SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

?

S-94-51

MEMORANDUM

•

To

............ SENATE ....................................

Subj.d .......

MEMBERSHIP ON SENATE .

VICEPRES1DENT UNIVERSITY

From ........

CHAT uN

9••

SENA...................

Date........

MOTION: ?

"That, pursuant to the provisions of

Section

34C2)(l)

of the University Act,

the Vice-President University Development

hold membership on Senate, with such

membership adding two to the faculty

members to be elected under Section 34(2)

(g) , and one to the student members to be

elected under Section 34(2)(h)"

(Explanatory note:

If the above is approved, election would

be called for two faculty members to be

elected by and from the faculty members

jointly, and for one student member to be

elected by and from the students at large.

The Act permits Senate to add to its member-

ship but requires that such addition be made

without altering the ratio set out in

Paragragh G covering the number of faculty

members and in H coverning the number of

student members.)

.

---

RATIONALE FOR THE VICE-PRESIDENT, UNIVERSITY DEVELOPMENT

?

AS A MEMBER OF SENATE

The Vice-President, University Development, has special

responsibility for the presentation of the University in the

community (local, regional and national). Objectives which

concern this office Include: informing our publics of the

University's mission, strengths, and contributions to the

community; strengthening the public's acceptance of and support

------------for universities, and for -Simon- -Fraser- University -in -pa-rticula-r-;

establishing collaborative and mutually beneficial relationships

with alumni, governments, and community groups; and attracting

private, corporate and government gifts to the University. Each

of these tasks is directed towards enhancing the University's

principal functions of teaching, research and service.

.

The Vice-President, University Development's primary task 18 to

work towards the strengthening of the University's academic

programs. He/she can do this best when fully Informed about

academic activities and priorities, and when the background. to

academic decisions is understood. Further, those responsible for

establishing academic program policies and priorities should have

the opportunity to directly Inform and question the development

activities of the University.

For these reasons, the University would be served if the

Vice-President, University Development were a member of Senate.

JPB/lm

September

13,

1984

---

Attached are copies of the report of the Presidential Advisory

Committee on University Priorities. Attached to the report are three

----------

discussions papers on related issues. A fourth discussion paper on-work-

load will be made available to the Vice-President Academic shortly. As

you know, the program evaluations have already been sent out to each

program.

WGS :jp

At t.

fl

---

THE FUTURE OF THE UNIVERSITY:

GUIDING PRINCIPLES, WITH ELABORATIONS, IMPLICATIONS,

AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Report?

of the President's Advisory Committee?

on University Priorities

Simon Fraser University

C

1984

0

---

Members of the President's Advisory Committee on University Priorities

John Chant, Department of Economics

John Ellis, Faculty of Education

Glen Geen, Department of Biological Sciences

Dennis Krebs, Department of Psychology. (Chairman)

Nikki Strong-Boag, Department of History and Women's Studies

Pat McCann, Executive Assistant

.

---

1.

Preface

The President's Advisory Committee on University Priorities (PACUP) was

created in November, 1983 and given two charges -- to "review the existing

academic programs and services of the University" and to "advise the President

on the development of an academic mission statement." Early in its

deliberations the Committee decided to confine its review to academic

programs, and recommended the creation of additional committees to review the

library and computing facilities. These committees have been created and will

report to the President in the near future.

Deadlines notwithstanding, the Committee met on an ongoing basis for ten

months. The Committee met an average of three times a week and consulted in

person with more than fifty people. In addition, it conducted three open

hearings and received submissions ranging from less than one page to more than

thirty pages from approximately sixty individuals.

?

- ?

-

The first step taken by the Committee to fulfill its mandate to evaluate

the 34 academic programs at SFU involved the selection of appropriate criteria

of evaluation and the development of a formal procedure. Members of the

Committee surveyed the literature on program evaluation, examined the systems

employed by other universities, consulted with experts in the area and

ultimately produced an evaluation scheme that is notable in three respects.

It contains nine criteria of evaluation. It is dependent primarily on two

types of information: statistical data supplied by the Office of Analytical

Studies and information supplied by program representatives. And, finally, it

• encourages representatives of programs to read and respond to preliminary

evaluations, and thus is more open to feedback and consultation than most

evaluation systems. (See Appendix)

In addition to consultations with representatives of programs, the

Committee discussed its preliminary evaluations with the Deans of each

respective faculty and with the VP (Academic).

The Committee did not examine the vita of individual faculty members.

For this reason, the Committee did not obtain a data base for discovering

whether there are faculty at SFU who have failed to meet their

responsibilities. It should be emphasized, however, that it is the strong

opinion of the Committe that such a data base should be developed. The

Committee questions the effectiveness of the present system of evaluation,

recommends that the President examine it, and, if it is judged as deficient,

develop procedures that supply a more valid indication of the performance of

individual faculty.

A valuable by-product of the development of the system of evaluation

developed by the Committee was the organization of data from the Office of

Analytical Studies in a form in which it can be used in the future for

planning and decision-making.

The results of the Committee's evaluation of each program have been

forwarded to the President. Representatives of each program have received a

copy of the evaluation of their program and an accompanying recommendation.

The reports will not be released to the public at large.

---

In general, the Committee found the quality of the programs at SFU to be

high. The Committee failed to find a basis for recommending the

discontinuation in whole of any major program at SFU, although it did

recommend that parts of a small number of programs be considered for

discontinuation and that significant cuts be considered in a few others. The

Committee also recommended that a some programs be considered for

restructuring.

In addition to the conclusions drawn about the 34 programs, four general

observations emerged from the program evaluations. First, there appears to be

considerable inequity among departments in the teaching loads of faculty.

Second, there is wide variation in the structure of the curriculum across

programs. As with workload, some variation is to be expected by virtue of

differences in the nature of disciplines. However, it is the opinion of this

Committee that a university-wide review of the curriculum is needed. In

addition to the obvious benefits to students of a more rational and consistent

curriculum, the university can save money by decreasing the number of

unnecessary courses, course repetitions, and low enrolment courses. Third,

the University would benefit from a more efficient system of management and

planning. Although this Committee did not evaluate the administrative sector

of the university, it recommends strongly that it be reviewed. The common

opinion that the University has been "over administered and under-managed"

should be examined. If it is valid, changes should ensue. If it is invalid,

it should be disavowed. Finally, during the course of program review, it

became apparent to the Committee that more should be done to enhance the

"sense of community" at SFU.

These four general observations -- about teaching load, curriculum, the

administrative structure of the University, and sense of community -- have

been elaborated by members of the Committee in four discussion papers.

The report that follows is the Committee's response to the second part of

its mandate -- "to advise the President on the development of an academic

mission statement." It consists of some 25 principles that, the Committee

submits, shoL'ld guide the future of SFU. Because such principles tend to be

abstract and truistic, the Committee has attempted to flesh them out with

elaborations, implications and recommendations. The degree to which each

principle is elaborated is variable, determined in many cases more by the

areas of expertise on the Committee and the sophistication of the input it

received than by the significance of the principle.

In closing, it should be emphasized that this Committee is advisory to

the President. The recommendations contained in this report are the

Committee's advice. The Committee has attempted to structure its advice in a

manner that would make it easiest for the President to act on; however,

ultimately the President will submit his own statement of mission to the

University community and set in motion the procedures that will enable the

University to meet its objectives.

11.

Ll

---

1.

The Future of the University:

Guiding Principles, with Elaborations, Implications,

and Recommendations

PRINCIPLE 1

The University should seek to fulfill its responsibilities

to its students, faculty, staff, and alumni, to the people

of British Columbia and Canada who support it, and to the--

international community of scholars in several inextricably

connected ways: by developing the intellectual capabilities

of students, by preserving, disseminating, refining,

integrating, and elaborating existing knowledge, by creating

and discovering new knowledge, and by supplying

constructively critical commentaries on prevailing beliefs

and values.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 1

• ?

1.1 Different constituencies view the purposes of SFU in different terms.

For example, the general public tends to be most aware of its teaching

function, whereas scholars from other universities tend to be most

cognizant of its research contributions. However, there need be no

conflict between the different purposes that guide SFU; each should

complement the others.

1.2 Universities are places where individuals are encouraged to question

accepted truths. As such, universities become a sanctuary for social

criticism and innovative thought. The value of free and questioning

thought must be preserved. Some of the radical ideas of today will

become the accepted truths of tomorrow.

1.3 ?

There is a continuing need to provide the public with information about

the purposes and achievements of SFU. In particular, "products" that

are not generally appreciated, such as the products of research and

other scholarly activities and the value of a liberal education should

be communicated regularly to the public (see Mennell report, 1982).

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. ?

That the policies and procedures of SFU, both formal and informal, be

carried out in ways that maximize the fulfillment of its fundamental

purposes. The principles, elaborations, and recommendations that follow

specify ways in which this goal may be achieved.

---

2.

2.

?

That a coordinated plan to inform the public of the purposes and

products of SFU be developed and implemented. This plan should begin

with a consideration of the recommendations of the Mennell (1982) Report

dealing with alumni ties, public involvement in SFU activities, links

with government, business, and labour, media coverage, and an emphasis

on quality and mission.

PRINCIPLE 2

The University should allocate its resources in a manner

that preserves and strengthens its academic areas of

excellence and fosters those that show promise.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 2

2.1 ?

When resources are allocated, both in times of abundance and in times of

scarcity, they should be allocated in a manner that preserves and

strengthens those aspects of the University that have an established

reputation for excellence and those that show the greatest promise of

fostering excellence. In general this means favoring programs that have

achieved excellence or show promise of excellence over those that have

not or do not, favoring academic functions over nonacademic functions,

and favoring essential services over desirable services and amenities.

2.2 ?

Essential services are those without which the fundamental purposes of

the University -- teaching, research and other scholarly activities --

could not continue. Research equipment, the library, computing

capability, audio-visual resources, and some support staff are

essential. Heated rooms, food services, record keeping, clinical

services, and parking are necessary at some minimal level. Desirable

amenities and services are those which tend to make the University a

more comfortable and enjoyable experience, but without which the

fundamental purposes of the University could still be fulfilled.

Recreational, athletic, religious, and counselling facilities and

various artistic events are examples of desirable services and

amenities.

2.3. ?

In times of financial restraint, all aspects of the University should be

called upon to increase the efficiency of their operations, performing

their functions with fewer resources. Desirable services and amenities

should be reduced or eliminated first, as long as their reduction or

elimination does not jeopardize essential services or the integrity of

the academic core. Were the University forced to strip itself of all

recreational, athletic, day-care, artistic, religious and social

amenities and services, it would be immeasurably poorer and less

attractive to students, faculty, and staff. Inevitably, the quality of

the University would suffer. At that point the University should shrink

essential services, but not to a point where it jeopardizes its areas of

excellence. Past that point it is best to make cuts in the academic

programs that contribute least to the mission of the University and show

the least promise of achieving excellence.

---

3.

RE0PtIENDAT 1011:

?

3. ?

That resources be allocated in a manner that maximizes the excellence of

teaching and scholarship at SFU, both

in

times of abundance and in times

of restraint. If cuts must be made, they should be deepest in areas

most peripheral to the academic core of the University, then in the

academic areas of lowest quality and promise. Specifications of this

general recommendation are contained in ensuing points.

PRINCIPLE 3

The University should continue to avoid unnecessary

duplication of programs already adequately provided in the

province. Each of the institutions and agencies that

contribute to the educational well-being of British Columbia

should defer to the others in terms of competence and

acknowledged mission.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 3

?

3.1 ?

All aspects of overlap among the three B.C. universities cannot and

should not be eliminated. All universities must offer some of the same

fundamentalor core programs to ensure that their students have an

appropriately rounded education. In addition, certain specialties

• ?

should be offered by more than one institution if student demand is high

and if alternative approaches taken by the different universities

provide fresh and interesting options for students.

