Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39

SENATE. 

AS AMENDED AT SENATE 

16/5/83

.ENATE COMMITTEE ON ACADEMIC PLANNING. 

Subject....

.

'P.

.PP9

...ATELLITE CAMPUS. 

.S

?

Date......

The proposal for a Simon Fraser University Downtown Satellite 

Campus was considered by the Senate Committee on Academic Planning at its 

meeting of April 

13, 1983.

The following motion was approved: 

"That Senate approve in principle that Simon 

Fraser University establish a satellite campus 

in downtown Vancouver" 

The SFU/Downtown Planning Committee, who prepared the proposal, presented 

the following rationale in support: 

1.

There is significant demand for university level education in downtown 

Vancouver for both degree-oriented and career-related programs. 

2.

The education needs in the urban downtown core are such that one of the 

universities in the province will, at some time, act to meet them. 

•

?

Simon Fraser University should be the university which acts to meet this 

demand. We have demonstrated that we are interested in serving this area 

and that we have the curriculum development capacity to meet the downtown 

educational needs. 

3.

Approval in prinóiple for establishing a downtown satellite campus will 

enable Simon Fraser University to set an agreed-upon goal, to inform 

others of our objective, and to plan towards that end. 

There was unanimous recognition by SCAP that a downtown satellite campus 

would not be established until such time as additional funding is made available. 

MOTION: "That Senate approve in principle the establishment of 

a Simon Fraser University satellite campus in downtown 

Vancouver It is understood that recommendation for the 

establishment of such a campus would not be made until 

sufficient designated and private funding is made available." 

Note: It is intended that a standing committee of SCAP will be established 

subject to the approval of the above motion by Senate, to oversee 

and guide planning for a satellite campus. 

- ?

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

J ?

MEMORANDUM

Dr.

Munro, Chairman? 

To

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

S.C.A.P. 

rs.... 

UNIVERSITY DOWNTOWN SATELLITE CAMPUS 

scftP ?-5' 

R.C. Brown, Chairman 

From

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

SFU/Downtown Planning Committee 

Date

.............April 

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

?

7, ? 

1983

Attached is the report of the SFU/Downtown Planning 

Committee. The Committee fully endorses the body of 

the report, but I want to state explicitly that not 

all of. the appendices were prepared by the Committee 

and that some members are not in agreement with every- 

thing contained therein. Naturally, I will be available 

to discuss the report with the Senate Committee. 

R. C. Brown 

RCB/bjr 

Attach. 

cc. SFU/Downtown 

Committee members 

A PROPOSAL FOR A SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY 

DOWNTOWN SATELLITE CAMPUS 

A Report to the Senate Committee 

on Academic Planning 

?

Submitted by: 

the:,SFU/ Down town Planning Committee 

'R.C. Brown, Chairman 

March 31, 1983 

?

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Report of the SFU/Downtown Planning Committee 

to the 

?

Senate ? 

Committee on Academic Planning 

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

1

Appendix ? 

A: ? 

The ? 

SFU/Downtown 

?

Council 

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

6

Appendix B: 

?

Background: ? 

The SFU/Downtown 

Program ? 

1980-82 

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

9

• Table 1: 

?

•

SFU/Domtown Enrolment History 

80-1to 82-3 by Faculty and 

Department.. 

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

13

* sable 2: 

?

SF13/Downtown Enrolment History 

80-1 to 82-3 by Program 

Development ? 

Concentrations 

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

20

*

?

Table 3: 

?

Selected Student Profile 

Statistics 

?

(%)

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

27

Appendix C: 

?

Ministry of Education Downtown 

• ? 

Education ? 

Centre Study 

?

Executive Summary 

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

14

AppendixD: 

?

Rationale ? 

for a Downtown University 

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

42

Appendix E: 

?

A Downtown Satellite Campus: Planning 

andProgram ? 

Options 

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

48

Appendix F: ? 

Three Models of Downtown Program 

Development 

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

54

•

?

* Statistical Data deleted on Senate distribution pages 13-33                  

•

inclusive. 

?

This may be seen at Secretariat Services if 

• ? required. 

REPORT OF THE SFU/DOWNTOWN? 

PLANNING COMMITTEE TO THE SENATE COMMITTEE 

?

ON ACADEMIC PLANNING 

I. TERMS OF REFERENCE 

On May 12, 1982 the Senate Committee on Academic Planning approved "the 

establishment of two planning committees - internal and external - to develop SFU/ 

Downtown, as set forth in SCAP 82-1i." The internal committee; the SFU/Downtown 

Planning Committee, was established as a sub-committee of SCAP (V.P. Academic to R.C. 

Brown, 82.07.27) with a mandate to: 

• . .assess needs and potential, consider. 

SFU/Downtown program development pro- 

posals, develop such proposals, and 

forward specific recommendations. • .to 

SCAP... 

?

(SCAP 82-11:16) 

R.C. Brown, Dean of Arts, was subsequently appointed by the V.P. Academic 

as Chairman. In addition, seven members were nominated by the deans as follows: 

J.P. Blaney (Continuing 

.

Studies), A.D. Doerr (Graduate Studies), J.W. Ekstedt. 

(Interdisciplinary Studies), N.R. Reilly (Science), N. Robinson (Education), K. Strand 

(Arts), R.C. Wyckham (Business Administration). W.G. Gill (Continuing Studies) was 

appointed Secretary to the Committee. 

The Committee met through Fall. 1982 and Spring 1983. It reviewed the 

existing program and examined several background documents, statistical reports and 

prograuf proposals. Liaison and discussion with the external committee, the SFU/Downtown 

Council, were coordinated by the committee Chairman, R.C. Brown. (The composition 

and terms of reference of this Council are included in Appendix A). 

