The case of

student services

is somewhat different. While there may be

economies of scale in these areas as well, their autonomy at SFU-FV will be

quite important to their innovation and flexibility in dealing with local

needs and success here would in turn be quite influential in making the

campus an attractive place for students. While liaison with the Burnaby

Mountain campus will be important, SFU-FV should probably have its own

Director of Student Services, possibly with a mandate which includes

additional functions.

Had this report been written ten or even five years ago the question of

computing facilities

would have been problematic. Of particular

importance would have been whether or not SFU-FV should have its own

mainframe computer. NOw, with advances in computer and

communications technology, it can be recommended that computing

services at SFU-FV be limited to personal and mini-computers with

appropriate local and inter-campus communication networking. Earlier in

this section we have argued for a maximum use of computing in instruction

and the organization of academic computing should be carried out so that

this is encouraged..

B. Location

Although the Committee's terms of reference do not specifically include

responsibility for selecting a location for SFU-FV, this report does reflect

certain thinking about location. Thus, iris important for readers of the report

to know the Committee's views on the

, characteristics of a desirable location.

We believe that SFU-FV should be located.somewhere on the south side

of the Fraser River between 30 and 60 minutes' drive from Burnaby Mountain

under normal driving conditions and adjacent to Highway 1. The south side

location is required by population location and the 'range of distance reflects

the need to be far enough away from Burnaby Mountain to give SFU-FV an

independent existence '

but not so far as to be deemed' inaccessible. (Locations

more than 60 minutes' drive from Burnaby Mountain are also ruled out. by

population location.)

The report by John Pierce, "Participation and Locational Analysis of the

Fraser Valley"

, reviewed a number of possible sites and others have since

been brought to the Committee's attention. It is not our role to choose between

these alternatives, but we would like to emphasize that the location for SFU-FV

must be on a large, quiet, attractive, accessible piece of land that offers an

attractive working environment and does not constrain the future development

of the campus. Site analysis and choice should be an early priority if a decision

to proceed is made.

Facilities

•

Similarly, although again it was not an explicit part of our terms of

reference, we would like to offer advice on the basic design of facilities for an

SFU-FV campus. We believe strongly that SFU-FV should be a complete

campus able to provide the same services and learning and working

environments as SFU's main campus. This means that the SFU-FV campus

should include classrooms, laboratories for teaching and research, faculty and

staff offices, library and study space, cafeterias, residences, recreational

facilities including a gymnasium, and social space for students, faculty, and

staff.

It will be easiest to obtain funding for many of these buildings in the first

phase of campus construction and while some of the construction will be

phased over the first ten years, we would urge that efforts be made to include a

7 John Pierce, "Participation and Locational Analysis of the Fraser Valley", unpub. report prepared for the

Fraser Valley Planning Committee, June 1989.

good portion of the "non-academic" space- in

the first phase, even at the risk, of

some over-building. We would also suggest that considèratioPbe given to

locating a conference céntr& at SFU-FV. There is a needfr a university

facility of this type in the eastern Lower Mainland and its ptTovision would be a

great assistance in carrying out the proposed conference mandate of

Continuing Studies.

Serious consideration Should also be given to the possibility that SFU

FV occupy a site contiguous to a new community college campus and with a

public school. The advantages of sharing a site with a school, which are

associated with the proposed Teacher Education Consortium, involve the

opportunity to have a nearby facility where liaison between Education faculty

and an operating schol facility can be used to facilitate teaching and research.

The advantages of sharing a site with a community college campus include

realizing economies in the provision of student services, library and

recreational facilities, and in achieving the best degree of integration with

college programs. In making these suggestions, the Committee is aware that

planning would be more complex and that delays could result.

Another useful arrangement to :share the SFU-FV campus site could be

made with laboratories or other research facilities from government or

industry which were attracted by the opportunity to locate near one of the

Schools. While this would not be likely in the first phase of SFU-FV's

operation, the desirability of this should be kept in mind when the site is being

chosen and the campus buildings placed on it.

External Relationships

1. Colleges:

During its planning the Committee Chairman took advantage of

several opportunities for discussions with Presidents and other officials

from the colleges. It was apparent that there was a great deal of support

for the Simon Fraser initiative. Several concerns were raised by college

officials, however, particularly in conjunction with the provision of first

and second year course offerings.

There are a number of positive ways that Simon Fraser can respond to

these concerns.

First, of course, it is essential to maintain the Committee of

Presidents as a forum for the exchange of information.

Second, there should be a second level of executive planning between

Simon Fraser and the colleges, to deal with matters specific to

various programs. This committee should seek to maximize

cooperation and articulation among the various post secondary

institutions.