PRINCIPLE 4

The University should not aspire to cover all areas of

knowledge. It should preserve the areas in which it already

has established strength, and, in addition, emphasize two

types of programs: fundamental and innovative.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 4

?

4.1 ?

Fundamental programs are those that are widespread in their application,

pervasive in their influence, and supply the traditional academic

foundation for other programs. Innovative programs are those that are

not readily available elsewhere, meet emerging social needs, and build

on fundamental programs. They are emerging fields of study,

applications of established disciplines, professions, or near

professions which, while developing their own knowledge base, use as a

foundation the information, theories and tools of fundamental

programs. In general, they reflect responses to a changing social

• ?

context and provide learning and research opportunities not readily

available elsewhere.

---

4.

?

4.2 ?

By virtue of the fact that it is a University bound by tradition and its

own history of development, SFU must and should continue offering basic

programs in fundamental or "core

d

areas. It is difficult to imagine a

university without programs in the sciences, social sciences, and

humanities. The subject matter of fundamental programs will and should

overlap with the subject matter of programs at UBC and UVic. Although

existing departments offering programs in the traditional areas should

be preserved, they should not necessarily be preserved in their present

form. Not all departments need offer undergraduate major, honors, or

graduate programs. Not all departments need offer all their present

"streams". Successful aspects of core departments should be preserved

and strengthened. Unsuccessful aspects of core departments should be

decreased or eliminated. Departments offering programs with traditional

content have a special responsibility to distinguish themselves in other

terms, especially the quality of their scholarship and instruction.

?

4.3 ?

Fundamental programs are important in their own right, for the

contributions they make to a liberal education, and for the

contributions they make to new areas of inquiry and application.

Fundamental programs should provide the foundation for applied studies

and emerging disciplines.

4.4 The capacity to develop innovative programs should be prized as evidence

of SFU's vitality, its commitment to advancing knowledge and its

responsiveness to the evolving needs of society. The relationship

between innovative and fundamental programs should not be competitive,

even in times of financial restraint. Each should augment the other.

The continuing association should be one of sympathy and shared

resources, made manifest through mechanisms such as common curricular

components, joint appointments and collaborative research. Cooperation

between fundamental and innovative programs should instill a greater

degree of integration in the University and foster the most efficient

use of its resources.

?

4.5 ?

From its beginnings SFU has resisted pressures to develop large numbers

of traditional professional faculties. That policy should be continued

as long as other universities are able to meet the demand for

professional training. Consistent with its emphasis on innovative

programs, SFU should offer a small number of relatively unique

professional programs associated with areas of excellence in the

University.

PRTNNPIF

Because the quality of the University will be most readily

apparent in the achievements of its faculty, students and

alumni, the University must be ever more energetic in

attracting the best possible professors and students.

0

---

5.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 5

5.1 ?

SFU should develop organized and active programs for the recruitment of

excellent faculty and students. This will involve the coordinated

effort of departments and the administration, and the investment of

resources.

5.2 ?

The efforts of the Faculty of Science in encouraging able high school

students to enrol at SFU are to be commended. Other faculties should be

encouraged to emulate its example. Such efforts should be extended to

college students and mature students as well.

5.3 The success of certain departments in attracting graduate students of

superior ability is to be commended and should be emulated. The

University should supply the resources and the departments the energy

for the active recruitment of superior graduate students.

5.4 ?

The University should endeavour to recruit world-class scholars whenever

the opportunity arises. In the ordinary course of recruiting faculty,

the University should place particular emphasis on quality. On occasion

this may involve hiring a professor of truly outstanding research

potential who does not fit the precise teaching needs of the

department. The costs of reassigning teaching responsibilities within a

department are minimal relative to the benefits derived from the

acquisition of an outstanding scholar.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

4.

That a coordinated, university-wide set of policies and procedures be

developed for the recruitment of undergraduate students, graduate

students, and faculty; and that the resources necessary to implement

these policies and procedures be made available to departments. The

recommendations of the High School Recruitment Committee (1983) should

be considered as part of this process.

5.

That funds be set aside to enable departments at SFU to hire faculty of

extraordinary accomplishment or potential when special opportunities

arise.

PRINCIPLE 6

The University should reaffirm its commitment to high

quality scholarship. It must ensure that opportunities and

incentives are provided for faculty to improve their

scholarly productivity, that the scholarly contributions of

faculty are evaluated in the fairest and most valid ways,

and that excellence in scholarship is adequately rewarded.

40

---

.

6.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 6

6.1. The advancement of knowledge by members of the University is one of its

primary responsibilities. Knowledge may be advanced in a number of

ways: through experimentation, through the analysis of published and

archival material, by synthesizing and analysing existing scholarship,

by developing integrative theories, and so on.

?

6.2

?

A professor's contribution to the advancement of knowledge entails

communication with other scholars. Most often this finds expression in

publication. Publication will occur in different forms and at differing

rates depending on the discipline. Although it is pointless to attempt

to establish productivity "norms" across the University, the standards

apprbpriate for evaluating scholarship in each discipline should be

specified.

?

6.3 ?

A distinction should be made between the quality and quantity of

scholarship. Professors at SFU should be encouraged to emphasize

quality over quantity, and evaluations should reflect this emphasis. In

some instances a modest volume of work may prove to be of signal

importance. In other cases, a considerable volume of work may fail to

make a significant contribution.

REOENDATIOt4:

?

6. ?

That the President, as the academic leader of the university, assume a

central role in developing incentives to enhance the scholarly

productivity of faculty and students at SFU; that he ensure that the

best possible methods are employed to evaluate the scholarly

contributions of faculty, that policies which reward scholarly

achievement or its absence (promotion, tenure, salary) are applied

rigorously, and that formal and informal ways of encouraging,

recognizing and publicising scholarly achievement be developed.

PRINCIPLE 7

The University should reaffirm its commitment to high

quality teaching. It must ensure that teaching is evaluated

in the fairest and most valid ways, that opportunities and

incentives are provided for instructors to improve their

proficiency, and that excellence in teaching is adequately

rewarded.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 7

?

7.1 ?

The University's reputation among academics is based primarily on

research: and scholarly activity; however, its reputation in the

community is based primarily on the experience of the many people who

take its courses and programs.

---

7.

7.2 Teachers at SFU include professors and a variety of other instructors

such as teaching assistants, faculty associates, and laboratory

instructors. Teaching involves much more than lecturing, important as

that may be. University teachers have an obligation to keep themselves

abreast of new developments in their fields, to strive to improve their

methods of instruction, and to encourage the free exchange of ideas

between themselves and their students. Teaching involves preparing new

courses, updating existing courses, leading seminars and tutorials,

supervising research, meeting with students informally, assisting

students with term papers and the like, evaluating performance,

supplying constructive feedback, and, in general, helping students

improve their basic academic skills. Teaching involves a commitment to

students that extends well beyond formally scheduled contact hours (see

C.A.U.T. Guidelines concerning Professional Ethics and Professional

Relationships).

7.3 A number of different methods of teaching evaluation are employed by

different units at SFU, some undoubtedly more valid than others.

Recognizing the difficulties inherent in the evaluation of any

performance -- scholarly productivity and course achievement are two

important cases in point -- SFU should seek to employ the best available

methods. A large body of research has been conducted on this issue.

?

7.4 ?

Students have a legitimate and important role to play in evaluating

most, but not all, aspects of teaching. Although, for example, the

choice of subject matter for a specific course is best evaluated by the

faculty member or his or her colleague, students are

in

a good position

to comment on whether an instructor sets clear objectives, abides by his

or her course outline, shows up on time, inspires enthusiasm for the

subject matter, speaks clearly and coherently, answers questions

adequately, and, in general creates an atmosphere conducive to

learning. Students should have the opportunity to offer their views on

all courses, anonymously, using an instrument appropriate for the

purpose.

7.5 The Chairs of departments and other colleagues should play a more active

role in evaluating teaching. The present use of student evaluations and

casual observation should be augmented by consultation and classroom

visitation. In particular, Chairs and peers should insure that

professors update their courses appropriately.

?

7.6 ?

The evaluation of teaching should serve two purposes: it should supply

a basis for assisting instructors to improve their performance and it

should supply a basis for decisions about salary, tenure, and

promotion. These purposes should be kept distinct. Appropriate

resources should be associated with the former, and appropriate

procedures and incentives with the latter..

?

7.7 ?

A variety of relatively simple and inexpensive procedures could be

employed to raise the overall quality of teaching at SFU. More

extensive and systematic feedback could be given routinely to

instructors by Chairs and colleagues; the teaching assistant training

program could be reinstituted; professors of acknowledged competence

---

8.

could serve as mentors to more junior faculty; an unobtrusive and non-

threatening consultative service could be instituted; workshops in

teaching skills could be provided, etc.

REILO WE NDAT ION S :

7.

That a task force be created to make specific recommendations about ways

of improving the quality and evaluation of teaching at SFU. Initially

It should consider four matters: training for teaching assistants, ways

of assisting instructors to improve their teaching techniques, policies

and procedures for evaluating the teaching effectiveness of professors,

and an effective system through which students can voice their

complaints about faculty. The task force should be asked to make

recommendations that are as simple and cost-effective as possible,

taking into account the findings of Senate paper 83.56 and other

relevant material. This task force should include students, faculty,

administrators, and a member of the Office of Analytical Studies.

8.

That the President direct the Deans of each faculty to ensure that valid

and representative information is provided about the teaching

effectiveness of every faculty member who is evaluated for purposes of

promotion, tenure, or salary.

PRINCIPLE 8

The University should insure that modes of instruction that

contribute most fully to the education of its students are

employed. Instructors should be encouraged to explore new

pedagogical approaches as need and opportunity arise.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 8

8.1 ?

SFU should remain receptive to new teaching approaches. For example,

advances in computer technology should be kept in mind as a means of

improving teaching in selected courses.

8.2 ?

The tutorial system is a distinguishing feature of the University. It

is valued by many students, but it has never undergone a thorough

evaluation. It now appears to be under some challenge both financially

and pedagogically.

8.3 ?

The tutorial system as it is generally thought of -- a small discussion

group matched with larger lectures -- is but one of many possible

approaches intended to assist students in the clarification of concepts

in small group settings. Individual consultations, drop-in tutoring

sessions, student-led tutorials are instances of alternative

arrangements which have merit.

---

.

S

9.

8.4 A variety of options to the now standard tutorial arrangements should be

encouraged and examined. Different disciplines, different levels of

• study, different class sizes, and different instructional styles are all

likely to call for different arrangements in assisting students to gain

mastery of course material.

REOPT4ENDAT ION:

?

9. ?

That an expert committee evaluate existing modes of instruction at SFU,

including the tutorial system, and propose improvements and

modifications.

PRINCIPLE 9

The University must ensure that Professors make significant

and ongoing contributions in the areas of teaching and

scholarship. An adequate or even superior performance in

one area cannot fully compensate for Inadequacies In the

other.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 9

?

9.1 ?

Over a career a professor should devote approximately equal time to

teaching and research, and significantly less to administrative and

other matters. However, this division need not be applied inflexibly to

every professor in every year. There will be times when extraordinary

levels of scholarly activity justify a decrease in a professor's

responsibilities in other areas; and there will be times when it is

appropriate for a professor to assume additional teaching or

administrative duties.

?

9.2 ?

Policies and procedures related to salary, tenure, and promotion should

reflect the necessity for all faculty to make ongoing contributions to

both the teaching and scholarly functions of the University. Thorough

reviews of the accomplishments of faculty over extended periods of time,

such as for example every five years, may supply a more adequate

perspective on their overall performance than one, two, or three year

reviews.

?

9.3

?

There is considerable variation in the workload of professors, both

between and within departments. Teaching responsibilities vary widely

in terms of courses taught, graduate students supervised, directed

readings courses provided, etc. Similarly, research activities and

administrative duties vary considerably. The total workload of some

professors appears to be much heavier than that of others. In the

interests of equity this problem requires resolution. ••

?