The committee saw that its mandate was not to examine whether there should 

be a downtown program, but rather to develop proposals and make recommendations as to 

what Simon Fraser University's downtown presence should be. This report to SCAP. 

follows from this interpretation of the Committee's charge. 

II. RECOMMENDATIONS 

The Committee recommends to SCAP: 

A.

That the Senate Committee on Academic Planning endorse in principle that 

Simon Fraser University establish a satellite campus in downtown Vancouver. 

B.

That SCAP establish a.standing committee to oversee and guide planning for 

this satellite campus. 

III. DEFINITION OF A DOWNTOWN CAMPUS 

As proposed here, a downtown satellite campus would be a branch of Simon 

Fraser University with its own physical plant (classrooms, offices, and service 

facilities) located in a single, identifiable downtown location. The campus would 

have some resident faculty and a set of definable programs. Student, administrative, 

and research services (academic advice, registrar, library), would be operated as 

extensions of existing service units. 

Policy decisions concerning the downtown campus would be vested in our 

Senate and Board of Governors. (The downtown satellite campus model is compared to 

two other program development options for illustrative purposes in Appendix F). 

IV. RATIONALE FOR THE RECOMMENDATIONS . 

?

.

A. There Is a significant demand for university level education in downtown 

Vancouver for both degree oriented and career related programs. Evidence 

of this demand is provided by 

•

?

a) enrolment data from the existing SF11/Downtown program (refer to Appendix B 

for the history of the program and data); 

b)

a survey conducted by the Ministry of Education in 1982-1 (see Appendix C 

for a summary of the survey); and 

c)

the phenomenon of recurrent education. 

B. The educational needs in the urban core, are such' that one of the universities 

in the province will, at some time, act to meet them. The University of 

Victoria's initiatives in the interior provide an illustration of a situation 

in

which one institution has moved quite deliberately to establish a 

particular mission. 

C. Simon Fraser University should 'be' the university which acts to meet this 

demand. We have demonstrated that we are interested in serving this area 

and that we have, the curriculum development capability to meet downtown's 

educational needs. The advantages for us from the expansion of our effort 

downtown are: 

1)

Externally, our reputation can be enhanced by demonstrating that the. 

university is meeting the needs of the community. Unlike our two sister 

institutions, Simon Fraser lacks a well defined' community image or focus 

which would be appealing to the public and thus contribute to our image 

as the university which provides accessible, broad ranging, high quality 

education. 

2)

An enhancement of our public image would likely make SFU more attractive 

to "highly qualified" students and thus improve the overall qualityof the 

institution. 

3)

Internally, we may be able to expand the range of our academic program 

and build upon our existing strengths. 

4)

As demonstrated in other urban centres, a university located in a 

downtown core generates interactions related to teaching, research, and 

service which are of benefit to both the downtown community and the 

university. 

D. Approval in principle for establishing a downtown satellite campus will- 

enable Simon Fraser to set an agreed-upon goal, to inform others of our 

objective, and to plan toward that end. A planned, rather than an ad hoc, 

incremental approach is beneficial because: 

?

'

? '

.

4.

1)

it makes the internal choices clear; 

2)

it enables the university to receive the maximum possible external support 

from the attendant publicity given to the objective; and 

3)

it decreases the probability that our efforts will be diluted because 

of duplicate activities by the other 

.

universities. 

(For a' more detailed and expanded rationale concerning a downtown campus, see 

Appendix D.) 

V. THE ACADEMIC PROGRAM OF A DOWNTOWN SATELLITE CAMPUS 

An initial academic program with four basic components is proposed; a more 

detailed examination of some potential program and planning options is presented in 

Appendix E. The proposed components are: 

1)

Undergraduate-lower division. There would 

.

be three lower division programs-- 

one each In Liberal Arts and Science, the Social Sciences, and the Humanities. 

• ? 

Each program would have, a core curriculum with limited electives. The 

objective would be to 

,

enable downtown students to meet current undergraduate 

lower division requirements by means of offering existing SFU courses downtown 

and thus complete degrees at the main campus or at another university, or 

downtown as proposed below. 

2)

Undergraduate-upper division. The objective would be to enable students to 

complete a degree at the downtown campus. Accordingly, the upper division 

program would be limited to those degree programs for which the downtown 

demand is greatest. This element of the proposal requires more extensive 

discussions to determine which degree programs are most appropriate. The 

intention is that, initially, the upper division undergraduate program 

would be limited to three or four degree programs. 

3)

,Graduate Programs. An' objective would be to provide graduate education 

downtown when the specific graduate program is closely associated with the 

particular interests of downtown students. While some proposals for new 

5.

programs exist, at the outset the graduate program might be limited to 

existing programs using existing courses. 

4)

?

Professional Development and Special Projects. This component has, as its 

objective, the demand for employment-related training and information and for 

general education. This would be met by seminars, short courses and conferences. 

VI. CONSEQUENCES OF RECOMMENDATIONS 

A. ? 

Approval "in principle" of the concept of a downtown satellite campus implies. 

endorsement of the concept as an explicit 

.

planning goal. Individual elements 

of the plan would be brought forward for consideration bySCAP as required. 

B. ? 

The establishment of a downtown campus could create a number of problems, 

including: 

?

.. ? 

.

1)

a potential drain on resources which would otherwise be available to 

?

?

the main campus; . 

?

.

?

.

2)

the potential of undesirable competition between the main and downtown 

campus and other centres operated by SFU in the province; 

3)

major inconveniences (travel time and scattered resources) to students, 

faculty,and staff; and 

4) possible conflict with other post-secondary institutions. 

