.? T

SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

?

MEMORANDUM

S

?

From.....

SENATE APPEALS

B

O ARD

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

REPORT AND

Subject

RECOMMENDATIONS., .O .... SENAT

E

FROM.....A.B .

Date

........MAY

?

19.,....l9.7

?

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

.

The Senate Appeals Board wishes to make the following motions

which arise from the attached Senate Appeals Board Report to

Senate:

Motion I

That the Senate Appeals Board establish procedures which

will allow departments to have input on appeals for

retroactive withdrawal.

Motion II

That all reference to "course change policy" be deleted

from the terms of reference of the Senate Appeals Board.

The terms of reference will read:

"To consider cases wherein an individual feels aggrieved

by the decision of the Registrar to apply a particular

admission, readmission, standing or credit transfer policy

in his or.her specific case."

[1

---

t

To: Senate

?

From: Senate Appeals Board

Subject: Report on Senate Appeals Board ?

Date: 18 May 1978

Activities - for information

The attached report outlines' the activities of the

Senate Appeals Board for the 1970-1977 per iOd.

Statistics contained in the report cover the 1974

to 1977 period.

0

---

I

.

?

S.A.B. REPORT TOSENATE

A. ?

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

In November of 1968, Senate identified that there were a.

number of grievances and concerns regarding admission and

standing and suggested that. Senate establish an Admissions

and Standings Appeal Committee as a separate and distinct

body from the Senate Committee on Undergraduate Admissions

and Standings. In December of 1968, Dr. John F. Ellis

was elected by Senate to develop an appropriate admissions

and standings policy for the University. Resulting from

this Senate decision was the Ellis Report "Admissions and

Standings - A Suggested Policy", which was accepted by

Senate in April, 1969.

Contained in the. Ellis Report was the recommendation to

establish a Senate Appeals Board and a Senate Undergraduate

Admissions Board. Subsequent to this recommendation was

approval for the establishment of the Senate Appeals Board

(S.381); (see Appendix I). Following approval of S.381,

the Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board gave a more clear

definition of the terms of reference and procedures. This

is outlined in SUAB 1 (Appendix II.).

It was soon recognized that the composition of the Senate

Appeals Board produced a polarized situation with no

mechanism of resolving tie votes. As a result, Paper S.434

(Appendix III) was presented to Senate and approved. . This

paper gave the Chairman the authority to vote in the case

of tie votes.

?

.

0

---

I

I

-2-

?

S

A further change in the structure of the Senate Appeals

Board was approved by Senate in Paper, S.71-142 (Appendix

IV). This paper allowed for the two faculty alternate

members to substitute for either one of the prime faculty

members and provided .for an additional student alterhate.

There have been no further amendments to the terms of

reference or composition of the Board. Under the present

composition, the Board has not encountered, any procedural

problems. The current membership of the Board is listed

below:--

Chairman: ?

Ross Powell

Secretary

?

Alan McMillan

Faculty by) PRIME

?

Prof. L. Wilson

and from ) MEMBERS

SUAB ?

) ALTERNATE Dr A. Whitney

Faculty by) PRIME

?

Dr. R. Hobson

and from ) MEMBERS

Senate

?

) ALTERNATE Prof. C. Hoyt

Students ) PRIME

?

Ted .Glas

elected by) ALTERNATE Fred Sommer

Student

?

) PRIME ?

William Rudder

Council

?

) ALTERNATE David Frydenlund

Student Society

Registrar's Office

Asst. to V/PAca./Psyc

?

S

Faculty of Education

Computing Science

Economics & Comm.

B.

?

RESPONSIBILITIES AND TERMS

?

REFERENCE

During the initial period (1970-1973) there was an excessive

turnover of members of the Board, particularly the student

members. As a result of this turnover, there was little

opportunity for briefing and orientation of new members.

0

---

I

-3-

.

This situation has changed considerably since 1974 and

currently members are on the Board for a longer period-

of time. The Board has been quorate on every occassion

except for one when the notice of meeting did not reach

the members. In this case, it was decided to hold the

meeting with one faculty member, the secretary and the

recording secretary, as there was a full agenda involv-

ing a large number of in-person appeals. The attendance

for the Senate Appeals Board members is summarized in

Appendix V.