Third, Simon Fraser should participate in the development of new

university transfer programs at the colleges where appropriate and

requested.

4. Finally, it should be noted that there are significant opportunities for

cooperation between the academic programs offered by SFU-FV and

the career programs offered by the colleges. This would enable the

colleges tO make use of the opportunity to develop their career

programs, and increase the relevant enrolments further.

In other words, following through on the initiatives for cooperation

established over the summer, and with careful monitoring of student

demand, it should be possible to ensure that the programs offered by Simon

Fraser and the colleges together provide new opportunities for access and

learning in British Columbia.

Trinity Western University:

It is often forgotten that there is a

ovincially-chartered private university in Langley which already offers

degree programs in Arts and Science and, with SFU help, Education.

TWU's current enrollment is about 1,000 students with about 1/3 from

Surrey and Langley, 1/3 from other parts of the Valley, and 1/3 from

elsewhere. 8

We should be sensitive to the position and

interests of Trinity

Western University by keeping them informed of our planning.

School Districts:

The Faculty of Education 'already has been involved in

some cooperative projects with Fraser Valley school districts. Districts

contacted during the planning process were most enthusiastic and eager to

participate in SFU-FV. School districts 'should continue to be informed

and have opportunities 'to participate in appropriate aspects of future

SFU-FV planning.

8 TWU enrollments were not included in our transition rates. Including them would-increase these rates, but

we do not think it would make much difference to our* projections.

4. Communities:

Officials in many Fraser Valley communities were

contacted during the Committee's planning process and all expressed

enthusiastic support for the SFU-FV initiative. Community access to

SFU-FV's intellectual, cultural, recreational and athletic resources is

attractive locally and the possibility that the University's property

holdings might be sufficiently large to conserve some land as a heritage

preserve also has appeal. Employment prospects and SFU-FV's economic

multiplier effect were noted as additional benefits.

Accordingly, when a site is chosen, SFU should ensure that local

government administrators, politicians and citizen groups in both the host

and surrounding municipalities are fully informed about the reasons for the

decision to build at a particular location. A subsequent task of considerable

importance will be to establish the relationship between SFU-FV and its

local community in areas of planning, permits and the provision of

services.

PART IV. BUDGET

Although the Committee's terms of reference do not include

specification of budget estimates, it has occurred to us that there will be

considerableinterest in our best ideas of the approximate cost of operating

SFU-FV over the eight years (1992-93 to 1999-2000) of our planning horizon.

We should emphasize that these are rough preliminary estimates that will

certainly have to be refined and revised as program planning proceeds.

For the purposes of this section, we use the fiscal year VIE enrollment

and faëulty staffing levels shown below. The operating budget estimates,

which are in 1989 dollars, begin one year before SFU-FV opens. We have

assumed a September, 1992 opening - this would only be possible if the

decision to proceed were made by March, 1990 and if the planning and

construction phase proceeded on a fast track.

Academic

FTE

Enrollment

Recurring

Start Up

Total

Year

FV Area

Outside

Total

Faculty

Operating

Cost

1991-92

million

1992-93

1900

100

2000

130

1993-94

2500

300

2800

170

1994-95

2900

300

3200

200

1995-96

3400

500

3900

220

1996-97

3700

800

4500

240

1997-98

4000

1000

5000

260

1998-99

4400

1100

5500

280

1999-2000

4800

1200

6000

300

These estimates are based on the following assumptions.

The projected FTE enrollment is the sum of the Fraser Valley area

enrollment from the Planning section of the report plus an estimate of

students from outside the Fraser Valley area who would be attracted to

SFU-FV by its unique programs.

SFU-FV will receive govenmient funding of $6500per FTE and collect

student fees of $1800.* The operating budget estimates for the final

year (1999-2000) are thus $8300 times 6000 FTE students.

Standard basic tuition fee of $52/hour adjusted to $60 to lake accouñtof differential and

co-op fees.

The student/faculty ratio in 1999-2000 will be 20:1, slightly lower than

SFU's at present. In earlier years, for the same reasons mentioned

above, the student/faculty ratio will be lower, starting at

15.4:1

in 1992-

93.

Faculty salaries and other instructional staff costs would account for

between 40 and

percent of the operating budget by 1999-2000. The

remainder would be needed for staff salaries and operating expenses.

PART V. CONSULTATION AND FURTHER PLANNING

In closing our report, we address two important issues of process during

the next months. The discussions which Committee members had within SFU

showed that there is great interest in the possibility of new campus in the

Fraser Valley. However, the pressures which a development of this magnitude

would place on a University already experiencing severe growth pressures

means that there is great concern surrounding this initiative. Much of this

concern involves the process which will be followed within the University in

making the decision to proceed, or not, with SFU-FV and with any subsequent

and more detailed planning process.