C.

?

These potential problems can beminimized by their general recognition by 

the proposed SCAP standing committee and by that committee's commitment 

to a development of the downtown campus which would not proceed at a pace or 

in a fashion detrimental to the existing program. 

APPENDIX A ?

THE

SFU/DOWNTOWN COUNCIL

7.

is

?

The SF 

1

1/Downtown Council 

?

Terms of Reference 

• .to advise on needed 

proposals and strategies, assist 

would aid in developing and of fe 

of any fundraising activities to 

programs and priorities, assess program development 

in identifying community individuals and groups who 

ring proposed programs, and-assist in the formulation 

support the creationof a downtown campus.." 

SCAP 82-11:7 

?cRMR 1P T-1 T D

Tom Rust ? 

.

?

.

President and Chief Executive Officer 

Crown Zellerbach Canada Limited 

Jack Blaney 

Vice-President 

University Development and Extension 

Simon Fraser University 

Bob Brown ? 

.

Dean of Arts, Simon Fraser University 

Chairman, SFU/Downtown Planning Committee 

. ?

John Cleghorn 

Senior Vice-President and General Manager 

Royal Bank of Canada 

Klaus Deering 

President 

Glenayre Electronics Ltd.. 

Gordon Gibson 

Gibson and Clark Properties Ltd. 

Warren Gill 

Director, SF11/Downtown 

Don Hudson 

President 

Vancouver Stock Exchange 

Bob Kadlec 

President 

Inland Natural Gas Go. Ltd. 

George Pedersen 

President 

Simon Fraser University. 

Chairman 

Executive Secretary 

8.

Tom Simons ? 

0 ?

President 

R.A. Simons International Ltd. 

Ray Smith 

President and Chief Operating Officer 

MacMillan Bloedel Ltd. 

?

Bob Wyman 

Chairman 

Pemberton Securities Ltd. 

.

APPENDIX B 

BACKGROUND: THE SFU/DOWNTOWN PROGRAM 1980-82 

10.

BACKGROUND: THE SFU/DOWNTOWN PROGRAM 1980-82 

The existing SFU/Downtown program of offering university credit courses in 

the urban core of 'Vancouver was developed as a response by Simon Fraser University 

to the educational needs of a community previously poorly served by institutions of 

higher education. Discussion of these needs began in the early 1970's, but it-was 

not until late 1978 that a proposal for an SFU/Downtown program'was prepared. This 

1978 proposal, which evolved from a needs assessment survey of potential downtown 

students conducted over the previous year, as well as consultations with business 

and 'cultural leaders, provided an initial rationale justifying the establishment 

of a downtown program, outlined the role of' a downtown program in relation to the 

university as a whole, and presented some program development concepts. In early 

1979, the proposal was discussed and approved on an experimental basis by the Deans, 

Chairmen, administrative directors,, and the 

Senate'Conunittee 

on Academic Planning. 

Two fundamental principles were established to guide the early development 

of the program: 

1)

that SFU/Downtown should not operate at the expense of existing programs; 

and; 

2)

that the early phases of downtown programming should be experimental and provide 

opportunities to those departments having the resources and desire to participate. 

Accordingly,' the SFU/Downtown program was inaugurated in January 1980 by 

opening an office at 

822

Howe Street (across from Robson Square) and scheduling 

credit courses in a variety of locations throughout downtown,, including Robson 

Square, the YMCA, and at various hotels. The response to this experiment 

was so

encouraging that it quickly became apparent that classroom space of a more permanent 

nature was required. Consequently, the University began to lease and renovate 

facilities at 

549

Howe Street, in what 

now known 

the Downtown Education Centre. 

0 ?

In this Centre, Simon Fraser has eleven modest, but well supplied classrooms, ranging 

in size from 

to 100 student capacity. The 

822

Howe Street office remains in 

11.

operation and provides library, bookstore, and support services to faculty and 

students. 

Over its short history, the program has grown rapidly to serve over 

1000 individuals in almost 50 courses in each of the Fall and Spring semesters. 

The average age-of SFU/Downtown students is 33 years, 56 percent are female, 

half are employed full-time, and over 50 percent live in the City of Vancouver. 

Approximately 40 percent of those enrolling each semester are either new or 

re-admissions to SFU and these students account for 10 percent of the new 

?

-

admissions to the University each semester. Since 1980 total SFU/Downtown 

enrolment has.exceeded 6500 

-

and the growth of the program has been constrained 

only by limitations, on the teaching and fiscal resources available.. In many 

high demand areas, such as Business Administration and Computing Science, we 

have been unable to mount. sufficient courses to meet the needs of the downtown 

community. An enrolment history 

.

.of.the program is presented in the accompanying 

?

.

tables. 

Over the past three years the downtown credit program has been gradually 

focussed around particular " 

,

themes", "core structures", and "concentrations" with 

the dual 

.

aim of providing a distinctive coherence to our downtown offerings while 

also, providing a platform for future program development in areas of university 

interest. These foci have generally reflected on-going program development 

discussions across the campus. With the exception.of the certificate programs, 

the concentrations used to both select and promote courses have not been structured 

in a formal programmatic sence -- enrolees have only earned credit in existing 

disciplines. Therefore, although the program has become more focussed, it remains 

essentially an extension of the campus evening program. While such a program serves 

student and other interests, ari brings attention to SFU's role in 

'

the community, 

it does not by itself realize the potential of our-downtown presence. 

12.