There has been a change in the types of appeals which are

now heard by the Board. Some types of appeals which were

considered by the Board have been designated to other

jurisdictions. The types of appeals that are no longer

considered by the Board include:--

'Grade Changes:

Paper S.381 gave the'

:

Senate Appeals Board authority

to consider appeals for grade changes, however, the

SUAB I paper which followed, made reference to course

changes, but not to grade changes. As a result of

this, only faculty and departments now make grade

changes and any appeals for such are referred direct-

ly to the appropriate department.

2.

?

Transfer Credits:

There 'is a formal system now for assessing credits.

0

---

-4-

These are done by the Admissions Office in consul-

tation with the departments and no longer come to

the Appeals Board.

3.

:Spcial CourseLbads:

This is now handled through the Office of the Dean.

in each case.

4.

COurse Challenge:

There is a specific mechanism now for handling this

type of request.

5. Students

b

e

i.

n

g..

admi

. tted ..

to

.. the

.p

rofessi.onai. Develop-

rnent' Program

: ?

:.

They are considered by the Appeals Board only on the

request of the Faculty of Education, which has given

some commitment to the student about admission to th e

Professional Development Program.

6. De'easedcourse1oad'whjlebn'Adernjcprobation

This is now handled directly by the Admissions Office

with the approval of the Senate Appeals

.

Board.

Items which are still handled by the Appeals Board fall

into the categories of 1) admissions; 2) retroactive

withdrawal, or course deletions which are granted on the

r

---

-5-

basis of documented medical evidence, or documented

evidence of compassionate grounds; and .3) waiving of

the full time which students should be away from the

University when on REQUIRED TO WITHDRAW or PERMANENT

WITHDRAWAL categories.

C.

?

PROCEDURE AND OPERATION

1. COnfidentialIty:

SUAB 1 requires that all meetings of the Board

shall be closed and the proceedings shall remain

confidential. It has been found by the Board

that this has served to encourage some appelants

to reveal personal or family problems which they

were not prepared .to divulge either to their

instructors or other members of their departments.

It is believed that this is an essential aspect of

the operation of the Board.

2.

Adjudication:

The terms of reference make several comments which

are relevant to the judicial proceedings of the

Board. Thus, under Powers, SUABi states that

"The Board should endeavour to ensure that prime

consideration, is given to academic factors, but

may consider' other factors in marginal cases."

It also notes that "The Board may reject or sustain

an appeal on the basis of whether or not existing

policy has been properly applied, or whether

because of extenuating circumstances, the application

of that policy should be waived."

? .

---

I

-6-

?

.

It is also stated that a student has a "right

to appeal the application of a particularpolicy

in his case," and that the Board may question

whether application of a policy is consistent

with its intent, with respect to particular

cases.

Prior to 1974, it appears that students were often

required to defend their cases before a Board of

critical, unsupportive judges. In this climate,

students seemed reluctant to reveal problems of

a personal nature; in any case, personal problems

were rarely divulged.

However, in 1974, with the advent of an elected

chairman, the Board adopted the reasonable man

approach to adjudication. Rather than simply

requiring students to present their case and basing

decisions on the arguments made, the Board has

taken the approach of first attempting 'to collect

all of the information relevant to the appeal.

Thus, documentation is encouraged for any claims

made about the student's circumstances, Board

members question appelants about aspects of

their circumstances that they may not have

thought to include in their case, etc,

Except in certain extreme cases, the Board seeks

to reach a decision on an appeal only after answers

have been obtained to all of the questions relevant

to the student's circumstances.

0

---

-7-

.

Retroactive withdrawals pose a special category of

appeal when they are requested for only part of a

semester's performance. In such situations students

are required to provide evidence of extenuating

circumstances which affected only some, but not all,

of the courses undertaken during the semester in

question. The Board has considered thirty-two such

cases over the reporting period. (See Appendix VIII.)

Generally, appeals are sustained where application

of an existing policy is not consistent with its

intent because of circumstances beyond the control

of the student or the uniqUe characteristic(s).of

a student's situation. Appendices VIII and IX

provide examples of the kinds of considerations

upon which appeals have been sustained.

3. ?

Documentation:

In order that the integrity of the Board's decisions

may be protected, students are encouraged to document

all claims, made concerning their unique or extenuating

circumstances.

Medical documentation in the form of 'a letter from a

doctor is required, confirming that the student was

incapacitated during the period of time relevant to

the appeal, where the student's health is important

to consideration of a case. Documentation has also

been submitted where a student does not wish to reveal

specific information of a personal nature in the form

of a letter from a psychological counsellor confirming

---

-8-

that the student was subject to personal problems

during the period in question in the appeal.

