Q:fE.ç 

.

.°. .the 

. ?

.cf. ? 

.S.tuc1.i.s.. 

Action undertaken by the Senate Graduate Studies Committee, at 

its Meeting on October 25, 1988, gives rise to the following motion: 

MOTION: ? 

"that No. 2 of General Regu1atn 1.10.2 be amended 

FROM: The thesis may be pssed on the condition that minor 

revisions be comp,léted to the satisfaction of the 

Senior Suoervisor. 

TO:

?

The thesis,n(ay be passed on the condition that minor 

revision( which are essentially editorial in nature 

. ?

an/

bs7coe)fect the form of presentation (but not the 

su

?

of the thesis, be completed to the satis- 

fa ion f the Senior Supervisor." 

MOTION: 

"add to the last paragraph of General Regulation 1.10.2: 

A decision to pass the thesis or to defer making judgement 

may not be reached on a tie vote of the Examining Committee. 

I-a-4na4o1--vte--te-13ass—t-he—thesTsordeferTudeme11t 

-We

B.P. Clayman 

Dean of Graduate Studies. 

SIMON F R A S E R UNIVERSITY 

?

MEMORANDUM 

.

DEAN OF GRADUATE STUDIES 

TO: ? 

Senate Graduate Studies 

?

FROM: B.P. Clayman 

Committee 

SUBJECT: ? 

Thesis Defence Outcomes 

?

DATE: 25 October 1988 

A recent case suggests the need for increased precision in 

the definition of possible thesis defence outcomes. Our present 

regulations (1.10.2) allow the possibility that: 

11

2) The thesis may be passed on the condition that minor 

revisions be completed to the satisfaction of the 

Senior Supervisor." 

and state that 

"The decision of the Examining Committee is by simple 

majority vote... 

The two problems that arose were in the lack of a definition of 

It

mjnor revisions" and the uncertainty that arises when the 

Examining Committee vote results in a tie. 

I propose the following solutions to these problems: 

1)

Replace the present wording under (1.10.2, outcome 2) 

with: 

"The thesis may be passed on the condition that 

minor revisions, which are essentially editorial in 

nature and/or affect the form of presentation (but not 

the substance) of the thesis, be completed to the satis- 

faction of the Senior Supervisor." 

2)

Add to the last paragraph of (1.10.2): 

"A decision to pass the thesis or to defer making 

judgement may not be reached on a tie vote of the 

Examining Committee. If a majority vote to pass the 

thesis or defer judgement cannot be 

re4e 

ed

,

the thesis 

will be failed." 

S.G.S.C. ? 

- 2 - 

?

25 October 1988 

I would appreciate your discussing this matter with your 

Graduate Program Committee. It will be on the agenda of the next 

meeting of the Senate Graduate Studies Committee. 

B.P. Clayman 

BPC:pm 

M.

McGinn (For distribution at the SGSC 

meeting of 25 October 1988) 

MOC2 5SGSC 