In recognition of the demand for university programs downtown and the 

potential of the downtown site to enhance the university generally, the role and 

future direction of Simon Fraser's downtown activities have been under constant 

scrutiny. These evaluative processes have resulted in a number of review and 

planning documents. Of these, a paper present(-.d by J.M. Munro and J.P. Blaney 

(80-10-21) examining the first' year of downtown operations and outlining three 

models -- Extension, Downtown Centre, Downtown Satellite Cam 

p

us -- for program 

development has been of key importance. This paper was widely circulated on campus 

and was the subject of a speëial Dean's meetin, and a Faculty Forum. Agreement 

was reached at a meeting of Deans on 81-03-18 that the "Campus" model offered the 

greatest potential for a strong downtown progrnm and that planning for an expanded 

downtown prograni should be undertaken. As a result, further discussion papers 

• ? 

were generated culminating in J.P. Elaney's proposal of 82-03-02 to the Senate 

Committee on Academic Planning (SCAP 82-41) to create two complementary planning 

groups - The SFU/Downtown Planning Committee and the community-based SFU/Downtown 

Council - to advise and lead the program development process. These two committees 

have been active in developing the rationale and proposals for the direction of 

Simon Fraser's future downtown endeavours. 

•1

APPENDIX C 

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION? 

DOWNTOWN EDUCATION CENTRE STUDY 

?

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

k'report

• Centre survey (1982).

Jo-Anne Lee

November 1982

Province of ?

Ministry, of

British Columbia Education

• ?

POST.SECONOAv

DEPARIMENI

Program Services Division

7451 Etmbrsdge Way

Richmona

British Columbia

VBX 188

© Msninry of Education. Province of British Columbia. Canada

part

of this publication may be reproduced in any form

without permission in writing frcm the publisher.

xecuive S"ummaiy

_) U

DOWNTOWN EDUCATION CENTER STUDY 

?

a

Executive Summary 

A study was conducted of students enrolled at the Downtown 

Education Center (DEC), 549 Howe Street during a two-week 

period in March . 

, 1982. ? 

The purpose of the study was to 

investigate student 

?

characteristics., motivations 'for enroll- 

ing

,

, satisfaction with selected aspects of the Downtown 

Education Center and other program planning related information. 

A total 

.

-of 2508 questionnaires 

were 

distributed; 1685 question- 

naires were received from BCIT, a response rate of 76%, and 

497 questionnaires from SFU, a response rate of 52%. 

,

The

questionnaire was developed in consultation with BCIT and 

SFU officials. 

A brief synopsis of findings follows: 

What a'Le students ' bai.c demogn.aphc ciiaac.tc<sti.c? ?

The majority of respondents, regardless of institutional 

affiliation, were: aced 20-29 years, unmarried, without 

dependents and female. Approximately one-quarter.ha'd 

attained high school' completion and another one-quarter had 

completed one to three years of university 

education. ? 

SFU

respondents were generally more highly educated than'BCIT 

respondents. Approximately twice as many BCIT students were 

employed full-time than SFU students. 

?

In terms of respondents' ? 

general occupational characteristics, BCIT as a group were 

more homogeneous than SFU respondents. For example, almost 

40% of BCIT respondents were employed in the clerical sector 

and another 14% were employed as "managers". SFU respondents 

on the other hand, were more occupationally heterogeneous with 202.' 

employed as "professionals", 19% employed in clerical occu- 

pations and 14.5% in managerial 

jobs.

. .

What a'Le. 4.tuden.t at.tJ.tade4 towaItd4 cect4400m eflvonrncnt,

equ..pmen.t and matvLae4, convnAnce

£Ocafon, 6tudent

abieju

Couite

to meet pe,%,6onat expat,.on,

4chedaI.Ang, pa't!z.ng, cou'Eze o.'t.ng and bu

Vtvce?

Respondents rated various aspects of the DEC on a scale from 

"poor" to "excellent". As a 

rule, 

BCIT respondents not only 

showed, a tendency to rank items higher than S.FU respondents, 

but also exhibited'more consensus in their judgeménts. Highest 

rated overall by both groups was convenience of location (DEC) 

and lowest rated was parking. 

?

In

summary, both .BCIT and SFU 

students rated most aspects in the adequate to good range 

with parking and student services' . judged less favourably. 

How aAe btudent6 -nonmd about couJt

oc'.c'cf at the

Students were asked about their sources of course information. 

•

?

Awareness of the Education Information Center (ETC) was 

specifically probed. 

?

Almost all' respondents wer(' aware of the 

existence of the Education Information Center but only 20% 

identified it as a source for course information'. 

?

The findings 

suggest that SFU 'students mainly utilize' their institution's 

calendar, brochures and word of mouth while most BCIT students 

utilize their institution's calendar., the 'ETC, 

?

ord of mouth 

and brochures. 

?

Few respondents reported obtaining course 

information through posters, rad 

j

oor 'television advertising, 

drop-in, or a professional association. 

What a'ie 4tade.nt6' 'iea6on4

i t ?

n'to..nq?

There were clear and significant differences between SFIJ and 

BCIT respondents concerning reasons for enrolling. 

?

The

findings strongly Indicate that BCIT respondents enrol for 

career-related reasons such as, career advancement, professional 

certification, an. . d increasing self-confidence. 

?

Also of prime 

38.

importance was convenience of scheduling, an instrumental 

reason more related to facilitating learning opportunities 

than to career advancement. SFU 

r

espondents, on the other 

hand, appear to be motivated by degree attainment and the 

desire to understand broader issues. 

?

On the basis of these 

?

differences in motivational orientations, there is strong 

statistical evidence for concluding that SFU and BCIT 

students are distinct and separate consumers of educational 

services offered at the DEC. 