•

---

10.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

10.

?

That, with the assistance of the Office of Analytical Studies and in

consultation with Deans of faculties and Chairs of departments, the

Vice-President, Academic be directed to produce a set of criteria

specifying the teaching load for faculty in all departments at SFU.

These standards may or may not vary from department to 'department, but

in any event should be made explicit. In general, all faculty should

teach an average of four regular courses per year. Exceptions to this

principle should be made on clearly defined grounds.

PRINCIPLE 10

The University must protect the rights of its faculty to

engage in unconstrained intellectual inquiry and insure that

this right is not abused. After the scholarly productivity

and teaching competence of professors are clearly

demonstrated, they are entitled to receive an appointment

without term; however, tenure must not be permitted to

shield those who are negligent in their duties.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 10

10.1 The award of an appointment without term represents a major obligation

undertaken by the University and a major benefit bestowed upon the

individual. Professors must establish that they have the ability both

to teach well and to make significant scholarly contributions before

they receive tenure. A somewhat greater length of time than the present

minimum may be necessary to supply new members of faculty with the

opportunity to demonstrate their ability. In view of the magnitude of

the commitment of the University to tenured faculty, it would seem

appropriate for the award of tenure to be accompanied by promotion -- at

least from Assistant to Associate Professor.

10.2 Tenure provides professors with the freedom necessary to pursue

intellectual endeavors, but it carries with it a

.

continuing obligation

to "use that freedom in a manner consistent with the scholarly

obligation to base research and teaching on an honest search for

knowledge" (CAUT model clause on academic freedom, 1977), and to

maintain an active program of scholarship and high standards in

teaching.

'

The University should offer encouragement and assistance to

professors who experience difficulty in meeting their

responsibilities. In cases where professors do not respond

constructively to such assistance, the University should apply sanctions

such as negative salary adjustments. Failing these measures, the

University must be rigorous in the implementation of procedures of

dismissal. To permit tenure to protect those who are negligent in their

duties is to jeopardize the future of tenure and to dilute the quality

of the University as a whole.

41

---

11.

RECOMMENDATION:

.

?

11. ?

That Policies AC2 (Renewal, Tenure and Promotion) and AC22 (Salary) be

revised and applied to reflect the foregoing principles.

PRINCIPLE 11

The University should admit as students those most likely to

benefit from a university education. Individuals who

display outstanding promise should be sought out and

actively encouraged to enrol. Others of promise should be

given full opportunity to develop their capabilities.

Mature students should not be denied opportunity by

arbitrary barriers to access.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 11

11.1 Raising standards for admission or instituting an admissions testing

program have been suggested as devices for improving student continuance

rates. These suggestions require further study. Good predictors of

success are elusive. Sound standards for continuance are, in the long

run, more humane and defensible than artificial barriers to access.

11.2 The early decision to modify entry requirements for mature students and

to offer courses at convenient times and locations has served SFU and

•

?

the community well. Although drop-out rates of mature students are

worrisome, many mature students reap great satisfaction from their

studies. Contact with those with more experience also enriches classes

for other students.

PRINCIPLE 12

The University should ensure that it fulfills its particular

responsibility to Canadian students, while at the same time,

within responsible limits, fulfilling its obligation to help

educate students from other nations. The University should

attempt to preserve a balance of students from other countries.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 12

12.1 The University has taken ad hoc but generally responsible steps to

ensure that Canadian students have priority in high-demand programs.

12.2 The University should not be reticent in pointing

both to the University and to Canada of providing

opportunities to a representative mix of students

other countries. It should not be forgotten that

.

?

students have attended and continue to attend Bri

universities.

out the advantages

educational

of high ability from

thousands of Canadian

tish and American

---

0

RECOMMENDATION:

12. ?

That Senate review the principles it has established for enrolment

limitations and insure that they foster an acceptable balance of

Canadian and non-Canadian students in all programs.

PRINCIPLE 13

Although the University must fulfill its responsibility to

discontinue students who fail to meet its standards, it

should make every reasonable effort to minimize such

failure.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 13

13.1 The number of students who drop out or experience difficulty in

continuing at SF1) should be a source of concern and an object of

Study. Not all those admitted can be expected to complete degrees:

they may have neither the inclination nor the aptitude. However, every

effort should be made to supply assistance to those who are motivated to

do well.

13.2 Underpreparation

in

university level learning skills is a problem

amongst some students at all universities. SFU is no exception. SF1)

should not ignore this problem; it should address it directly,

particularly in its introductory courses. Even good students could

benefit from improvements in basic skills.

13.3 The financial problems of students are a cause of concern. SFU has a

record of contributing more to student aid from its base budget than

most universities. This policy should continue. The University should

endeavor to increase scholarship, bursary and loan funds.

13.

That lower levels courses, in addition to addressing disciplinary

concerns, be so designed as to provide students with necessary basic

skills for learning, and that the need for additional resources devoted

to remediatjon be evaluated.

14.

That efforts to acquire additional funds for financial aid to students

be intensified.

PRINCIPLE 14

The University should ensure that the quality of education

it offers is not Compromised by enrolment pressure, and that

a balance is preserved among the programs it offers. It is

better for SFU to be small but good than large and mediocre.

12.

---

13.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 14

14.1 There is a variety of opinion concerning the appropriate future size of

the University. The determination of size, however, is not solely the

responsibility of the University. Social and economic forces also play

a role. A desire for growth on the part of the University, for example,

which is not matched by student demand and economic resources, could not

be realized. Similarly, the decision to remain small in the face of a

demand for academic services accompanied by fresh resources might be

irresponsible.

14.2 Of overriding importance on the question of size is a commitment to

quality in the advancement and dissemination of knowledge. Excessive

enrolments must not be permitted to compromise the quality of teaching

and scholarship.

14.3 The University will be hard-pressed to continue what it is presently

doing given the current level of support. The expansion or addition of

programs must be matched by fresh resources for personnel, facilities,

and equipment or by the termination of existing activities.

14.4 The size of individual programs and the balance between them are as

important concerns as the size of the University as a whole. Rules of

thumb on size and balance are elusive and simplistic. There are times,

nevertheless, when a program is too small to permit a coherent effort.

Similarly, there are, times when the unfettered growth of a program can

• ?

disrupt the balance and integration needed by the University to achieve

its broad purposes.

PRINCIPLE 15

The University must ensure that the primary purpose of all

of its programs is to advance and disseminate knowledge.

Although some programs may supply artistic and technical

training as part of their curriculum, they should not permit

such training to compromise their fundamental

responsibilities.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 15

15.1 Practical, artistic, and vocational training are inextricably connected

to the advancement and dissemination of knowledge in several

disciplines. It is as foolish to say that a university has no interest

in practical or artistic matters as to say that a vocational institute

or conservatory can ignore academic concerns. However, artistic and

practical training that does not contribute to the advancement of

knowledge is inappropriate at SFU.

40

---

14.

PRINCIPLE 16

The University should examine its commitment to existing

programs and establish priorities for the implementation of

new ones.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 16

16.1 A program can be defined as a coherent grouping of courses which, upon

its completion, satisfies the requirements for a degree, a diploma, a

certificate, or a major or minor within a degree.

16.2 Most programs at SFU are well established, involve a significant

complement of faculty and attract considerable student interest. Others

are in the prOcess of establishing themselves, and aspire to grow. In

addition there is a fairly large and growing number of small programs,

some attracting strong student interest, and others that appear to have

little appeal to students. Further, a number of programs are at varying

stages of the approval process, some with departmental backing, others

supported by Continuing Studies.

16.3 The present state of affairs raises three general concerns. First,

several of the emerging programs are making or about to make significant

claims for new resources -- personnel, space, equipment. It is unclear

whether the needs of these programs over a period of emergence were

either specified or taken into account in planning the University's

financial future. Second, it is unclear what principles have guided the

approval of some 'of the smaller programs. Some contribute elements of

coherence and integration to existing course offerings. Others appear

to reflect a narrower interest. Third, most new programs draw teaching

personnel from established programs. This, of course, is preferable to

hiring teaching personnel for an uncertain future; however, past a

point, resources diverted from central programs will weaken the core of

the curriculum.

REO*1ENDATIONS:

15.

That Senate declare a moratorium on the introduction of new programs;

and that the moratorium not be lifted until an adequate appreciation is

obtained of the fiscal, personnel and space requirements of existing

programs, particularly the newer ones.

16.

That the Senate Committee on Academic Planning be more proactive,

encouraging when appropriate, the development of new programs.

Proposals in the form of prospectus should be examined en bloc at

specified intervals, perhaps twice a year. Certain proposals should be

encouraged and others discouraged. Subsequent, more detailed proposals

should include resource implications and, again, should be considered en

bloc to encourage priority setting.

---

15.

PRINCIPLE 17

In order to insure that it has the resources necessary to

continue mounting innovative programs, the University must

devise procedures that enable it to terminate unsuccessful

programs at minimum human and financial cost.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 17

17.1 A major strength of SFU has been its willingness and ability to mount

innovative programs. It should maintain this strength in the future.

However, procedures must be developed that make it easier to terminate

programs that prove unsuccessful.

17.2 There are two reasons why universities find it difficult to terminate

programs. The first is to be found in the tendency of organizations to

retain functions, once established, whether they are needed or not. The

second is related to faculty personnel policy: it is difficult to

discharge tenured faculty.

17.3 New programs should be staffed with the smallest possible number of new

tenure-track faculty. In some cases professors with the necessary

expertise and interest from existing programs could help staff new

programs on a seconded or joint appointment basis, with their numbers

augmented by visiting and term faculty. Once a program has proven its

quality and attractiveness (say, after 5 years), its staffing and

organizational arrangements could be changed to a more conventional

form. If the program were unsuccessful, it could be terminated with

minimal human and financial cost.

17.4 A viable mechanism for terminating unsuccessful programs is a positive

way of ensuring the capability to mount innovative programs in the

future.

RECOIIIENDATION:

17. ?

That conditions under which a new program will be terminated, together

with mechanisms for making termination possible, should be specified by

the Senate Committee on Academic Planning before additional programs are

approved.

PRINCIPLE 18

The University should evaluate its programs periodically.

The criteria on which programs are evaluated should include

the following: the quality of teaching and research,

student demand, contributions to British Columbia and

Canada, contributions to other programs, efficiency of

curriculum, cost-efficiency, and efficiency of management.

Though not all criteria of evaluation are equally important

. ?

in every case, any deficiency should supply a stimulus for

correction.

---

16.

Elaborations and Implications:

PRINCIPLE 18

18.1 All programs at SFU should set objectives and assess the extent to which

they have met their objectives on an ongoing basis. Programs should be

evaluated in terms of both general criteria such as the quality of

teaching and scholarship and criteria specific to their particular

objectives.

18.2 SFU should employ two kinds of program review: informal and formal.

Informal reviews should be conducted annually on two bases. First, each

department should review objectives set the previous year, assess its

success in attaining the objectives, examine relevant issues respecting

the management and operation of the department, and set objectives for

the forthcoming year. Second, each Chairman should meet with the Dean,

discuss performance in the previous year against specified objectives

and review objectives set for the following year. Informal reviews, to

the extent possible, should use objective information and specific

objectives.

18.3 Formal reviews should be conducted every five years or more frequently

if required by the Dean or Vice President, Academic. First, a committee

drawn from members of other departments within SFU should review the

program in terms of its internal functioning and its functioning within

SFU. A review format similar to that used by PACUP (see Appendix)

should be considered. Second, an external committee of peers should

review the research and scholarly activities of the department and its

members.

18.4

The Office of Analytical Studies should supply the data that serve as

the quantitative basis for program reviews. These data should be

updated and made public on an annual basis. Conclusions and programs

should, of course, be based on qualitative judgments as well as

statistical data.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

18.