In the case of appeals for retroactive withdrawal,

students are asked to have the instructor and depart-

mental chairman .give written approval to their

request by signing a late drop form for each course

potentially affected by the appeal. Where depart-

ments and/or instructors are unwilling to support

the appeal, students are asked to request a note

explaining the reason(s) for not granting approval.

(Problems have been experienced with this procedure

and are addressed in Section E of this report.)

Students appealing for admission or readmission are

required to submit documentation of their performance

at other institutions and are encouraged to provide

personal or business letters of.refereñce which might

indicate that they have the necessary attitudes and

work habits to perform-academically at a university

level.

D. ?

STATISTICAL INFORMATION AND SUMMARY OF CASES 1974-1-1977-3

The co,llection of data for Appendices V through IX required

a detailed reading of the minutes of all meetings of the

Board for the period 1974-1 through 1977-3 and the review

of over 1000 student transcripts. There was no attempt

to report on Board decisions made prior to 1974 because of

the volume of work involved and the fact that the types

of appeals considered by the Board changed in 1974.

.

Appendix

There has

V

been

outlines

a quorum

the attendance

(3 voting members)

at Board

at

Meetings.all

meetings

?

S

---

t ?

I

-9-

with the exception of one. During the four year

period there have been a total of 57 meetings for

the purpose of hearing of appeals and three policy

meetings.

Appendix VI summarizes the volume and 'nature of appeals

considered and reports on the decisions made in each of

the four categories.

Appendix VII reflects the performance of students who

have been admitted under the "special entry

If

category.

The report summarizes the cumulative grade 'point average

(as of the end of 1977-3) for all special entries who

registered in 1974-1 to 1977-3.

Appendix VIII lists all appeals for retroactive withdrawal

for the period from 1974-3 to 1977-3. The report lists

the number of cases considered 'by semester, the nature of

the appeal, the decision and the circumstances and

documentation presented in support of the appeal.

Appendix IX includes al.l appeals for readmission from

students who were placed on required to withdraw and

permanent withdrawal.

E. ''CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

Research and discussion of this report began in 1976

and it became clear to the Board at that time that a

,series of 'recommendations were needed concerning the

policies administered by the Registrar's Office. The

scope of these concerns were broad and accordingly they

40

?

were addressed to SUAB which has incorporated them in

Senate Paper S78- ?

. There are still several matters,

---

- 10 -

however, which are of particular concern to the Board

itself, some of which involve specific recommendations

and these are discussed below.

1.

Visa Students:

In the past the Board has heard a small number of

appeals from individuals studying here on a student

visa. It is unclear at the present time how recent

changes to the Immigration Regulations will influence

the number or conduct of these appeals. It is the

Board's intention to monitor this area carefully

over the upcoming year and report on it to Senate

in our next report.

2.

Procedures for Retroactive Withdrawal:

Concern has been expressed by some departments about

their not having any input to the Board before decisions

for retroactive withdrawal are considered. The Board,

through the Secretary, has attempted to have students

approach departments and request approval for retro-

active withdrawals before a case is heard. However.

as there are no clearly defined procedures, some

problems have:occurred. The Board is of the opinion

that the departments should be given an opportunity

to have input before appeals for retroactive with-

drawal are considered. In order for this to occur

the Board will establish the procedures to be used'

and draft a separate form for future requests. This

form will allow a department the opportunity to

approve and/or comment

on all requests

for retro-

active withdrawal from

courses in that

department.

is

is

---

- 11 -

3.

Reports to Senate:

Under Senate policy SAB is in reporting category

"C° which requires that reports be, forwarded to

Senate annually. While this has not been accomplished

in the past, it is felt that this was due, in the

earlier years of the Board, to the lack of continuity

of Board members and, more recently, to the feeling

that several areas of policy required comprehensive

review before a

'

proper report could be forwarded.

In future, reports from SAB will be largely standardized

to provide Senate with updates of Appendices V-IX in

addition to any special concerns that are raised

during the year's operation. 'With respect to Appendix IX,

. ?

the Board recognizes'the importance of reviewing the

performance of students subsequent to readmission. Due

to the time-consuming nature of such a review it was

not possible to present this information in the current

report. This project is presently underway and will be

communicated to Senate in the next report from the Board.

4.