What a'Le

dent' edaa.t.Lona goats?

Respondents wer,e asked if-the course ta'ken' 

.

wOuld help to 

advance career goals. The findings were congruent with 

findings on reasons for enrolling. 

?

BCIT respondents almost 

?

unanimously' perceived that courses taken would assist in 

achieving career related goals. 

?

SFU respondents showed less 

conviction and unanimity in this regard. 

?

In 'keeping with 

other findings, SFU students were a more heterogeneous 

group with some students viewing courses taken as assisting 

in career-related goals'and others feeling that it was too 

early to know or that the course taken was unrelated to their 

career goals.. 

What e dcn'ta1? and e.mpoyPnen

9ogkaphc. ma4ket - 

the

DEC 4etv-ng?

Respondents' home and work postal codes were plotted on a map 

of Vancouver. 

?

The findings confirm that in terms of students' 

work locations, the DEC

has a'geographjc

market centered in the'

downtown peninsula. However,by postal code breakdown, more 

respondents were employed outside of the area bounded by 

Granville St., Burrard St., Georgia St. and Burrard Inlet (the 

area in which the DEC is located) than from within it. 

?

It ? 

should also be recalled that twice as many BCIT respondents 

39.

were employed full-time than SFU respondents, so that .BCIT 

respondents would contribute 

more 

to this trend. SFU 

respondents appear to be employed in more dispersed locations 

throughout the city.. A large proportion of working respondents 

have work sites located west of Burrard Street. in terms of 

residential distribution, slightly over half of respondents reside 

in Vancouver. Generally, areas of high residential concentra- 

tion correspond to areas of higher zoned residential density 

such as the West End,. Kitsilano, South Granville, Marpole, 

South Cambie and Mount Pleasant neighbourhoods. For those 

who lived outside of Vancouver, more resided in North Vancouver 

than any other municipality. 

Whcz.t o.then cous'o do

4tudeni want

occd downtow?

Students were asked if there were courses offered at their 

institution's main campus that they would like to take down- 

town. ? 

A larger proportion of SFU students offered 

.a definite 

response, only 25% responded "don't know" compared to almost 

twice as many (49%)BCI.T students. SFU students appear 

to be more desirous of increased course offerings 

downtown than BCIT respondents. Almost half of SFU students 

responded "yes" compared to approximately a third of BCIT 

respondents. 

What. £4 4.tudet

£ne/te4.t in

a ?

eitnate

6o4m,6 

06 in,6tlLuctioll?

There appears to be more interest in other 'forms of face to 

face instruction-(e.g. tutoring, learning groups, learning 

exchanges)

than 

mediated 

distance education modes. 

Guided or directed independent study received the second 

highest number of responses. 

40.

9. What aAe ztudent

p4e4ence6

.towand4 otheii. "avaiabte"

6acitities-?

Ten types of facilities and locations were listed and respon- 

dents were asked to select and rank their top three choices. 

There were statistically significant differences between SFU 

and BCIT respondents on their first, second and third choices. 

As a first choice, .SFU respondents selected an established 

college, university or institute campus. This choice as a 

first preference is rather confusing unless courses offered 

downtown are for some reasons, unavailable on the main. 

campus. As second choice, SFU respondents chose a new campus 

located downtown and as third choice, the DEC. 

?

BCIT respondents 

rankedfora firstchoice, the DEC, secondly, a new campus 

located downtown, and as third choice, a downtown office 

building. ? 

On the basis of these rankings, a facility located 

downtown is more highly preferred by respondents than at any 

other location. ? 

.

Surnma'ty and Conctu4ion6

Apart from basic demographic characteristics, there .were few 

similarities between SFU and BCIT respondents. ? 

In general, 

both groups showed a high level of satisfaction with aspects 

of the Downtown Education Center although dissatisfaction with 

parking was expressed. 

Both groups expresed satisfaction with the downtown location 

and scheduling of courses. 

Students attending the Downtown Education Center generally 

perceive the location as a satellite campus to the main 

campus. This attitude was especially noticeable for SFU 

respondents. The majority of responding DEC students have 

had previous contiriung education experience, and the majority 

41.

of these students gained 'this experience through courses 

taken at their main campus. 

The findings tend to indicate that the majority of individuals 

attending BCIT and SFU courses 

at

the Downtown Education 

,

Center are not "new" students initiating an educational 

venture by virtue of the DEC's strategic location and 

convenient scheduling. Most-have had prior continuing educa- 

tion experience at their main 'campus or at VCC. Most were 

informed about courses through their institution's calendar 

and most chose to enroll in "downtown" courses mainly for ease 

of attendance. 

There appears' to be a'iarger potential "downtown" market' 

consisting of individuals who have not had previous continuing 

education experience.' At' present, neither institution system- 

atically markets programs to identified downtown 'target 

groups. P'erhaps if such a selective marketing strategy were 

implemented, agreater proportion of "new" learners would be 

attracted, to the DEC. 

There is. no doubt that a downtown educational facility such as 

the DEC, housing a wide range of career and academic educational 

programs ,has' proven successful. However, the study found little 

evidence to support the notion that a 'Howe Street location is 

critical to this success. 

?

In terms of respondents' work and 

home locations, their preferences for alternate locations and 

their dissatisfaction with parking and student services (SFU 

respondents) it may be concluded that 'the principle of the DEC 

should be supported but that 

its

exact location downtown may be 

subject tofurther consideration. 

43.