That a schedule and format for the setting of objectives and regular

review of all programs at SFU be established.

19.

That the Office of Analytical Studies report to the Vice-President

(Academic) and publish the quantitative data it collects on programs at

SFU at least once a year.

PRINCIPLE 19

The curriculum -- courses, sequences, programs, requirements

-- should be as spare, simple, and uncluttered as

possible. Cumbersome regulations, questionable

prerequisites, needless courses, premature specialization,

and overly lengthy and complex sequences should be

eliminated.

S

S

---

17.

.

?

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 19

19.1 The undergraduate curriculum is showing clear signs of dysfunction. The

curriculum is complex in terms of requirements and sequences and is

offered in a complex manner through the trimester system, day and

evening offerings, and the like. Those two complexities make it

especially important to ensure that the curriculum is efficient as

possible. These points and others are elaborated in the attached

discussion paper, Undergraduate Curriculum.

REcO*IENDATION:

20. ?

That an expert committee review the structure of the curriculum in the

University as a whole, with the intent of making recommendations that

lead to its simplification and an Improvement in its efficiency.

PRINCIPLE 20

The University should enunciate principles and regulations

that ensure that students attain a breadth of education that

extends beyond the specialization advocated by individual

departments. It should ensure that familiarity with a range

of knowledge and the acquisition of a solid foundation for

• ?

future learning should not be crowded out by premature

specialization.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 20

20.1 There is considerable variation in the number and degree of specificity

of requirements in the various programs at SFU. Some programs at SFU

require and specify significantly more courses than comparable programs

at UVic or UBC. Although the number of courses required in some

programs should be greater than in others by virtue of the subject

matter, all programs should seek to minimize their requirements in order

to maximize the flexibility of the curriculum and students' freedom of

choice. In no case should the requirements of a program deprive

students of the opportunity to obtain a broad foundation for future

learning.

20.2 In view of the speed with which knowledge is changing in various fields,

it is becoming increasingly important for students to obtain basic

skills in learning. Courses that are especially designed to supply a

solid foundation for future learning facilitate the mastery of more

specialized subjects, and, therefore, should be taken primarily in the

first two years.

20.3 A solid foundation for future learning involves at least the following:

40

a) the inculcation of attitudes and values such as a respect for

truth and an openness to new ideas;

---

18.

b)

training in the methods of advancing knowledge (research design,

statistical inference, critical and creative thinking, logic,

theoretical synthesis, problem solving, decision-making);

c)

training in methods of communication, especially reading and

writing;

d)

training in the understanding and manipulation of numbers (basic

mathematics, computer skills);

e)

acquaintance with the major themes and styles of inquiry of the

sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities.

REOPVlENDATION:

21. ?

That the expert committee on curriculum reform make recommendations that

(a) enable SFU to provide the courses necessary for students to acquire

a strong foundation for future learning; (b) ensure that SFU invests

adequate resources in these foundation courses (some will require small

tutorials or labs and individual instruction); and (c) ensure that the

requirements of the various, specializations offered at SFU do not

deprive students of the opportunity to obtain basic foundational skills.

PRINCIPLE 21

The University should continue to remain as open as possible

to those who are qualified to attend it. Subject to

sufficient demand to ensure cost effectiveness, courses and

degree completion programs should be offered at times and

places convenient to those carrying home and/or vocational

responsibilities.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 21

21.1 When it was instituted in 1965, the trimester system was seen as having

two potential benefits: it would provide students with flexibility in

undertaking programs and It would make year-round use of the physical

facilities. It has succeeded in the first and to a lesser, but still

significant, extent in the second.

21.2 The trimester system is costly in at least two ways. It requires an

elaborate administrative provision in registering, scheduling and record

keeping, and it requires a frequent offering of essential courses.

Enrolment patterns and numbers of students differ from program to

program with some making more, some less, use of the trimester

arrangement.

21.3 On balance the trimester system has proven its usefulness and thus

should be retained in its essential form; however, modifications in the

system should be considered. Greater use of the summer session and the

restriction of some programs to the fall and spring semesters are

examples of such modifications. Courses should continue to be offered

in the Summer Session and the Intersession to the extent that student

demand warrants.

---

19.

21.4 The campus on Burnaby Mountain is the core of SFU, and the University

mustprotect the quality of its core. Credit courses and programs

should be offered off-campus only when they serve the needs of students

better than they would if offered on-campus. The quality of off-campus

offerings should be as high as the quality of on-campus offerings.

21.5 Departments and the Division of Continuing Studies have worked together

to increase the accessibility of the programs offered at SFU. The

practice is now so well-established that departments should assume

greater responsibility for it. Faculty Deans should ensure that

departments continue to meet necessary commitments. The allocation of

resources by the Deans should be contingent on the cooperation of

departments.

21.6 All credit courses offered by the University -- day, evening, off-campus

-- should be of equal quality. Undue reliance on temporary staff for

off campus and evening credit courses should be avoided.

21.7 Ultimately, the ability of the university to extend high quality

instructional services is dependent on the strength of its scholarly and

research activities. Care must be taken to avoid long-term damage to

the university by diverting resources to shorter-term instructional

activities.

21.8 The reform and simplification of the curriculum would be beneficial to

the operation of the trimester system and credit extension activities.

22. ?

That the demand for courses and programs in the evening, off-campus, and

summer semester be assessed and, with this information in hand, each

department develop a coherent plan for the offering of courses and

programs. This plan should be responsive to student demand and

sensitive to the need to insure quality in the summer, evening, and off-

campus.

PRINCIPLE 22

The University should, with appropriate safeguards,

encourage the provision of its problem-solving capability to

industry, government, labor, and voluntary organizations.

Interactions between the University and outside institutions

should be mutually beneficial.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 22

22.1 Individual professors should be free to offer consulting services to

agencies and organizations in the community as long as these activities

S ?

do not detract from the fulfillment of their responsibilities at SFU.

This arrangement, given existing safeguards, should be of benefit to the

university, the community, and to participating professors.

•

---

20.

22.2 There is an increasing recognition that Canada's efforts in research and

development are inadequate to meet the challenges of a competitive world

economy. Related to this is the urgent need to increase employment

opportunities, particularly for youth. The University's graduates are

obviously part of this group. Various national bodies are encouraging a

closer interaction between universities and industries that addresses

economic and employment concerns. SFU should endeavor to make its

highly-trained problem solvers available to industry. In return,

industries should be encouraged to increase the number of jobs they make

available to graduates and to contribute resources to the University.

22.3 In entering into collaborative relationships, the University must ensure

that its integrity is maintained and its autonomy protected. However,

the University should not ignore the serious problems the nation faces

nor pass up opportunities that have the potential to strengthen its

academic programs.

RECOMMENDATION

23. ?

That the University encourage the activities of its Research Investment

Task Force and request it to bring forward proposals for policy

consideration.

PRINCIPLE 23

Resources devoted to the administration of the University

should be kept to a minimum. This principle has implications

for the management of departments, the central administration,

and Senate.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 23

23,1 Like academic programs, administrative units and functions should be

reviewed periodically to assess their quality and effectiveness.

Regular reviews and budgetary openness would allay concerns and

suspicions about the cost, efficiency, and priority of administrative

services.

23.2 Like academic units, administrative units should establish goals and

objectives against which their performance can be judged. This should

assist the University administration to ensure balance between resources

allocated to academic programs, physical facilities, and support

staff. It might also provide a means of curtailing the tendency of

bureaucracies to expand.

23.3 Academic departments should review their management procedures, minimize

the number of committees, and leave detailed department management to

the Chair. Having selected Chairs by a widely participatory process,

the departments should give them a mandate to manage during their term

of office, subject to positive annual reviews of their performance by

the members of the DTC in their departments and by the Dean of their

faculty.

---

21.

23.4 As a widely applicable principle, the responsibility for decisions

. ?

should be delegated to those in a position to make the most informed

• ?

decisions. The movement toward decentralization instituted by the

outgoing Vice-President, Academic should be continued. Decision-making

should be decentralized to the lowest possible level and the individuals

responsible held accountable.

23.5 All administrators should be evaluated annually.

23.6 Senate should clarify and simplify its goals and procedures as much as

possible within the terms of the University Act. To the extent

possible, academic decisions should be delegated to the lowest

reasonable level and subjected to minimal review thereafter. Minor

changes in the curriculum should not, for example, be of concern to

Senate as a whole. A small faculty or Senate committee would better

serve that purpose.

23.7 Careful re-examination of the function of Senate is long overdue. The

principal function of Senate should relate to planning and major

academic decisions. The planning function is probably best carried out

by a Senate Committee (a revitalized SCAP?).

23.8 As part of the review of Senate activities, there should be a

redefinition of the function of and necessity for Its numerous

committees. Each committee should be instructed to review its

operations. Goals and objectives should be established and efforts made

to minimize the number of faculty members and students involved. An ad

•

?

hoc committee should then examine the committee structure of Senate as a

whole and produce a set of recommendations for increasing its

efficiency. It seems possible that some committees could be eliminated

entirely and most reduced in size. These points and others are

elaborated in the attached discussion paper, University Management.

REcO*IENDATIONS:

24.

That all administrative units develop goals and objectives against which

their performance can be evaluated on a regular basis.

25.

That all departments review their management procedures and attempt to

reduce the time devoted by faculty to administration.

26.

That an ad hoc committee of Senate be created to examine the structure

and function of Senate and its related committees with the goal of

making recommendations to increase the efficiency of Senate and redirect

its focus to major academic decisions and planning.

PRINCIPLE 24

The University should, on an ongoing basis, attempt to

enhance the sense of community experienced by its members.

---

22.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 24

24.1 Faculty, students, staff and alumni exist as essential and associated

components of the University community. Yet, even within these groups

and very definitely among them there is often a lack of understanding.

Hard times may exacerbate these relationships and drain the University

of the goodwill and trust without which it cannot prevail. While

maintaining its commitment to its central purposes of scholarship and

teaching, the University also should insure that it provides the type of

experiences that promote loyalty and cooperation among its members.

24.2 A sense of common purpose and mutual goodwill can be encouraged in a

variety of environments -- from the seminar room, to the athletic field,

to student society meetings, to the Childcare Centre. Such occasions

may not themselves be at the heart of the academic enterprise to which

SFU is committed, but they do much to guarantee its ultimate success.

Opportunities to experience SFU as a comfortable, attractive and

exciting location for work and study need the University's full

support. Without vital and viable amenities and services, SFU's

citizens would quickly fail to know or to value other faculty, students,

staff or alumni or the common enterprise itself.

These points and others are elaborated in the attached discussion paper,

The Sense of Community.

RE O#IENDAT ION S

27.

That the President meet with the Faculty Association, the Student Society,

the Alumni Association, TSSU, APSA, AUCE 1 and 2, Polyparty, and other

interested groups on campus to discuss the coordination of efforts to

strengthen community feeling and loyalty. This should be a cooperative

enterprise.

28.

That the means by which the university may be made a more comfortable and

satisfying environment for work and study be investigated. The provision

of more lounges and common rooms would be one step in that direction.

29. That efforts to provide more student housing

assistance, as appropriate, from the public

possibility of creating a university village

actively pursued.

be intensified, seeking

and private sectors. The

on Burnaby Mountain should be

PRINCIPLE 25

The University must maintain a sense of intellectual and

educational adventure, even in times

of financial

restraint. SFU should remain at the forefront of

universities in the creation

and application of new

technologies for teaching and research,

expending every

effort to preserve the spirit

of innovation in which it

was

founded. It should be responsive

to the growing need for

life-long learning and recurrent education for older and

part-time students. It should

become a university of the

future, not the past.

6

---

23.

.