The Committee recommends that the following consultative process be

followed during the next semester.

1. Early distribution of the Committee's report to all interested parties.

This should be accompanied by a specification of the decision process

and timing.

2. Provision of a series of forums for discussion of the report prior to

providing reactions to the Vice-President, Academic.

Consideration of the report and the Vice-President, Academic's

recommendations by the Senate Committee on Academic Planning.

4. Concurrent discussions and consultation with colleges and community

constituencies will be undertaken.

Our second recommendation concerns the subsequent planning effort.

Once a decision is made to proceed, a number of important tasks willhave to be

carried out simultaneously. These will include the selection of programs, the

choice of location and design of the facilities, program planning, planning for

academic and administrative services, and liaison within and outside the

university. A number of these tasks will have to be carried out by committees

and the whole effort should be supervised by the person who will hold the

position of Vice-President, Fraser Valley. We strongly recommend that this

appointment be made at the same time as a decisionto proceed with SFU-FV.

Finally, we share with one of our faculty.cólleaguesthe viewthatwith

wisdom and careful planning we can buildon the strengths of the Bumaby and

Harbour Centre locations, and develop a campus in the Fraser Valley which will

help SFU to become a truly great North ArnericanUniversity. To accomplish

this objective we urge a full and frank discussion of this proposal throughout the

University community.

APPENDIX 1

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

FRASER VALLEY PLANNING COMMITTEE

Members

Dr. R. C. Brown, Dean, Faculty of Arts, Chairman

Dr. L. Meredith, Associate Professor, Faculty of Business -

Administration

Dr. J. Munro, Professor, Department of Economics

Dr. C. Oehlschlager, Chair, Department of Chemistry

Dr. L. Salter, Chair, Department of Communication

Dr. S. Shapson, Associate Dean, Faculty of Education

Ex-Officio Members

Dr. S. Duguid, Continuing Studies

Mr. G. Macdonald, Special Assistant to the President

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

MEMORANDUM

TO: Dr. R.C. Brown, Chair

FROM:

J.W.G. Ivany,

Vice President, Academic

RE:

SFU Fraser Valley Planning

DATE: 28 April 1989

Committee Terms of Reference

The Fraser Valley Planning Committee has been established by the

Academic Vice President and charged with the responsibility of developing

academic and administrative proposals for an SFU satellite campus in the

Fraser Valley. The Committee will submit a written report to the Academic Vice

President who will then place before the Senate Committee on Academic

Planning those programme proposals which he determines should be

considered. The Committee's responsibility is to develop a six-year plan which

will include:

an academic plan for the campus, including recommendations about

how it will be phased into place;

the administrative infrastructure necessary to support the academic

plan.

When carrying out these responsibilities, the Fraser Valley Planning

Committee should take into account the need for linkages between the main

campus and the new satellite campus; and the relationships between the

satellite campus, local colleges and the local communities.

....2/

The planning process will be carried out with the following assumptions

and constraints:

The satellite campus will be designed to accommodate 2,500 full-time

equivalent undergraduate students by the end'of the 1994/95

academic year, with the possibility of 5,000 FTE by the year 2000.

Third and fourth year undergraduate courses from existing SFU

Schools, Departments and programs will be offered, but competition

'b'I1h university transfer programs at the community coilegs will be

minimized.

Proposals for new academic programs which will be unique to the

satellite campus will be considered.

A Faculty of Education consortium in the Fraser Valley should emerge

as part of the proposal.

The satellite campus is to be considered an extension of the Burnaby

campus rather than separate.

The Committee will not be concerned with capital costs, but will make

recommendations concerning space requirements as they relate to

programming initiatives.

The Report will be submitted to the Academic Vice President no later

than September 8, 1989.

J.W.G. Ivany,

Academic Vice President

William G. Saywell, President

Vice Presidents

Deans

/acs

- t

APPENDIX 3

Population Growth

According to the Central:Bureau of Statistics i986-2006 population

forecast, the total population of the Fraser Valley will increase from 532,000 in

1986 to 717,000 in 1996 and 897,000 in 2006 or 69 percent over 20 years.'

Growth in the population age cohorts of particular interest in forecasting

university enrollment will be much lower, as shown below.

18-24

2534

1986

54,000

901000

1996

60,000

104,000

2006

81,000

109,000

Increase, 1986-2006

50%

21%

It should be noted that the lower growth -rates in these age cohorts are not

peculiar to the Fraser Valley area; they will occur across theprovince.