RATIONALE FOR A DOWNTOWN UNIVERSITY 

The Committee recognizes that there must be significant locational, 

demographic, and educational needs within the downtown core of Vancouver to require 

the establishment of a campus to provide advanced post-secondary education in the 

area. The British Columbia .    

university system has evolved rapidly over the past 

twenty years keeping pace with the educational needs resulting from alterations in the 

fabric of social and economic development within our communities. Significant 

gaps exist, however, in 

.

terms of programs available, groups and locations served, 

and research activities. For example, the need for access to post-secondary education 

is no longer confined to secondary school leavers. Adults of all ages and in all 

occupations are continuing their education on either a full or part-time basis. In 

addition, high school graduates are increasingly seeking new career programs which 

address contemporary concerns. 

?

5 ?

. ?

The question of access is particularly important for the urban core of 

Vancouver. As noted, Vancouver has become a major North American business, administrative, 

and cultural centre, yet it is one of the few such cities not directly served 

by a university. The urban core of Vancouver 

and its 

surrounding residential 

zones are key areas for development and growth within the region. Vancouver 

has been in the vanguard of the trend towards 

a more 

compact city centred on a 

dominant, high density core. This process reflects both national trends and 

conditions specific to the urban development of the region. Contrary to 

predictions 

twenty years 

ago,

the downtown 

area has 

reinforced and expanded 

its position as the pre-eminent transactional node in the Lower Mainland. Key 

factors influencing the dominance 

downtown are advancing energy costs, the 

transportation network, changes In family structure and fertility, and the 

O

transition to a post-industrial urban economic base. The management,. decision 

making, and support service sectors 

the economy, which have become the princi- 

44.

pal source 

of growth 

and employment within 

the

region, 

tend to locate 

in close 

proximity 

and

act as 

.

centralizing forces. 

In Vancouver, 

the massive 

growth of 

job opportunities in the urban core observed 

since 

the late 1960's has resulted 

in increases in residential densities and land 

values 

around the core -- largely 

as a result of limited accessibility from the suburban municipalities. Lacking 

the extensive freeway network of most North American cities, massive urban sprawl 

has not occurred within the region; rather equilibrium conditions between job. 

opportunities and transportation costs have 

served 

to enhance the redevelopment 

of areas such as Kitsilano and the Fairview Slopes. The completion of the 

Advanced Light Rapid Transit system in 1986 

will serve 

primarily to increase 

the accessibility of the core from the suburban 

areas. 

Major developments such 

as B.C. Place and Lonsdale Quay will produce new housing for some 40,000 indi- 

viduals and accelerate the conversion of older single family neighbourhoods to 

higher densities. 

The increase in residential density around downtown reflects- 

' demogra- 

phic changes, as well as desires to reduce commuting times and heighten access 

to urban amenities. Families have become smaller and more dependent upon two 

incomes. The increased participation of women in all sectors of the workforce 

has been an important force in this restructuring of residential lOcational 

preferences. The dual trend towards higher fertility in two-career households 

and the increasing number of families passing beyond the family-raising cycle 

has accelerated demand for housing proximate to job opportunities and social 

services. 

The present and future demands on the educational system of this spa- 

tial concentration of people and jobs is ever increasing. 

The pace of informa- 

tional and technological change which 

has accompanied post-industrialism has 

significantly altered traditional 

work opportunities and career paths. The 

45.

restructuring of the labour market has created new demands for-re-training and 

re-ed 

ucation 

-

programs, particularly for university-level expertise in the areas 

of management, human services, a 

d

ministration, Information processing, and policy 

making. As a consequence, over the past five years colleges and universities in 

North America had a 37 percent increase in enrolments of students over 35 years old 

and a 26 percent jump in enrolments of those over 25 years. Demand for coherent programs 

permitting the integration of part-time study and employment has outpaced growth 

amongst full-time students. 

In both locational and demographic terms, the provision of post- 

secondary educational opportunities in British Columbia has been based upon a 

different set of conditions than those presently observed. In the early 1960's, 

the regional college system and Simon Fraser University and the University of Victoria 

were established in response to provincial post-war economic developments and 

population growth resulting from the baby boom. 

'

A critical impact of this growth 

was the movement towards suburbanjzatjon brought about by the increased accessibility 

provided by the automobile. After 1960, the major growth occurred in single-family 

neighbourhoods in the eastern suburbs' of Surrey and Coquitlam,- and the southern suburbs 

of Richmond and Delta. Throughout the early 1960's the decline of the downtown area, 

as was observed in the United States, was repeatedly -forecast; beginning in the 1970's 

it became increasingly evident that this would not be the case 

'

in Vancouver. While 

forest processing and other activities previously located around downtown did disperse 

throughout the region, the management 

'

and service functions of these industries remained 

in the core and expanded dramatically, following:natjonal economic trends. 

With the decline of the birth rate following the end of the baby boom 

and the increasing complexity of -a technologically-based society,, the demands upon 

the Post-secondary educational-system have 

altered 

radically. Learning has become 

• a lifelong process requiring continuing access to the resources of higher education. 

Vancouver,as the focus of economic and cultural activity within the province and as 

46.

• a centre of a large population requiring access to education, is now in the position 

occupied by the suburban and interior areas twenty years ago. It is clear that, within 

the urban area, the locus of these conditions is the downtown core. 