Elaborations and Implications: PRINCIPLE 25

25.1 The context within which the University operates is changing. If the

University fails to adapt to this changing context it will serve the

society which nurtures it with decreasing effectiveness. But adaptation

does not necessarily imply transformation. It is important to preserve

the essential values and purposes of the university. Developing the

intellect, disseminating and advancing knowledge will continue as in the

past, modified only by changing objects of attention and tools of

inquiry.

25.2 The population is aging. By the end of the decade, those between 35 and

44 will increase in numbers by 30 percent. Society will become

increasingly technological and information-based. Because of these

changes, the resources of the University will be required by individuals

who have life and working styles that will necessitate the delivery of

programs in non-traditional ways. As we move into the next decade,

universities will have less and less of a monopoly on the provision of

sophisticated educational programs. SFU should endeavor to cooperate,

not compete, with institutions that provide alternate learning

opportunities.

25.3 Women constitute a growing proportion of the paid labour force and this

trend will likely continue through this decade. Women, however, do not

• ?

share proportionately in the higher paying occupations. SFU should be

at the forefront in assisting women to improve their educational

qualifications.

25.4 Technology can be used to offer courses or segments of courses either on

or off campus at acceptable levels of quality and to enhance research

programs. The beneficial consequenôes of this in-reducing instructional

and research costs could be substantial. SFU 'should be at the forefront

in developing ways to enhance instruction and research productivity

through technology.

25.5 Recurrent education and educational leave are attracting increased

interest from individuals, organizations, and government. A challenge

to SFU is to ensure that the new/non-traditional students become

scholars as well as course-takers. SFU should establish appropriate

programs for those students. In return, these new students will bring

fresh and worthwhile interests to the university, not the least of these

will be improved opportunities for interaction in research between the

University and the community.

25.6 In responding to needs presented by changes in demography, the workforce

and technology, the University needs to ensure that the traditional and

non-traditional do not come into conflict -- that both work together to

foster teaching and research.

---

APPENDIX

PROGRAM EVALUATION: PACUP PROCEDURES

.

0

---

4 ?

.

.

SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

?

MEMORANDUM

T ?

Deans of Programs, Chairmen, Directi

rs

Fro m

Presidents Advisory Committee

11êdOfP1i f-rhs........................

lit

at Simon Fraser University

Subject......REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

?

February 13,198

As you know, the President has formed an advisory committee ("PACUP") to

draft a statement of purpose for Simon Fraser University and to review its

academic programs and services. The members of PACUP intend to consult widely

within the university community about the academic mission, purposes, goals

and objectives of our university while reviewing its academic programs. We

will need your cooperation and assistance in the program review. Would you,

therefore, consult with members of your department and respond as frankly and

clearly as possible to the attached request for information?

In evaluating programs, we intend to adopt the following procedures:

A ?

Information gathering phase

1.

Solicit qualitative information from program representatives (see

attached request).

2.

Obtain quantitative information about the demand, curriculum efficiency,

and cost of each program from the Office of Analytical Studies.

B ?

Evaluation phase

1.

On the basis of our interpretation of the information obtained from the

Office of Analytical Studies and from program representatives, evaluate

the contributions of each program to Simon Fraser in relation to its

cost.

2.

Send a copy of our first, preliminary evaluation to program

representatives for comment and correction.

C ?

Follow-up phase

1. ?

Read reactions to the preliminary evaluation from program representatives

and, when required or requested, meet with program representatives to

discuss the evaluation.

0

---

I

?

A

-2-

?

0 ?

Final evaluation

?

1. ?

Write final evaluations of programs accompanied by one of the following

recommendations:

a)

That this program be continued at higher levels of activity and

complement.

b)

That this program be continued either at current levels of activity

and increased complement or at lower levels of activity and at

current complement.

C)

?

That this program be continued at current levels of activity and

complement.

d)

That this program be continued at current levels of activity and

complement, but that faculty replacements and visiting and other

temporary appointments be controlled until levels of activity

increase.

e)

That this program be continued, but at lower levels of activity

and/or complement.

f)

That this program be continued, but restructured in some specified

manner.

g)

That this program be considered for discontinuation.

PLEASE NOTE: The President's Advisory Committee on University Priorities

is empowered only to make recommendations to the President. In all cases

where the President considers reducing, reorganizing or discontinuing

programs, members of the affected programs will be fully consulted. In

addition, the discontinuation of programs requires both Senate and Board

approval.

2.

Send copies of the committee's evaluation and recommendations to the

President with a copy to each program representative.

3.

Integrate selected aspects of program evaluations in a final, public

report.

Would you provide Pat McCann, AD 3191, with the information requested in each

of th&ten categories contained in the attached request. We realize that some

dimensions may be largely irrelevant to some programs, and that others may

need to be qualified, redefined or amplified in terms of the particular

program under consideration. It should be clear what we want -- a valid

indication of the functions, costs and benefits of each program. We are

dependin

g

on you to provide that for us in the most representative way

possible. As you can imagine, the task of organizing and interpreting input

from some three dozen programs is demanding. Therefore it is important for us

to receive your responses at the earliest possible date, and in any event not

later than March 12, 1984. Please be concise.

---

PRESIDENT'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON?

UNIVERSITY PRIORITIES

Request for information from Academic Units

In one or two pages please outline the program or programs in your department

(or equivalent unit) . Use a diagram when appropriate.

The information requested below should be supplied in terms of the largest

representative academic units for which you are responsible. In most cases,

the unit will be a department as a whole. However, in some cases it may be

necessary to distinguish between graduate and undergratuate programs; and in

other cases it may be necessary to distinguish between "streams" or areas of

specialization within undergraduate or graduate programs.

A ?

QUALITY

What levels of excellence have been attained within your department

It is notoriously difficult to determine the quality of departments and

programs and to reach verifiable conclusions about excellence. However, you

are in the best position of anyone to do it. Recognizing that different

criteria may apply to different departments, you may wish to address some of

the following indices: the number of eminent scholars (as evidenced by the

number of publications, quality of journals, book reviews, citations, etc.),

honours received by faculty and graduate students, success of graduate and

undergraduate students, research grants, rank of department in discipline,

membership on editorial boards, evaluation panels, and other distinguished

positions, fellowships, scholarships and other awards, creative performances,

invited presentations, etc.

Although scholarly and artistic excellence tend to make a special contribution

to the quality of a department, we are equally interested in the quality of

teaching, service and consulting. if there are any faculty members in your

department whose service to the university through teaching is so exceptional

that it. offsets a less than adequate contribution through scholarship, we

would be interested in hearing about them.

The quality of a department may be diluted by faculty who contribute less than

their share. Do you have any underachieving or unproductive faculty in your

department? If so, how many? What can be done about the problem of

unproductive tenured faculty?

Although general conclusions about quality and excellence are necessarily

subjective, we are interested in specific objective and verifiable, evidence.

If your department has attained excellence in some areas, there must be ways

to document it. Please provide us with the supporting evidence.

1

Note: If the academic unit you represent is not a department please

substitute the appropriate label (e.g. Faculty, program).

---

IVA

B ?

UNIQUENESS

Is your department (or are aspects of it) unique or of specia.l significance in

B.C., Canada, or the world?

1.

Identify characteristics such as distinctive approach, demand, or

especially high quality.

2.

What are the number and location of similar departments or programs

in other Canadian universities?

3.

Are there any demographic, industrial, geographic, or cultural

attributes of the area which make it essential. to maintain your

programs at this univers.ity or which endow them with special

regional significance?

C

?

CONTRIBUTION TO AND FROM OTHER PROGRAMS, AT SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

What contributions does your department make to other academic units at Simon

Fraser University and what contributions does it receive from them?

?

Please

distinguish between contributions made by your department as a whole and

contributions made by faculty as. individuals.

1. ?

What is the nature and extent of the contributions this department

makes to other academic units of Simon Fraser in terms of teaching,

service and research? (For example, cross-appointments, service

teaching, collaborative research, supervision of graduate students,

service.)

2.. ?

What is the nature and extent of the contributions this department

receives from other academic. units at Simon Fraser?

3.

Assess the benefits and. costs to your department from its

associations with other programs at Simon Fraser.

0 ?

CONTRIBUTIONS BEYOND SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

What formal contribution does your department make to. professional bodies,

research centres, other universities, or the community?

1.

Are any programs in your department directly or indirectly

preparatory or integral to a professional qualification or to.

programs. outside of Simon Fraser? What is the nature of this

relationship?

2.

Does your department have a formal relationship with a research

centre, community or government body or similar entity? What is the

nature of this relationship?

0

---

-3-

E ?

DEMAND FOR INSTRUCTION

• What is the extent and nature of student demand for the services of your

department?

1.

The Office of Analytical Studies will be providing us with

statistical material on the extent and nature of student demand for

services in your department (number of declared and intended majors

and minors; number of B.A., M.A., Ph.D degrees awarded, etc.).

Should you wish to review this information, please send a note to

Pat McCann, AD 3191. Please apprise us of any special circumstances

of which we should be aware in interpreting statistical data on the

demand for your programs.

2.

If you limit enrolment in any of the courses in your undergraduate

or graduate program, please estimate, with appropriate

justification, the extent of unrestrained demand. What means do you

use to limit enrolment? How much demand is there for admission to

your graduate program?

3.

Describe in qualitative terms the nature of the demand for

instruction in the undergraduate and graduate programs in your

department (e.g. preparation for employment, general education,

other). If preparation for employment is an important justification

for your program, please comment on the current state of and likely

trends in need for your graduands.

i

s ?

F ?

CURRICULUM EFFICIENCY

How efficiently is the curriculum of your department offered?

1.

The Office of Analytical Studies will be providing us with material

concerning the curriculum of your department (e.g. number of

courses, number of courses offered, class size, program

requirements.) Should you wish to review this information, please

send a note to Pat McCann, AD 3191.

2.

Please describe and explain the patterns of course offerings in your

undergraduate and graduate programs in terms of the curriculum needs

of these programs. Discuss any significant increase or decrease in

your offerings over the past five years.

3.

Does the trimester system, the evening program or the downtown

campus have consequences for the course offerings of your

department? If so, what are the consequences, and how have you

dealt with them?

4.

Which streams within your department could be dropped without major

harm to your overall program? if some streams had to go, which

would be the first?

0

---

-4-

5. ?

Do other academic units at Simon Fraser duplicate parts of your

program offerings? If so, why? What, if anything, should be done

about it?

G ?

COST

What are the costs associated with offering the programs in your department

1.

The Office of Analytical Studies will be providing us with

statistical and financial information relating to the costs of

offering your programs (direct instructional costs, instructional

support, relevant ratios, etc.). Should you wish to review this

information, please send a note to Pat McCann, AD 3191.

2.

If there are unusual or exceptional costs incurred in the offering

of your undergraduate or graduate programs please indicate their

nature and magnitude.

3.

What are your perceptions of the costs of operating the programs in

your department compared to those in other Canadian universities?

H ?

AMENABILITY TO COST REDUCTION

Could the programs in your unit be offered in a less costly manner without a

significant loss to the contributions they make to Simon Fraser?

1.

Could parts of your program be offered by or in cooperation with

other academic units at Simon Fraser? Should they be?

2.

Could your department offer courses or elements of other programs at

Simon Fraser? If so, why hasn't it?

3.

Could the number and frequency of your course offerings be rduced

without major harm to your programs?

4.

Could less expensive instructional methods be adopted with little

harm to your programs?

5.

Are there ways in which economies could be ralized with respect to

your support staff?

6.

Please evaluate the benefits to your programs of our tutorial system.

I ?

DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT

How have the department's decision-making processes contributed to the

effectiveness of the use of its resources?

1. ?

How are teaching credits assigned to faculty for teaching various

courses?

---

-5-

2.

How many courses have been cancelled in your department in the past

•

? two years? What criteria are used for cancelling low enrolment

graduate and undergraduate courses? What happens to faculty members

affected by coursecancellation?