Terms of Reference:

In the original terms of reference of the SAB, mention

is made of our jurisdiction with respect to grade change

policy. In SUAB 1 this was changed to read "course

change policy." It is the present view of the Board

that this reference does not add any information relevant

to the operation of the SAB and so it is our recommendation

that this phrase be deleted so that under the terms of

reference the purpose of the Board will read:

.

?

To consider cases wherein an individual feels

---

- 12 -

aggrieved by the decision of the Registrar to

apply a particular admission, readmission,

standing-or credit transfer policy in his or

her specific case.

S

40

---

:.-...... .•..

•

?

- m ?

.

S

so

CL.)

till

As revised and ;)rvtd

by Senate at.

its

t..t'tin

of July 6, 1970.

A PROPOSAL FOR THE F.STMLISIIILNT OF THE

?

SENATE U:DJRCRADUATE

MXILSSIONS

BOARD AND

?

THE SENATE APPEALS BOARD

by

Dr. Robert C. Brown

.

History of the Problem

At the March meeting of Senate, Paper 5.329 was presented

as a summation of the several previous attempts to establish a Senate

Undergraduate Admissions Board and a Senate Appeals Board. After

considerable debate, during which some sections of the paper were

approved, Senate referred the matter to the Academic Vice-President

for reassessment,- "with a view to making sure there are appropriate

appeal mechanisms ... that it not be so complex and that the bodies

be not so separate (so that) more problems are likely to occur."

With these instructionaof, Senate in mind, lengthy interviews

were conducted with Admissions personnel, members of the present Ad

Hoc committees, Senators andministratora. These discussions

indicated the need for a comIete. re-thinking of the problem. Thus,

since Senate did not appr*&pper S.329 itotal and thus none of

•

?

its parts are yet accepte4bjicy I have chosen to completely re-

define and restructure itsaproposals. Those wishing to review past

debate on this matter are referred to Pipers 5.305, 5.293, $308 and

S.329, plus the minutes of the meeting. of December 1 and December 8,

1969 and January 12, January 26 and March 2, 1970.

Re-Statement of the Problem

At a special meeting of Senate in November 1968, two Ad Hoc

Committees were struck in response to strong student-faculty criticism

of existing admission and transfer policy. The first, the Senate

Undergraduate Admissions Board (SUAB), was charged with directing the

admissions, standing and credit procedures of the University; and the

second, the Senate Appeals Board (SAB), was charged with hearing

student appeals.

The Registrar was instructed by Senate to direct to these

committees all cases for which a definite Volley had not yet been

established or which would require individual interpretation. The

cases were to go to SUAB for interpretation and decision. In cases

where

the

request of the applicant was denied, he was informed

of

his

right to appeal either in person, via representation, or both, to the

Appeals Committee • The decision of the Appeal. Committee was, final

and binding.

While there is merit in some of the aspects of this

Ad tL

system (studenti, were provided with an appeals mechanism allowing

them personal rep resentation

1

and some Senators did become familiar

with the complex problems of admissions, transfer and standings

policy) there were alsoseveral- negative results. They are too

---

-2-

numerous

to list them all

h

ere, but P

e

rhaps the most serious were the

lack of confidence which developed between t

resulted from the I reque

?

?

rev

ersal of SUA

decis

he committees

ions

by the

that

?

?

th

?

Appeals

In the

Consi

stency

e general

of th

lack ot confidence among admissions personnel

e COmIitteES. and the general ma1aj generated

withj the

Regjserars

O

ffice in having Senate CommjLt5

d

oing their

Jobs for

th

em. The general problem faci8

S

enate now then is to

ma

that.

reconstruct

'the proble

these

encountered

comjtteos within the spirit of the Eiji, Repo so

within

the Previous

system

are minimized

or eliminated The ultimate goal is to Provide a mechanism for

the

and review of P

o

licy, • mechanism which provides Students

R'

wV

,istrar's

li rights

01

of

fice

appeal

to performand

W

hich,

?

a

at

confid

the same

?

ent efficient

t

ime, will

manner.

allow the

?

W

hile the Eiji, Repor, as

a

ccepted

by

Senate,

c

alls for' the

?

?

formation of the

?

and the SAB, a few qualifyj

co

mments are in

?

order here.

A

seen in the previous Paragrap5, these COmmittees were

generated

as a result of alleged

inadequacj5

in admissions procedures

Within the

Regis58

Office. This, it

s

eems to me,

has

been a

misinterpretation of facts.