Participation in Post-Secondary Education

Enrollment projections for a Fraser Valley campus depend both on the

size of the available population age cohorts of interest, the level of participation

in post-secondary education, and the distribution of enrollment among available

institutions.

1 It should probably be pointed out that these forecasts assume much lower rates of net migration

than the Lower Mainland has experienced in the last three years. Thus,'.some would argue that

they are excessively conservative and that population will, grow more rapidly. over the next 20 years.

However, it is probably a good idea to have an influence which may bias our enrollment projections

downwards since many of the other assumptions may have the opposite effect.

At the present time (1987 data), the transition rates for Fraser Valley

Grade 12 enrollees attending university

and colleges show the following means

and ranges:

Mean

Range

University

8.6 percent

2.3 - 14.2 percent

College

13.3 percent

10.9 - 22.5 percent

Thus, 21.9 percent of students enrolled in Grade 12 in 1987 in Fraser Valley

school districts went on to attend university or college academic programs in

1987. In the inner part of the Lower Mainland

the transition rates were much

higher, averaging 15.9 percent for university and 11.1 percent for college for a

total of 27 percent.

Our enrollment projections assume that the Fraser Valley

transition rate for university increases steadily through the 1990's so that by

1999 the average university transition rate for the Fraser Valley area will be

16.4 percent. This will put it in the vicinity of the 1987 Burnaby rate

(15.5

percent) and the average inner Lower Mainland rate of

15.9

percent. The

college transition rates are assumed to remain at their 1987 level of 13.3

percent; this compares to 11.1 percent for the inner Lower Mainland in 1987.

These assumptions give a total transition rate of around 30 percent, near the

1987 rate for the inner Lower Mainland. Whether these rather substantial

increases in area participation in post-secondary education will occur will

depend on many factors, among them the degree to which the Fraser Valley area

acquires a similar socio-economic mix to the inner Lower Mainland. In the

2 Note that none of these statistics include Trinity Western University.

3 Vancouver, Burnaby, Richmond, New Westminster, Coquitlam, North Vancouver, and West

Vancouver.

4 The Lower Mainland's highest rates for college transition are in Agassiz-Harrison (22.5 percent) and

Chilliwack (18.6 percent). In other Fraser Valley districts the transition rates are closer to the inner

Lower Mainland level.

1986 census, income levels and average years of schooling, important variables

in determining the level of post-secondary educational participation, were both

lower in the Fraser Valley than in the Lower Mainland.

Enrollment Projections

The next stage is to convert the student numbers projected using the

transition rate methodology into enrollment projections for SFU-FV. There are

several steps here. We will explain them by presenting the actual forecast data.

Grade 12 Direct to University

In 1992, 801 Fraser Valley students are projected to enril in university directly

from Grade 12. In our projections, 50 percent of them (401)•enroll in SFU-FV

and the other 50 percent (400) attend other universities. The other universities

continue to attract 400 high school graduates per year as first year students

throughout the planning period. We are assuming that the location and quality

of SFU-FV will enable it to compete strongly for Fraser Valley high school

graduates. By 1999, SFU-FV's share of high school graduates proceeding to

university will be 74 percent, slightly less than SFU's 1987 .share of Coquitlam

high school graduates.

Grade 12 Direct to College Academic Programs

As noted above, the transition rate to academic programs in colleges will remain

constant at 13.3 percent, 2.1 percent higher than in the inner Lower Mainland.

Rising population will increase first year college enrollments from 949 in 1992

to 1,227 in 1999, however. It is projected that 20 percent-of these students will

transfer to university after one year and another 20 percent after two years.

SFU-FV will obtain 50 percent of these students in 1992 with increases to 60

percent by 1999. This will total 184 students in both groups in 1992 rising to

275

in 1999. Other universities will obtain a steady transfer enrollment of 184

students per year.

c. Survival

Rates at SFU-FV

For these two groups of students (direct from Grade 12 and college transfer)

current SFU experience with respect to continued enrollment (the "survival

rate") has been applied.

Participation of Older Students

Forecasting the participation of students in the over-24 age cohorts is difficult.

The university participation rates in the inner Lower Mainland for the 25-34

•

and over-35 age cohorts are 3.732 and 0.44 percent, respectively, on an FFE

basis. One-half these rates (1.866 and 0.22, respectively) was applied to the

population projected for these age cohorts over the study period to give a

projected enrollment for the over-24 age group. All these are assumed to be

attending SFLJ-FV. Since this is an aggregate approach, it is not possible to

distribute this group by program year.