3.

How are faculty assignments among courses and semesters determined?

4.

What criteria are used to assign teaching assistants?

5.

How much of a reduction in teaching load is granted to members of

your department each academic year for administrative

responsibilities in your department or elsewhere in the university?

Please specify.

6.

What criteria are used to establish the frequency of offering of

courses at each level of your undergraduate program? Graduate

program?

7.

Have there been any special circumstances over the past five years

which have affected the ability of this department to manage its

resources effectively. If so, please describe.

J ?

OTHER MATTERS

1. ?

Does your department have a statement of goals and purposes? If so,

please forward it.

S

2. ?

Are there at present any areas in which, relative to others, a

current lack of resources curtails severely your contribution to the

university? Explain, showing how additional resources would

strengthen your contribution.

3. ?

We would appreciate any additional suggestions, comments and ideas

which you think we should consider, whether these relate to your

department, other departments or the university as a whole. To

illustrate: Are the existing faculties and departments aligned in

the most appropriate way? Are there major aspects of the

university's operation which should be reconsidered (trimester,

tutorial system, etc.)? Is our university administered efficiently?

We realise that completing this request for information will involve

considerable time and thought. We assure you that we will treat the

information you provide with due respect.

S

0

?

February 13, 1984

---

.

DISCUSSION PAPER

PRESIDENT'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE?

ON UNIVERSITY PRIORITIES

UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULUM

S

---

SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

?

MEMORANDUM

• ?

To........

?

From ....

.

.

!..'.Ady.1pry.Committe.

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

?

onUnirsiyPriritie.

Subject... ?

9duate• .cur

.ricuu

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

Date

..............•

1984

During our deliberations it became increasingly obvious to us that the

undergraduate curriculum had become large and complex, was difficult to

manage, was costly to administer and offer, and was creating accessibility

problems for students.

Accordingly, and in an effort to give greater tangibility to our general

concerns, we produced the attached "PACUP Working Paper on Undergraduate

Curriculum." The working paper has four sections:

Introduction -- This section makes the point that we have developed a

very complex curriculum and, simultaneously, a complex way of

offering it. In our view this is a mismatch which yields unfortunate

consequences.

II - Some Random Observations -- This is a listing of 17 observations or.

is

?

"facts" which illustrate a variety of problems with the current

curriculum. The listing is far from exhaustive.

III - Some Assumptions -- This listing of 6 assumptions suggests a point of

view or a potential consensus against which curriculum reform could

proceed. Again, it is suggestive rather than exhaustive.

IV - Some Principles Relating to Undergraduate Degree Structure -- This

listing of 13 principles is an attempt

,

to set forth some working

"rules" which, if broadly agreed to within the university, would

guide the process of curriculum review and reform within the various

programs. Up to this point, departments have been free to set

requirements subject to only the most general university-wide

requirements. We believe that this largely unfettered freedom has

led to great unevenness in requirements, program to program, and, in

some cases, to programs that are overly complex, specialized and

extensive. It should be borne in mind that the University awards the

degree.

In brief, then, the PACUP Working Paper is not a blueprint for reforming

the curriculum. Rather, it is a starting point for preparing the needed

blueprint and, as such, might be useful to the expert committee on curriculum

reform which we recommended elsewhere.

• ?

...

---

.-•.- ... 2

Some Additional Comments

1. Cost Implications - In our discussions with Deans and Chairs we have

encountered sorneskepticism concerning the beneficial effects on

instructional costs of curriculum simplification. We find this

difficult to understand given the inevitability of the increasing

numbers of low enrolment classes which result when more and more courses

are offered to the same number of students, and given the simple fact

that the more courses that are Offered, the more instructors are needed.

A precise estimate of cost savings could probably be obtained through a

computer simulation of curriculum simplification. This might be worth

attempting. But the point could be made by considering the following

simple illustration concerning the fictional Departments A and B.

1.

Both departments offer one-half their lower division curriculum each

fall and the other half each spring.

2.

Both departments offer their programs in the evening and cycle the

required lower division required courses Over a two-year period.

3.

Both departments offer their programs downtown and cycle the required

lower division required courses over a three-year period.

4.

Department A has 4 lower division required courses and Department B,

6 lower division courses.

5.

Over the 3 year period, Department A must offer 22 lower division

courses and Department B, 33 courses. Thus, instructional costs in B

are 50% higher than A.

2. Management Implications -- Several Department Chairs have mentioned the

difficulty they were experiencing in arranging teaching schedules for

department members. Varying patterns Of research semesters and

sabbaticals, the need to provide required courses on a predictable basis

semester by semester, day, evening, and off-campus all combine to create

formidable management problems. The response by some Chairs has been to

place heavy reliance on sessional instructors and to request additional

faculty.

The foregoing problems afflict fictional Department X. Its staffing

problems would be eased or eliminated if curriculum changes were made:

1. This is a mid-sized department with 14 members. It lists in the

calendar 15 lower division courses and 60 upper division courses

(plus graduate courses). Department X requires 18 semester hours of

lower division coursework (6 courses). It offers 4 "streams" or

emphases and requires Majors to take electives from all streams at

both lower division and upper division. At the 1984 convocation, 30

students graduated with a Major in "X."

.

3

---

.3

2. Department X should make most or all of the following changes in its

undergraduate curriculum:

2.1 Reduce its lower division requirements from 18 to 12 semester

hours.

2.2 Either increase the number of courses specified for intending

majors in the lower division or reduce the number of electives.

2.3 Defer specialization in the four streams until the third year.

2.4 Specify one or more courses to be required of all majors in the

upper division.

2.5 Reduce the number of streams.

Concluding Comment

It is our firm belief that reform of the undergraduate curriculum will

have beneficial consequences: instructional costs will be reduced, scheduling

problems will be eased for departments, and students should find it easier to

obtain the courses they need. In addition, if the process of curriculum

reform is carefully planned and well executed the quality of our undergraduate

degrees should be improved.

U

:1

---

DISCUSSION PAPER

• ?

PACUP WORKING PAPER -- UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULUM

I. Introduction

In an earlier day, the offering of the curriculum of a given department

was a fairly simple matter. A group of students would enter from high school

each September, would stay for eight months, would work or travel during the

summer, and would repeat the process three more times, emerging with a B.A. or

B.Sc. four years after entry. The department would offer courses at

predictable intervals to fairly predictable numbers of students who had fairly

uniform patterns of prior experience.

Consider SFU today. Only 27% of our students enter directly from high

school. More of them transfer from B.C. colleges bringing course credits with

them. Still others enter as mature students or as transfers from other

universities. And although most newly admitted students still register in

September of a given year, numbers of them commence their studies in January

or May or July.

Having gained entry, the student is not required to follow any particular

pattern of semester registration. He/she can study this semester, work the

next, or study for three semesters in a row and travel the next two. The

patterns of registration are virtually infinite.

Further, the student is permitted to take a full or partial study load

• ?

(the average semester credit hour load is 10) and he/she can undertake studies

in the daytime or evening, either on-campus or off-campus, or in any

combination of these.

This extremely flexible system has great advantages for students. They

need not take their degree exclusively at this institution. They need not

commit themselves to full-time study but, if they do, they need not commit

their resources for more than four months. And to some extent, given the

availability of courses, they need not commit themselves to day-time study.

The arrangement also has advantages for SFU. We can be seen as an

accessible, humane institution which has removed arbitrary barriers to

learning. However, in comparison with, say, UBC we must make elaborate and

costly administrative provision for several registrations, timetablings, room

assignments, exam schedulings, etc. per year. Further, again in comparison

with UBC the relative homogeneity of student groups (Freshmen, Sophomore,

etc.) simply does not exist at SFU. This, of course, removes from the

students a certain sense of community ("the class of

1

84") but more important,

it means that the cycling of course offerings is much more complex than UBC's

where students move as relatively homogeneous groups through sucessive 8-month

years of study.

In a word, then, SFU has chosen to make itself readily accessible to

qualified students who wish to be admitted and to this end has put in place

the necessary broad organizational and administrative arrangements. But if

SFU permits flexible means, patterns, times and locations for student

1.

---

2.

enrolment and study it has made an implicit commitment to offer its curriculum

in a similarly flexible manner so that students can get what they need, when

and where they need it. Otherwise, flexible admission arrangements become an

empty gesture. How flexible is the offering of our curriculum?

The University of Pittsburg faced this problem in the

1

60s. In the

interests of improving its accessibility to students, it established a

trimester system. In order to make its curriculum accessible year-round, it

offered all or most of its courses every semester. As a consequence, classes

were uneconomically small and staffing levels uneconomically high. The

university came close to bankruptcy by using this means of attempting to match

enrolment flexibility with curricular flexibility. We do not know whether

anyone thought of reducing the number of courses in the curriculum. Had this

been done, class size would have increased and staffing levels would have

decreased.

SFU has avoided much of the Pittsburg error and instead has employed a

mixture of procedures in an attempt to make its curriculum reasonably

accessible at less than excessive cost. First, high need courses (not

necessarily high enrolment courses) are offered several times a year. Second,

course offerings are made known in advance so that students can plan ahead.

Third, course-equivalent transfer credit is awarded fairly liberally for

foundational studies undertaken elsewhere. This relieves students of the need

to make up lower division requirements at the same time they are embarking on

more specialized studies. Fourth, many departments and professors waive

prerequisite requirements in individual cases in order to accommodate a

student's need for agiven course.

There are clear signs, however, that our attempts to make the curriculum

accessible are not working well. For example, only about 58% of students

received all their first course choices in semester 84-1. This, of course,

resulted from limitations on class size. In addition, course time-conflicts,

determined from reading the Course Guide, denied students the opportunity of

even requesting certain required or desired courses. Obviously the

probability of time conflict increases as more courses are offered at the same

time. The extent of this problem is difficult to determine but conversations

with students suggest it is substantial. A further indication of its extent

can be implied from the fact that three-quarters of B.A.'s and B.Sc.'s

graduate with more than the specified required hours. Presumably this is

because, in some cases, students take additional options when required courses

are 'unavailable.

At the same time that we impose enrolment limitations on certain courses

we permit substantial numbers of low enrolment courses to be offered.

Approximately 28% of undergraduate courses had enrolments of 10 or fewer

students (Fact Book 1982-3). Some would argue the pedagogical virtues of

small classes. But their number, particularly in view of course space

shortages elsewhere, is likely less a product of conscious choice than it is a

simple matter of too few students chasing too many courses and too many

courses, required or optional, being offered too frequently.

Given the foregoing there is a reasonable basis for supporting two

contentions. Our curriculum is less accessible to students than it needs to

be. And our curriculum is being offered in a costly manner.

---

3.

The matter of

face of it, not to

students gaining access to the curriculum appears, on the

be

.

number of courses

a problem. ?

After all, the calendar lists an immense

in total and every department has significant numbers of

when

student

courses.

one

?

choice

views

However,

itis

through

severely

the seemingly

the

constrained

eyes

vast

and

array

by

experience

the

of

following

options

of a

proves

student.factors,

to

?

some

be

In

illusory

fact,

of which

operate singly, some in combination.

Constraint #1 -

Only some of the array of courses are offered in the given

semester.

Constraint #2 -

Only some of the courses offered are in the student's area

of interest.

Constraint #3 -

Only some of the courses offered which are in the

student's area of interest are at the required level

(upper division, ?

lower division).

Constraint #4 -

Some of the courses the student would like to take in

other departments he is unable to because of the numbers

of courses his department requires.

Constraint #5 -

Some of the courses the student would like to take he is

unable to because of the numbers of courses his department

requires to satisfy "stream" or "group" requirements.

Assuming now that the student's course selection exercise has survived

these first five constraints, he is now faced by the following.

Constraint #6 -

The course he desires is in time conflict with another he

desires.

Constraint

#7 -

The course he desires is closed to him by reason of

enrolment limitations.