Over the past three years, Simon Fraser University's presence in the 

urban core has served to heighten awareness of higher education generally and has 

contributed to meeting some of the educational, needs of a wide range of Individuals 

who work or live In the downtown area. Through its downtown credit program, 

distinguished lecture series, and various professional development activi[.es, Simon 

Fraser has helped enrich community and business life In the city centre. In this 

period, our objective of establishing SFU/Downtown as an educational service for adults 

working in or living near theurban core has been met. A new student body, seeking 

initial access to higher education, career advancement or change, or degree completion, 

has responded to the University's initiative. A survey of downtown students from 

BCJT 

indicates 

and SFU 

that 

conducted 

a body of 

during 

university-level 

the Spring semester 

students 

of

with 

1982

distinctive 

by the Ministry 

goals and 

of Education 

?

expectations can be identified in the downtown area. Our present limited program 

cannot fulfill the level of existing or future demand. 

If Simon Fraser University is to be the institution to meet these needs, 

the establishment of a downtown satellite campus must be effected with deliberate planning. 

The creation of a downtown satellite campus could involve some not insignificant risks 

and problems, including the following: a net drain on resources which would otherwise 

be available to the main campus; a fragmentation of our mission and identity, with a 

consequent dissipation of energies; a competition between the main and downtown campuses, 

with the latter campus eventually seeking autonomy; inconvenience of distance and 

scattered resources to students, faculty and staff; conflict with other post-secondary 

Institutions; and great dis;ppniniincut. if our goals are thwarted. The potential of' such • 

problems needs to be given careful consideration. If the plan for our downtown activities 

47.

is not well integrated into that for the development of the University as a who1e, 

competition for resources may result which could lead to a Fragmentation, rather than 

enhancement, of our overall identity and mission. 

APPENDIX E

A DOWNTOWN SATELLITE CAMPUS,:

PLANNING AND PROGRAN OPTIONS

49.

A DOWNTOWN SATELLITE CAMPUS: PLANNING AND PROGRAM OPTIONS 

Simon Fraser University 'has an opportunity to create a unique post-secondary 

Institution to serve both full and part-time students in the urban core. The downtown 

area is a centre of considerable resources for teaching and cultural activities and 

already possesses the necessary infrastructural elements (housing, transportation, 

amenities, services) to support university programming. In reviewing the proposals 

for the future of the downtown program, the Committee and SFU/Downtown Council concluded 

that a downtown satellite campus offers the-greatest potential to meet the needs 

represented within the urban' core and to strengthen the University's internal and 

external positions. This conclusion was reached in part through a re-examination of 

the programming options - Extension, Downtown Centre, and Downtown Satellite Campus - 

outlined by J.M. Munro and J.P. Blaney (80-12-01) (See Appendix F for an outline of 

these options). Our present program has some of the characteristics of the Downtown 

Centre model, but is still largely described by the Extension model. These two 

programming models were seen as inappropriate in that they both fall short of the level. 

and' quality of programming necessary to contribute to the further development of Simon 

Fraser University and meet the educational demands within the core. 

The committee proposes that-the establishment of a downtown satellite campus, 

integrated into, our present administrative and service structure, be the-ultimate goal 

of Simon Fraser University's downtown program.. The creation of .a distinctive 

downtown campus will 

.

open new . avenUes for research, teaching, and the 

,

recruitment 

of highly qualifed faculty and students, as the university expands the range of its 

academic program beyond our present limitations. The development of a downtown campus 

Will

enable Simon Fraser to exploit fiscal and other resources which may he otherwise 

unavailable. The demands upon our present limited program are such that pI.arrned, 

rather than unfocussed evolutionary, growth is required in order to effectively manage 

the re-direction of our downtown programming. A blueprint for development within 

known 'general parameters must be established In order that incremental decision 

making leads towards awell-plannec! and approved goal. 

u.

As a first step in establishing 'a planning model for a downtown 'satellite 

campus of SFU the Committee proposes, that in consideration 'of the programs presently 

provided 

,

by the. three universities,.the educational'needs within the downtown (and 

wider) communities, and SFU's position 

'

within both the system and the community, 

that the greatest overall benefit may be achieved' by 

.

designing a downtown campus 

program which: 

1) serves graduate and undergraduate needs not presently met by the three 

universities; 

'

2) creates an environment conducive to the introduction of new interdisciplinary 

programs; 

3)

enables qualified graduates of the universi 

.

ties,,colleges and institutes to further 

their education; 

4)

provides opportunities for full and part-time study in coherent programs; and 

5)

addresses some of the critical needs'of the education and re-education of highly 

qualified manpower.                                 

These issues can be addressed by offering 

,

some' o.f our existing academic 

.

program 

downtown, but present a challenge to develop selected new curricula and services which 

complement existing university programs. These new programmatic areas must respond to 

needs for specific expertise, subject matter, and educat ional options (such as mid-career 

re-tooling) which reflect the demographic and social ch:iracter and the educational base 

of the urban core. To be most effective and cost efficient, the program must embrace 

the human, physical, and institutional resources represented within the downtown area. 

A Programmatic Model 

A program concept which addresses many of the above educational issues and 

which 'builds upon our 

,

existing program has evolved over the past' three years. This 

concept provides a general framework for a downtown 

satellite 

'

campus program comprised of 

three components 

with 'service,s for students, 

?

faculty 

and the, community. 

Within each' 

component a range 

of program-options is proposed to 

illustrate possible 

areas for 

program development. The three basic components are: 

51.

1)

Tightly structured undergraduate or "baccalaureate" core degree programs and 

selected 

.

-degree completion options; 

2)

Professional graduate programs with emphasis on management and the applied 

social sciences; and 

3)

Advanced professional development (non-degree) programs based upon the resources 

of both SFU and the downtown community. 

Each programarea Is based on the principles outlined andtogether they 

could create .a- distinctive role for the downtown campus and a means for strengthening 

the overall academic program of Simon. Fraser University. Some of the features and 

possible programs.within the four component areas are: 

1.