If

there Was a problem

been clearly demonstrated that there was

?

, and it has never

it was that Senate had not

Provided sufficie0t guidance in the form of University Policy so that

Student

the admissions

transfer.

peraon,j

Thus

could

what 1s

adequately screen applicants

required

is a body, like SUAB,

w

hich can

Particularly

ge

nerate new Policy and review existing P

o

licy; not Cojtt,es Which

review

hu

ndreds of individual cases That is the

job

of the

personnel. So while

t

here is a clear need for the two Committee system

t present, Senate may wane to reconsider the

situation

within two or

three

y

ears when we have generated needed Policy and procedures A

that time "exceptionall, Cases

s

hould b

handled

within

the Regjstrar. Office a rare, £.nd could ecei1y be t

The

Motions ?

they are in mostUniversities

It is moved that

Se

nate, Pcept the

fO11vjng:

and

(1) ?

application

The

Registrar'

of P

?

olicy

s

emanating

Officechared

from the Senate.

with

the

administration

P o

licy, the Registrar f a need is

guid

ance of the Senate Underrad

felt for

interp

retation of Such

guate

?

Admissj05 Board

strar

(Su1)

shall

?

seek

It

the

Should be clearly understoodthat the decision to

apply

a Policy of

Board

Senate

(SUAB))

(interpreted

is the respo

f

?

sib

j

by the Senate Undergraduate Admissions

j of the Regie

?

It follows

• Policy in a particular case c

that if such a

d

ecision is appealed, only the P

rop

riety of

applying

a be disputed. In other

w

ords, appeal

does not involve cuestioning the

advisability

of the Policies of

---

-

------

?

-

?

-.

0 ?

-3-

Senate. This does not me

but simply point

?

s out that

an

there

that the

is a

rules

difference

of Senate

be

tween

are

Policy

imm

utable

reform and

ap

peals of

spe

cific

CflSCS.

Where

Policy reform is

Its

deemed

own

ne

ini

cessary,

tiative

it

or

shall

Upon

be

a

con

recoe

ducted

?

by S

e

a

cting either on

?

nd

?

enat

(2)

?

The Senate Undergraduateati from the SUAB.

Majsaj05 Board (Sun)

de

To

cisions

recom

me

on

nd

undergraduate

to and recejy0 from the SenatePolicy

admissio

n

s,

re-admissions,

Of

to

standing

such

provide

Policy.

and

general

credit

?

directi

transfer

on in

and,

the

where

interpretation

necessary,

Pro

cedure

.

In

nece

nto

ee

It

ds

line

ap

ssitate

is

prise

to

the

with

be

the

formulated

general

the

the

Co

review

p

mmittee

urpose

respon

?

or

of

aof

of

existing

?

sibility

areas

ci

rct

in

Policy.

of

a,es

w

the

hich

which

Registrar

Policy

Then,

above there are three

follow:

Possible procedural routes whi

c

h the

Co

ittee Shall

a)

flOtify

Recoulne

SLM

ndation.

g

of need

to

S

for

enate;

review

the

or

Reg

establiistrar

will.

s

hmen

t

.

?

Secretary

of Policy;

nex

of

t

SUAB

mee

Senate

t

in

will

g

of

for

forward

Senate.

in

clusion

recommendatio

on the agenda

n

s to

OPERATING

No

I-

Off

Ice:

notification

Processed

StwIe*ts

apply

under

of Right

Senate

to 51strar'5

to

Rules

Appeal

O

ffice

r^

to

SUAB

1)

Develops new Policy where

policy

needed

-

and

'recoaneuü

rei5 existing

to Seuat.p

i

e

_

3)

2)

Receives

Interprets

Policy

existing

from

Policy

Senate

W

4

(Membership

I ?

overlap)

--.

SENATE

SAB

Spe

Hears

Of app

cific

ap

lication

pe

Cases.

als on

of

Propriety

p

olicy

in

---

-4 -

Instruct

Receive Policy

the Secretary

djj005

of Senate

from Senate:

to pass

Senate

Policy

will

decisions to

the SUg, and the SUAJ will,, where

An

necessary1

the interpretation

provide general

of

?

di

?

rectj0

to the Registrar

thà

Policy

-

In cases where

?

Senate

r

equests a reconefldatjon from the SUAB

.

?

, they

?

Will

be

h

andled as in a)

of

Will

Interpretation

an

info

existing

?

rm SUj

of

of

exi8ti

the need

ng policy:

for an interpretation

The Regi

strar

Policy.