Constraint #8 -

The course he desires has a prerequisite which he has not

satisfied ?

(or been able to satisfy).

Constraint #9 -

The course he desires has a corequisite which he has not

yet taken and is not being offered.

Constraint #10 -

The course he desires is offered at an inconvenient

location (downtown or on-campus).

Constraint #11 -

The course he desires has been cancelled unexpectedly

because the professor is unavailable.

Constraint #12 -

The course he desires has been cancelled because of low

enrolment.

Given this listing (probably incomplete) it is relatively easy to

understand why such

a high proportion of students are unable to obtain entry

to the courses they

choose. ?

The apparent breadth of choice and ease of access

are illusory, to some extent at least.

---

4.

It should not be. inferred that all the constraints are illogical or

irrational. Not all courses can be offered every semester. Some

prerequisites and corequisites are educationally defensible. Some instances

of class-size limitation are necessary. Some reasonable numbers of lower

division courses are needed to provide a foundation for upper division

study. And, in any case, given the virtually infinite possibilities in

course-choice combinations, it is impossible to eliminate all course selection

problems for students.

Nevertheless, the fact remains the we simultaneously have a surplus and a

shortage of class spaces. This is costly to students in lost access. And it

is costly to the university

in

low resource utilization. Its causes are

complex and multiple. But one avenue to solution is in the removal or

softening of the 12 constraints. Our report would be incomplete if we failed

to address this matter in a vigorous and specific manner.

II.. Some Random Observations Regarding SFU's Undergraduate Curriculum

1.. Departments report difficulties in managing the offering of their

curriculum.

2. Students report difficulties in gaining access to elements of desired

programs.

3.. Students who complete lower division requirements in a given discipline

are sometimes unable to gain entry to the major in that discipline. They

are dead-ended.

4.

Lower division requirements show considerable variation across the

university; there is often considerable variation between similar

disciplines.

5.

Lower division requirements in certain.disciplines at SFU differ

substantially from those of the same disciplines elsewhere in B.C.

6.

Some departments commence specialization in the lower division; others do

not.

7.

The structure of majors differs widely department to department. (Some

permit wide election, others have independent streams, still others have

core requirements plus either electives or streams.)

8.

Prerequisites and corequisites at times are precise and have face

validity;

in

other cases they are so broad as to lack utility.

9.

Honours programs are typically undersubscribed; some differ only

quantitatively from the major.

10.

Breadth (Group) requirements are so general as to be little more than an

ddministrative hurdle.

11.

the locus of decision-making in degree structure as well as content is

mainly in departments; Senate's role is mainly reactive. Overall,

principles which transcend departmental wishes are largely absent.

---

I ?

I

5.

12.

The B.G.S. is so underdefined that in different hands it can be

simultaneously well-structured, or very concentrated, or very superficial.

13.

Students entering the same major frequently have differing subject matter

preparation. This causes problems for students and professors.

14.

In certain disciplines, community colleges do not offer courses needed to

enter the upper division at SFU.

15.

Except in the sciences, lower division requirements (as distinct from

suggested electives) seldom require specific courses outside the given

discipline.

16.

Extensive lower division and upper division requirements make the offering

of evening and off-campus degree completion programs more complex and

expensive than would be the case if requirements were less extensive.

17.

Numbers of students (perhaps three-quarters) take significantly more than

the minimum semester hour requirement for degree completion.

III. Some Assumptions Governing An Approach to Curriculum Reform

1.

Current degree requirements are more numerous and extensive than they need

be. A reduction in and a simplification of requirements would reduce

costs and administrative complexity. it would also improve the

accessibility of the curriculum to students. It need have no adverse

educational consequences.

2.

We do not have the luxury of starting afresh in curriculum building.

3.

It is possible to state principles which will gain support from our

community and which show promise of improving the quality and cost

effectiveness of our undergraduate programs.

4.

The principles and proposals should have the twin virtues of sound

academic practice and common sense. They need not rely heavily on

ideological and philosophical argumentation.

5.

The principles and proposals should fit existing structures (trimester,

tutorial system, space, access) and should, in sum, recognize the

university's ability to pay.

6.

The principles and proposals should be capable of implementation without

administrative convulsion or the addition of further complexity.

IV. Some Principles Relating to Undergraduate Degree Structure.

1. The content and experience of a degree are more important than its

structure. All things being equal, form should follow function.

Nevertheless, function can be enhanced by appropriate structures and

inappropriate structures can inhibit and distort function. Thus, a degree

---

6.

structure, when devised in such a way as to reflect academic intent, will

support and enhance academic intent.

2.

For the majority of students, the Bachelor's degree will be the highest

'degree obtained. Its attainment should indicate that the student has had

broad but meaningful contact with a range of human knowledge and more

intense contact with one or two areas. In addition, the student will have

developed habits of thought, inquiry and expression generally regarded to

be the hallmarks of the educated person.

3.

For a significant minority of students, the Bachelor's degree will provide

entry to post graduate study. They will have obtained the same things

from

,

their studies that have been obtained by those not proposing to

continue formal study. But in addition, they will have demonstrated

through superior achievement an ability and an interest in further study.

4.

Since students cannot always foresee future interests and possibilities,

the Bachelor's degree, except perhaps in its late stages, should not

attempt to differentiate between those for whom the degree will provide

entry to graduate or post-baccalaureate professional study.

5.

Though the degree should be viewed in its entirety there is some

usefulness in distinguishing between the purposes of the first two years

(lower division) and those of the final two years (upper division), with

the former being preparation for specialization (among other things) and

the latter being engagement in specialization.

6.

Lower division studies, at a minimum, should permit the following:

6.1 The inculcation of attitude and values such as a respect for truth

and an openness to new ideas.

6.2 Training in the methods of advancing knowledge (research design,?

statistical inference, critical thinking, logical inference,

theoretical synthesis, problem solving, decision-making, creative

thinking).

6.3 Training in methods of communication, especially reading and writing.

6.4 Training in the understanding and manipulation of numbers (basic

mathematics, computer skills).

6.5 Acquaintance with the major themes and styles of inquiry of several

disciplines including at least one of the sciences, the social

sciences, and the humanities.

6.6 Preparation in the subject matter of one or, desirably, two

disciplines sufficient to engage in more specialized studies of the

disciplines at the upper division.

7.

It is desireable and useful for all students entering a given Major to

have similar academic preparation. Students entering the Minor should

have similar preparation to those entering the Major because they will be

taking the same (though fewer) courses than Major students.

---

7.

p

8. A clearer and simpler specification

be helpful to both the significant

wish to transfer to SFU and to the

offer functional transfer programs.

of lower division requirements would

numbers of college students who may

colleges themselves who must devise and

9.

The consequences of the foregoing for the lower division curriculum of

individual departments are the following:

9.1 The recognition that requirements for entering the Major should not?

be so extensive as to crowd out the other purposes noted above.

9.2 The recognition that lower division course offerings should meet the

academic needs both of students who will later enter the department's

Major and those who will not.

9.3 The recognition that the offering of specialized courses should be

eschewed in favour of courses which engage the student in the major

themes and styles of inquiry of the discipline, and (desireably)

encourage the acquisition of foundational skills of thinking, inquiry

and expression.

9.4 The recognition that the requirements of departments with quotas or

enrolment restrictions at the upper division should be modest at

most.

10.

Current upper division requirements for the Major (or Minor), department

by department, are generally similar in extent but different in pattern,

with some departments permitting a wide latitude of choice, others

permitting the choice of one stream (to the exclusion of others), and

others specifying a core and then permitting the choice of electives

and/or streams. Though identical programs for all Major (or Minor)

students in a given discipline may not be desireable, neither is it

desireable for Major (or Minor) programs in the same discipline to be so

idiosyncratic that graduates of the department have no disciplinary

language in common.

11.

Thus, it is desireable that both Majors and Minors have a common upper

division requirement. This requirement, perhaps even a single course,

should stress, at an advanced level, the major themes and styles of

inquiry of the discipline.

12.

The Honours degree, as it is presently constituted-in many programs tends

to be more different quantitatively from the Major than it is different

qualitatively. It is desireable that mere quantitative differences be

reduced and qualitative differences increased. Means such as admission by

invitation, student attendance at faculty colloquia, student involvement

with faculty research, etc. would help to realize the point. A graduating

essay or project might further emphasize the qualitative difference and,

perhaps, would be the sole quantitative difference from the Major. Not

all departments need offer an Honours program.

0

---

8.

13. Except in the Sciences, most departments make slight call on the offerings

of other departments except to suggest electives. Where appropriate, and

without increasing intra-departmental requirements, departments should use

courses from other departments to satisfy their own requirements.

Interchangeable cross-listings are a potentially useful device in this

regard. In highly specialized or derived programs, the lower division

requirements of a core discipline might provide appropriate preparation

for undertaking the Major.

I

0

---

0

fl

DISCUSSION PAPER

PRESIDENT'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE?

ON UNIVERSITY PRIORITIES

UNIVERSITY MANAGEMENT

is

---

[IJ

.

DISCUSSION PAPER

?

UNIVERSITY MANAGEMENT*

It is hardly necessary to state that Simon Fraser

University is under unprecedented pressure. It will become

increasingly difficult to maintain academic quality and launch

new programs. If we are to maintain the spirit of innovation

that has characterized sru, we will have to find ways to

harness our resources more effectively and to obtain new

resources.

This Committee received a great deal of input about the

management of the University. The following points were

frequently noted:

-the university is ove.radministered and underiaanaged

-unimportant matters take up too much committee time

-decisions are reviewed at too many levels

-there is too little consultation on major decisions

-the size of committees obstructs effective decision making

-departments have too little autonomy

Although most of these criticisms can be levied against

the administration of any university, they may be more

applicable at SFU because of its early history. The past is

now far enough behind to be put aside. Indeed, we must put it

aside. Our ability to weather the current constraints, to

build on our strengths and to foster new ones depends in part

on our ability to find better ways to manage our affairs.

It is clear that there is no single panacea which will

simplify bureaucracy and foster more effective administration.

However, certain principles can make a beginning in this

direction. Important among these principles are the following:

i)

the use of an effective incentive system

ii)

decentralization whenever possible

iii)

the review of performance rather than decisions.

Incentives

Any structure of governance creates its own set of formal

and informal incentives. With regard to SFU, for example, one

might ask the following types of questions: What financial

incentives are there for faculty to be productive? If few

faculty are denied merit increases, and if many of our most

productive faculty are in the range. of half-steps, where are

the financial incentives to increase or maintain productivity?

*Note: This is a preliminary draft.

0

---

-2- ?

.

What incentives are there for departments to use resources

efficiently? Do departments themselves benefit from the

elimination of waste and inefficiency? What incentives are

there to use services such as the Instructional Media Centre

and the Computing Center efficiently?

An essential element of any incentive system must be the

ability to discriminate between individuals whose performance

is superior and those whose performance is not. Consider

salary increments for example. As much as possible, merit

increments should distinguish between individuals who differ in

merit. Given a fixed sum for salaries,, this means that

individuals whose performance is mediocre will receive less and

individuals whose performance is above average or exceptional

will receive more. Policies that (a) enable the Deans to allot

a larger or smaller merit increment to departments on the basis

of confirmed judgements of their quality and productivity and

(b) enable Chairs to reward productive faculty, even if at

expense of those who are less productive, should be explored.

Some will object to-these proposals because they' imply an

enhancement of the discretionary powers of Deans and

departmental Chairs. This Committee believes that Deans and

department Chairs should have more discretionary power than

they do at present, subject to proper ch'ecks on their

performance, both by' those below and above them in the

administrative hierarchy.. Counteracting the potential problems

associated with increased discretionary power are three

considerations. First, faculty may well take more seriously

the types of people they choose as Deans and Chairs. Second,

such discretionary powers should be accompanied by effective

appeal procedures. Finally, the performance of Deans and

Chairs should be reviewed regularly.

