SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

?

s. ?

i

MEMORANDUM

SENATE

SubS

?

RECOMMENDATION ON PAPER

1t ?

1111LUU LJy

Senate,

S.M. 4/3/85

SENATE COMMITTEE ON AGENDA

From

............... ?

RULES.......................

Date....20

FEBRUA..1985

Action taken by SCAR at the meeting of February 20, 1985

gives rise to the following motion:

MOTION: ?

"That Senate be provided with the lists of

candidates for graduate degrees at both the

Masters and Ph.D. levels, with the lists to

include the following: the name of the

candidate, the candidate's faculty, the

recommended degree and the thesis title. Pull

documentation will/be available for review by

Senators in the Ofice of the Dean of Graduate

Studies and the Rfrgistrar prior to the Senate

meeting at which the lists of candidates will

.

?

be presented.,,

tile name of tile Senior Supervisor,

I

---

- ?

SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

p.

?

MEMORANDUM

To .......

..

Aç4a ..R

MJ

e ?

From ......

.W.R.Heath

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

Registrar ?

(

Dato.......ii..;rMrY.;J9L.L/1?.;...

or ilasters and Ph.D. candidates

At the Senate meeting of October 1,

1984,

the following motin moved by

N. Swartz, seconded by A. Kazepides was carried:

"That the Senate Committee on Agenda and Rules look

into the possibility of abandoning the practice whereby

Senate receives such volume of paper with regard to

graduating students"

At the request of SCAR, I met with Professors Swartz and Kazepides to

discuss their concerns about current procedures. That meeting gave rise

to the following recommendation.

At the Senate meeting of February

7, 1977

a motion in four parts was

before Senate to reduce the quantity of material supplied relative to the

list of candidates for graduation. At that time two parts of that motion

concerned producing merely lists of Masters and Ph.D. candidates. Senate

did not approve those specific parts with the result that fairly lengthy

dossiers for each candidate currently are being forwarded to Senate for

approval of degrees. To produce this material in the

1984

calendar year

involved the printing of

13,575

sheets of paper, and at a conservative

estimate

42

hours of secretarial time for a total approximate cost of

$750.

Further, the time constraints between the deadlines for approval of candidates

and the distribution of Senate material preclude distribution of the material

to Senators in advance of the Senate meeting. The brief period currently

provided immediately prior to the Senate meeting provides little time for

this material to be reviewed in any detail.

It is therefore recommended that Senate be provided with the lists of

candidates for graduate degrees at both the Masters and Ph.D. levels and that

the full documentation be available for review of senators in the office of the

Dean of Graduate Studies and the Registrar prior to the Senate meeting at which

It will be presented. The lists of candidates will include the following:

?

the

name of the candldate, the recommended degree, and the thesis title, for each

Faculty.

.

0