The interpretation wi be

made

and

tran

smitted to the

R e

a0

?

Senate.

gistrarl. °

f fice,

ecommefldatjàna to S

Regis

?

LET

.

L3

LHtIJ

b. Receive

Policy

DeCISiO8

from Sena.

Fate

c. Interpretatfonof. exie8 Policy:

•

Registrar

of

his

Academic

tie).

choice

?

Vice.preas

Chairman

sideflt

(nonor

?

a

votjng

Senate

except

design

in

?

case

of

•

on

the

altA

Senate

alternate.)

the

ernateBoard

Ccj

?

App-

they

tt.,

ointee

(There

?

Should

as

to

are

the

the

?

dácjd.

two

prime

Academic

Senate

mewhich

appBoard,

ehall

ointees

plus

serve

to

mber and Which

?

as

• ?

hs

Di

rector of

Three Students

(One

elected by Student

COun

Se

w

ith

PtOVjj0g

for an

alte

rnate, and two

S

cil

tudent

nators

el

ected from Senate with the third

term).

Student Senator to serve a

alternate;

one year

b)

c)

.

.

.

---

S ?

-5 -

Three faculty members (one elected by each Faculty

from its Undergraduate Curriculum Committee, with

each Faculty also providing an alternate; two year

term).

One member of Senate elected by Senate for a two

year term.

Recording Secretary (non-voting).

peration: ?

A.quorum will be five voting members.

Decision will be based upon majority (of those

• ?

present) rule.

•

?

The Director of Admissions will be responsible for

preparing the Agenda of the meetings, sending out.

notice of meeting, preparing and distributing

minutes of each meeting 'to the members of SUM and

• ? SAL

(3) ?

The Senate Appeals Board (SAS)

Purpose: ?

To consider cases wherein an

individual feels aggrieved

. ?

by

the decision of the Registrar to apply a particular

admission, re-admission, standing, credit transfer or

grade change policy in his specific case (see (1)above).

Procedure: ?

In cases where a student request with respect, to

admission, re-admission,, standing, credit transfer,

or grade change is denied by the Registrar, the

student viii be informed, in writing, of his right to

appeal the

application of a particular EglIcy

in

case. If he wishes to appeal, he will be informed of

the date. of the next meeting of the ccmeitt.e in

writing and Of hi. right to appear before the committee

In person, via mrepresentative, or both. The decision

of the committee is final.

Membership: ?

The Registr or his designate

(non-voting,

Chairman).

One Fecu4ty,embec of SUA, plus alternate, elected

by

Two studdbtó,

plus alternate, chosen in a manner to

be determined by Student Council.

One

faculty Senator, plus alternate, elected by,

Senate.

One Recording Secretary (non-voting).

S

0

---

I

Heetj8

A quorum

sha

Is

ll

three Voting

me

mbers.

be Closed and Proceedings shall remain

Confidential.

Regular

me

etings will occur three times a semester;

but

In the

before

week

the

prior

final

to

date

registr

to

ation;

change

after registration

c

ourses; and in

the ninth week of the semester. Special

me

etings may

be

sche

duled as deemed

nec

essary by the

Reg

istrar or

O

h

f

is

the

designate

meeting.

and

s

ha].l be

announced

well in advance

.

.

---

IJi

.9

-

2 -

S

1

*

APP

ROV AL

?

S.M. 6/7/70

The agenda was approved as distributed

2.

A

PPROVAL OF MINUTES

The

mi

nutes of the Open

Se

ssion of

June

?

distributed

?

1, 1970 were

a

pproved as

3.

BUSINES S

ARISING FROM THE

MINUTES

There was no business arising from the minutes.

.4.

R

EPORT OF CHAIRMAN

a)

Paper

S.380

the Board of Governors - Re ott

of

senate

Commi

_L^r

S-358

forw

arded

by

Senate to ?

?

(ad hoc).

?

ttee

_on the Method of

-- -

The

Chai

rm

an

of Senate stated that Paper S.380, which had been

distributed

to

Sen

ators earlier in June, 1970,

in diatt

.

d that the Board

of

Governors

has considered Paper S.358 dealing with the report of the

Senate

Co

mmittee on

the

Method of

Appointment

,

Tenure

and

Fun

ctions of

Deans and Heads of

Depa

rtments, and is holding

decision

on the coaplete

paper Pending legal opinion

.