Converting Head-Count Enrollment to FTE Enrollment

While the over-24 age group enrollment is projected in FTE terms, the Grade

12 group is a head-count measure. We have taken this group as enrolling in an

average of 30 semester-hours of courses per year. This is slightly higher than

the current SFU average for this group (about 24 hours) - using 24 hours instead

of 30 hours would reduce F1'E enrollments by 10 to 15 percent, with the higher

reduction applying in the later years.

Important Features of Enrollment Projections

population growth, in the age cohorts of greatest interest (18-24 and

24-35)

will accelerate after 2000.

transition and participation rates are very important; our methodology

predicts that current tendencies to increase participation will be sustained and

that SFU-FV will be successful in competing with other universities.

- SFU-FV would only have about

percent of its projected enrollment if it

was limited to third and fourth year students only.

APPENDIX 4

List of Submissions Considered by the Fraser Valle

Planning

Committee

CACUSS

Position Paper on Student Services,

Bill Stewart, Director of Student

Services.

Comments on the Fraser V alley Satellite Campus,

David Boal, Department of

Physics, 7 July 1989.

Considerations for the Planning

a Fraser V alley Campus,

Ron Heath,

Registrar, 26 July 1989.

Continuing Education at SFU-Fraser V alley,

J0 Lynne Hoegg, Dean of

Continuing Studies.

•

Demographic Survey of the Lower Mainland and British Columbia: A Report

Prepared for the Demographic Task Force,

John Pierce, Department of

Geography, June 1989.

Enrollment Increase Costs, SFU and Fraser V alley Campuses,

Walter Griba,

Director of IMC, 12 July 1989.

Fraser V alley Campus,

memo from Jon Driver, Department of Archaeology,

24 July 1989.

Fraser V alley Campus,

J. E. Rahe, Department of Biological Sciences,

2August 1989.

Fraser V alley Campus,

Stan Shapiro, Dean of Business, 20 June 1989.

Fraser V alley Campus Programs,

Bryan Beirne, Professor Emeritus,

Department of Biological Sciences, July

1989.

Fraser V alley Campus W riting Curriculum,

Rick Coe, Department of English,

26 July 1989.

r .

42'

Fraser V alley Developments,

Lalit Srivastava, Chair, Biological Sciences,

21 June 1989.

Fraser V alley Library Cost Estimates,

Charles MacDonald, SFU Library..

Fraser V alley Planning,

memo from Larry Pinfield, Faculty of Business

Administration, 10 July 1989.

Fraser V alley Satellite Campus,

memo from David Stouck, Department of

English, 15 June 1989.

Geography Environmental Studies and University Expansion: A Concept Paper,

Len Evenden, Department of Geography, 13 June 1989.

Local Heroes: Erindale and Scarborough are V ital Community Centres,

University of Toronto Magazine, Spring 1989.

Managing Multicainpus S y stems,

A Report for the "Carnegie Coufcil on Policy

Studies in Higher Education, Lee, E. C. and F. M. Bowen, Jossey-Bass

Publishers, 1975.

. .

Model for a College of

Liberal Arts and Sciences in the Fraser Valley, Evan

Alderson, Stephen Duguid, 31 May 1989.

Notes on the Chilliwack Campus,

Marilyn Bowman, Charles Crawford,

Department of Psychology.

Participation and Locational A nalysis of the 'Fraser V alley: A Report Prepared

for the Demographic Task Force,

J. T. Pierce, Department .of Geography, 'June

1989.

Participation Rates and Future Enrollment in Ontario Universities,

Council of

Ontario Universities, 1983.

Population Estimates and Demographics,

memo from Walter Wattamaniuk,

Director of Analytical 'Studies, 19 December 1988.

Proposalf or SFU Fraser V alley Initiative,

Marilyn Cairns,' Director, Academic

Advice Centre, 27 July 1989.

Report on Meeting with Presidents

the Fraser Valley Colleges, R.

C. Brown,

Dean of Arts, 1 June 1989.

Report on the Planning Committee on Interior Programming, SFU,

Brian

Wilson, 15 September 1977.

Report on Visit to the University

Toronto,

R. C. Brown, Dean of Arts,

31 May 1989.

Scarborough College and the Multicampus University

Toronto,

John

Kirkness, University of Toronto.

Thoughts on Geography and Environmental Science,

Ted Hickin, Department of

Geography, 6 June 1989.

Urban Multi-Unit Communit

Colleges: A daptation for the '70s,

Palola, E. G.

and A. R. Oswald, 1972.

Visits to University

Colorado and A rizona State University Systems,

R. C. Brown and L. N. Meredith, 27 June 1989.

Y ork University Faculty

of Environmental Studies,

brochure, 1988-89.