In addition to salary, there are other areas in which the

University should differentiate between more productive and

less productive faculty. Sabbatical leaves give scholars an

opportunity to use an uninterrupted stretch of time for the

development of their research and scholarship. Such leaves

seem inappropriate for faculty who do not conduct research or

make scholarly contributions. The University should review.the

research plans of sabbaticants in more than a perfunctory way

and obtain evidence that their sabbaticals will be productive

before granting sabbatical leaves.

The University should be more active in rewarding

productive scholars and outstanding teachers. Release time may

enhance productivity at critical times in the careers of good

scholars and teachers. In addition, 'the University could

foster scholarship and outstanding teaching in other ways, such

as the temporary provision of secretarial or research

---

-.3-

assistance. In all these cases the prime criterion should be

the potential for scholarly productivity and excellence in

teaching rather than the desire to treat all departments or

faculties equally.

There is one caveat; that should be made. Units or

individuals without a proven scholarly performance may come up

with promising initiatives. In these instances, the university

may wish to provide seed money to such initiatives.

In concluding, it should be said that many incentives are

informal and cannot be captured in any university policy as

such. Initiatives such as the recent reception and

certificates for faculty participating in the Speakers' Bureau

and the award for outstanding teaching are good examples of

informal incentives. Another example might involve the

establishment of a series of President's Lectures in which

faculty who have gained external recognition would give a

public talk on campus to convey the nature of the contribution.

Decentralization

Some decisions must be made at the highest level of

university governance, especially those that determine overall

university policy arid those that direct the distribution of

resources among the major components of the university.

However, unnecessary centralization of other decisions may be

problematic for at least three reasons: (1) it causes decision

makers to be diverted from their major responsibilities, (2) it

cultivates a lack of responsibility at other levels and

(3)

it

encourages decisions to be made by individuals who are not the

best informed. Every decision maker or decision making body

should ask "Could this decision be made at an earlier stage?"

In part, excessive centralization of decision making may

be the result of lack of clarity with respect to role.

Consider Senate for example. The central concern of Senate

should be to establish policy, not to implement it. For

example, Senate should set the framework in which departments

and faculties develop curricula and in which new programs are

approved. Such a framework would make it easier to determine

whether proposals are consistent with the intent of Senate.

Lack of this framework forces Senate into the detailed and ad

hoc review of specific proposals, and diverts it from examining

proposals in the context of the University as a whole.

Another example relates to the way in which new programs

are approved. At present, a large number of programs have been

approved in principle or are scheduled for consideration. Many

of them claim that they will not cost the University any more

money. No one has examined the implications, either budgetary

a

---

-4-

?

fl"

or for the identity of the University, of approving these

programs en bloc.. Senate, or perhaps first SCAR, should.

Principles must be developed that both encourage the

development of innovative programs and control the tendency to

approve all programs that are proposed. Perhaps, for example,

Senate should ensure that the resources for all new programs

are obtained either from external sources or that the existing

areas that will be cut, shrunk, restructured or discontinued to

provide them are identified. It is not enough to affirm that

programs are worthy of support, they must be more worthy of

support than the programs from which resources are diverted..

Reviewing Performance

Two contrasting approaches to university governance can be

characterized as review of performance and review of

decisions. The former requires the formulation of objectives,

whether formally or informally, the granting of discretion for

decision-making, and the subsequent periodic review of

performance. In contrast, review of decisions requires

systematic review of all decisions by bodies or persons at

other levels of the university structure.. This Committee

endorses the review of performance, from both above and below.

All units of the University, including Administrative

units, should draw up a formal statement of their objectives

for the next year and, perhaps for the next five years.

Appropriate .bodies should evaluate these statements and make

decisions about the allotment of whatever resources are needed

to obtain them,. At the end of a specified period, the units

'should be evaluated in terms of their objectives. Resources

(incentives) should be contingent on fulfillment of objectives.

As should be apparent, this Committee believes that

departments should be given greater responsibility for a

broader range of decisions than they are at present. Deans, as

a consequence, should be involved not in the review of these

decisions on an individual basis but rather on the outcome of

these decisions in aggregate. Deans and Vice-Presidents would

become to a greater degree appraisers and evaluators and, to a

lesser degree, decisions-makers.

9/13/84

WANG

PACUP

8OlC

ffm

---

.

DISCUSSION PAPER

PRESIDENT'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE

.

?

ON UNIVERSITY PRIORITIES

I H E

?

S EN S E

?

O.F ?

C 0 M M U N I I Y

0

---

DISCUSSION PAPER:

THE SENSE OF COMMUNITY

Some sense of Community undeniably exists at Simon Fraser

University. Some sections of the university also evidently

feel it more than others. The feeling of common membership

in/or sympathy for an endeavour of merit has inspired indiv-

iduals among students, faculty, staff, alumni and even the wider

public, to reflect positively on the university and, from time

to time, to intervene actively on its behalf. Many submissions

to PACUP have commented on the importance and the possible

mechanisms for generating such loyalty. The following memo

takes up some of these suggestions.

Much sympathy is generated by observation of or particip-

ation in only

'

a small part of the university. Good will inspired

by particulars -- a helpful lecturer, stimulating colleagues,

employer encouragement or a helpful public relations officer --

• ?

can develop to embrace the university as a whole. Indeed,

perhaps the emergence of a strong sense of community feeling

owes most to the accumulation of a host of small events and

incidents -- and the absence of recurring aggravations and

omissions.

For students the classroom at its be ;t introduces them to

a world of scholarly enquiry and excitem

r

nt. Their identific-

ation with SFU begins with actual experince of instructors'

concern and attention to the major task at hand. Good teachers

create loyal students and loyal alumni. Associations with other

students through the student society, clubs, recreation, etc.

also foster critical ties and relationships. Flourishing

student organizations are a good index 'of the commitment made

to the university. Like good teaching they should be encouraged.

S

...2

---

-2-

The rewards of the classroom are also essential in foster-

I

ing commitment by faculty.

?

Just as critical is an active

community of colleagues.

?

Mutual sympathy and support can be

encouraged within and across department and faculties.

?

The

Distinguished Visitor Programs like departmental colloquia

are valuable reminders of the common exercise.

?

Extra-departmental

groupings such as the Faculty Association or membership in the

University Club may also generate enthusiasm.

?

Introduction to

the concerns of faculty in other disciplines and faculties also

seems a good way to sensitize everyone to the variety of forms

in which talent, energy and dedication may be expressed.

Ignorance of matters outside one's own field of reference often

lies at the base of lack of appreciation of SFU.

?

SFU

WEEK,

has

been extremely valuable in offsetting isolation and introducing

readers to the range of talent available at the university.

Mechanisms to encourage collegiality constitute an essential

step toward sponsoring a strong sense of community among,

faculty members.

Staff people are frequently the critical contacts with the

university for students, faculty and the public at large. Their

sense of commitment to and appreciation by the university

colors views about the merits of the collective endeavour. Go.d

working envi :onments and positive labour-management relations

go a long

WEJ

toward furthering loyalties whose benefits to

the univers ty may be returned many times and in many forms

c

ver

the years.

The day-by-day accumulation of positive observations and

experience -- gathered from student daughters and sons, from

relaxed tours of campus, from the opportunity to hear SFU speakers

on the radio, television and in person, or from a helpful

referral or consultation by telephone -- nourish sympathetic

attention from the public. Outreach efforts such as the

University Speakers' Service marshall SFU's resources to useful

effect. Favorable impressions bring their special harvest of

...3

---

-3-

taxpayers' support, new students and future bequests.

On many occasions these groups and the individuals within

them act as disparate even discordant elements, sharing or

communicating little of their own experience of

SFU.

There are

occasions, events and locations, however, which offer opportun-

ities to experience and affirm a common connection. At present

the pub, the University Club, the Women's Centre, the Theatre,

and Art Gallery, the archaelogy museum, fitness classes, athletic

events, the daycare centre, the cafeterias and the residences

provide the major, and unfortunately the all too rare

opportunities, for interaction across

SFU's

diverse constituencies.

They offer concrete reminders in the form of service, entertain-

ment, assistance and information of reasons to come and to remain

on Burnaby Mountain. Such affirmations of a collective identity

beyond the formal contacts of classroom and office ought to be

systematically encouraged, all the more so since inducements,

common to many universities, in the form of easy physical access,

residences, comfortable lounges, coffeehouses and study areas

are so notably absent. More than offsetting the costs of SFU's

present commitments is the fact that sponsored centres, classes,

events and other services help to fill in, albeit inadequately, for a

whole host of options which students, staff, faculty and the

general public ma discover at older and richer institutions. it

is important that in the pressure to have costs retrieved, that

SFU

not force thL few situations in which community solidarity is

actually fostered to become so expensive to the individual user

as to jeopardize their survival.

Reiterating briefly, it is essential to maintain and, if

at all possible, improve

SFtJ's

commitment to:

1. high standards of teaching

---

-4-

2.

active student associations

3.

faculty colloquia and scholarly communication

4.

good labour-management practices

5.

an active program of community relations

6.

existing community resources.

• Such a commitment is not, however, sufficient. Indeed,

it often appears terribly inadequate to those familiar with

other universities. To meet the challenge of this invidious

comparison and to ensure the greatest possible degree of commit-

ment SFU should design a long term plan to augment its presently

rather meagre incentives to community. This should include not

only adding to the resources already in place but, inter alia,

in the area of

1.

Transportation

Bringing to SFU a rapid public transportation system with

regular connections to city suburbs and the valley. The

present large scale dependence on cars with all the costs

in deterrents to possible students and in the provision of

parking by the university, ought not to be regarded as

ideal.

2. Physical Plant

a.

Enlarging the presently inadequate residences to aim

for accommodation for perhaps 10% of the student pop-

uLation, with particular attention to the needs of

students with children. Preferably additions to the

present stock of housing could take the form of a

university village with accommodation available to

certain numbers of staff and faculty. The potential

for faculty serving as dons within the student

residences should also be explored as one mechanism

for integrating scholarly and residential concerns.

b.

Supporting proposals for the creation of a substantial

student centre on campus.

c.

Providing for the establishment of comfortable and

accessible study and informal discussion space both

in the library and elsewhere. In principle much of

this could be decentralized to offer students

opportunities for study and conversation near to the

---

-5-

office of their own department or program. Each of

these should have space assigned for a student common

room.

d. Special space and resources should be allocated to

graduate students.

3. General Community Enhancement

a.

Giving consideration to establishing a highly visible

President's Honor Roll with a special dinner or some

other form of public recognition of achievement.

b.

Focusing the attention of SFU WEEK on one section of

the university each week.

C.

Cooperating with the Faculty Association, APSA and

AUCE to sponsor special seminars and colloquia exploring

the role and concerns of members.

d.

Exploring possibilities for the donation of furniture

and trappings for student areas.

e.

Organizing departments and programmes during the period

of pre-registration to offer 'flagship' introductory

lectures to their subject to which the university

community and the public could be invited. Plan the

• ?

Open House to coincide with these lectures and pre-

Registration.

f.

Inviting the municipal councils of the surrounding area

to convene their meetings or public events occasionally

on Burnaby Mountain. ? -

g.

Urging faculty in departments and programs to invite

their ;ounterparts in local junior colleges and high

schoos up for a set of seminars and discussions about

subject area.

One last point. During their deliberations, the

members of PACUP have been struck not only by the fragility

of the existing sense of community but by the possible

limitations in the cultivation of this sense associated with

DISC and the Downtown campus. The benefits of the alternatives

in terms of enhanced accessibility are clear. However, students

who avail themselves of them may well not develop the same

sort of identification with SFU as on-campus students. Moreover,

faculty and staff who teach these courses may not maintain the

type of presence on the main campus that fosters a sense of

community, both in them and in students.