Undergraduate - lower division. The undergraduate program could provide 

an opportunity to create the high level of student-.to-faculty and student-to-student 

interaction characteristic of graduate programs at most universities. Following the 

successful models of a number of eastern universities, the downtown campus program 

could be intellectually broad and demanding, but tightly structured. At the lower 

division, three core or foundation programs in Liberal Arts and Science, Social 

Sciences, and the Humanities could be offered. These programs could have set 

curricula with limited electives and could be geared towards 

providing students with 

a sound grasp of the fundamentals of reasoning in preparation for work in specific: 

subject areas at the upper di 

y

ion.. Students whO complete their first 60 hours in 

these foundation programs could either select a major downtown or transfer to other 

programs at the Burnaby Mountain campus or at another university. 

2.

Undergraduate - upper division. The upper division program'could centre 

on three or four major areas of study towards degrees, diplomas, and certificates. At 

this stage of:disussions within the university, 'the downtown campus could offer some 

of the following undergraduate programs:' 

Management and Systems Science 

Business Administration 

Humanities 

d) Economics 

iL.

Possible new programs which might be appropriate for downtown include: 

a) ? 

T

jrban Studies ? 

.

?

0•

b)

?

Resource Management 

c)

?

Human Services/Criminology ? 

.

?

.

?

.

?

.

?

..

?

.

d) ? 

Human Resource Management 

?

.

?

. ?

.

The new programs would draw heavily upon existing courses, in many. disciplines, 

as well as some new integrative .courses. 

?

Standards for admission and continuance 

would be high. ? 

.A special feature of the upper division program could be a transfer 

arrangement for qualified graduates of the colleges and B..C.I.T . . 

?

to

.

.enablo them to 

work towards a university degree. 

3. ? 

.. Craduate. ? 

The graduate program could build upon existing: academic 

strengths at SFU, while permitting opportunities to develop further research expertise 

in areas of provincial .    and national interest. 

?

A principalcharacteristic.of the 

graduate program could be an integrative curriculum, allowing students from a range 

of academic backgrounds to engage in graduate-level study, primarily in professional 

fields. ? 

Some new prOgrams for consideration: include: 

?

.

a) ? 

Engineering/High-Technology Administration ? 

.

?

.

b)

?

International Trade 

.

(perhaps in conjunction with iJBC) . ? 

. ?

.

c)

?

Public 

?

Policy 

? .

?

.

?

..

d) ? 

Humanities 

e)

?

Criminal Justice 

? •. ? 

. ?

.

f) ? 

Human Resource Management. 

?

.. ? 

. ?

.

g) ? 

Resources Management 

?

.

?

0 ?

.. 0

h)

?

Environmental Studies 

?

.

?

. ?

.

?

. . ? 

.. . ? 

These 

.

largely interdisciplinary programs would fill some important needs 

within the province and would allow Simon. Fraser to develop a base in several new 

areas (e.g., architecture, urban land economics) and to further strengths in areas 

such as public policy, regional science, human services, resource management, 

?

.

?

.

economics, and business administration. 

?

Programs-could be geared both for full and 

part-time study.. 

53.

A.

Professional Development and Special Projects. Professional 

development programs (seminars, 

,

short courses, public policy conferences) could 

be offered in fields related to the above graduate programs. Further, some 

specialized services in response to particular urban needs are proposed. Two such 

services might be an Institute.for Civic and Urban Affairs (dealing with urban 

issues and leadership) and an Institute for Entrepreneurship. 

This overall program. concept and the individual program options are 

endorsed by the Committee as an appropriate program planning model for a downtown 

satellite campus. It is not the"only appropriate model; other models and program 

options may prove, more viable given needs and the University's ability to act. 

It is the Committee's view, however, that a general framework for program development 

with well understood, yet flexible, program options be established in order that 

development of the downtown satellite campus can proceed as a planned, rather than 

ad hoc activity. 

APPENDIX F 

?

.

THREE MODELS OF 

DOWNTOWN PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT 

l0i

. ?

CS.W'4

r-4W

(UOO'W

00.>,

1))

•-C.'.(U)(U

Ci'l

Xa)4'W

'0 ?

EU)

o ?

4)U)(1)

.'.)a)4.1

(-I(1)4)

U.'-i)))

4) ?

4)0

UEa)

.:a)'0

'0-+'.0

CO ?

-IE

S-i'U

.Ca)WO.

(000

-i>,U)C)

S-i

--4U)44

4)0 ?

V ?

t7w 10

4 ?

0(0

a) ?

XS-4

--3E0W

U).

(U-

4-'

U)05-I0

o-I

0(0

(U ?

.. CPO)

a)3-lX(UW

4.1

'-4

-'-4

C).

--I.,

4.)

04-4

C)'

C) 0) >,-4

C) C) C) C) (44-' C)

(.4-4

C: 0 14

U) ?

(UU)

U) ?

CU ?

0)V

'44

dU)

0 ?

.IJ

4-4

( ?

4)00

C: ?

0 ?

41( ?

4.4'U

4)4'

-.4

C:4.'V4J ?

I ?

C: ?

0 ?

(0'40

--4

C).'-' ?

U ?

'i-i

o ?

.00 ?

-.4 ?

'0)

0 ?

00) ?

C)V ?

--4 ?

(flOW-I

0 ?

'.0:

0)4.' 0-4 ?

4-i

(n.')..

0. ?

0)00 ?

>,U) ?

C) C:'

.C(>,

0 ?

41 ?

00)

0)0)

-4

U)14

00(0''

>,(U0

(UOC:

0.U)O

--IU).0 ?

U14.0

-.4