Paper S.380 showed,

however,

that the Board

had

app

roved, with some change, Sections III. A.

(Se

lection of a Dean's

Search

Comm

ittee) and III. B. (Terms of Reference of the Dean's Search

the

Committee)

agenda

?

was

As

considered

there were no

quest

ions on Paper S.380 the next item of

b)

Paper

S-381

-

p

^^O!a^

^for Establishment

.8

0

of

the Senate . Under ad

?

?

uate

Brown

Moved by R. Brown

se

conded by C. Kirchner,

"That Mo

tions 1, 2 and 3 of Paper S.381, dealing with

adopted"

Board

estab

lishment

(SUAB)

and

of

the

the

Seflate

Senate Under

Appea

l

graduate

s Board

Admissions

(SAB)

be

At this

p

oint the Chairmanent Statedhat

Se

nators could ask

questio

ns

on the paper of

SenAt

AtOw

n

.,

and he in turn could reply to the

Should

queries,

be

During

made in

the

the

questioning'pPaper.

The

eriod

fo

llowing

it was

changes

noted

were

that

noted

several

and

changes

agreed

I. Page 2 (Motion 1): Where the words "Admissions Board" appear, this

should

(SU1J3)."

be changed to read "Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board

U

---

I ?

—'

-

3 -

?

S.M. 6/7/70

2.

itself.

Page

i

mmediately

3 -

Operating

preceding

Model:

the Operating

A

line Should

Model

appear

and the

between

Operating

the

Model

statement

3.

Page 3 - Operating Model:

The

title "Operating Model (SAB)"

be changed to read "Operating Model (SUAN and SAg)."

?

should

In response to the question whether any Senator could propose policy

changes for the committee, Senator Brown stated that it was

the intent to

or

have

any

either

other

the

interested

R

egistrar's

body

Office,

propose

or

policy

the

cIlang&'s.

Committee,

In

or

Senate

itself,

other words,

to

reco

come

mmendations

from the

for.

Re

gistrar's

the need

Office

of pol

alone.

1ev changes did not

necessarily

have

Question was called on the motion to approve Motions 1, 2 and 3 of

Paper S.381, and a vote taken.

MOTION

CARRIED

Moved by R. 1cAninch, sended by J. Ellis,

•,

?

r.

"That Sonijte recozf4r the motion just passed."

It was pointed out that several Senators had thought

I t

2 and 3 were going to be handled indivjdu1Il.

Question was called on the motion to reconsider, and a

vote taken.

IOTION CARRIED

.1 Opposed

Amendment was moved by R.

M

cAninch,

s

econded by A.

Turnbu]1,

"That membership of the Senate Appeals Board (SAB)

be changed by adding the words 'Plus alternate'

by

after

s

ubstituting

the statement

the

'one

words

Faculty

'two students'

member of

for

S('AB';

the

words 'one

s

tudent'; and by adding the word 'faculty'

between the words 'one' and 'Senator."

The effect of the motion would be to add an alternate faculty member

a

at

faculty

large of

Senator.

SUAB and one student, and to

replace

the one Senator with

R. McAnich pointed out that from his experience on the former

Senate Committee on Appeals (Admissions and Standings) students and

faculty had somewhat different perspectives on the cases brought

before it, and that it was helpful in making decisions to have such

a balance. He thought that the proposed change to two faculty members

that Motions

.

.

.

---

-

fun

1 ?

-'

-

4 -

?

S.M. 6/7/70

and two students would ensure this balance. This view was supported.

by A. Turnbull, who had also served on the previous Committee. He

added that the former Committee had originally been set up on a

s

tudent-faculty parity basis and that the agreed upon arrangement

where a split

or tied vote would be considered lost had worked out to

the satisfaction of

the Committee.

R. Brown spoke against the amendment and stated that in his view

the Committee should have an uneven number in order to prevent a tie

occurring in voting. Other Senators spoke on the Issue with some

expressing the view that the Committee should be on

either a student-

faculty parity basis or that students should have

the majority. Others

opposed

Committee."

this view claiming that students would then

be "running the

Moved by R. Harper, seconded by J. Kenwarci,

"That the previous quesdon be called."

Question was called on

çe previous

questiàn, and a

vote taken.

PREVIOUS QUESTION CARRIED

. ?

with

member

Question

one

from

faculty

SUM

was

and

Senator,

called

one

on

student

and

the

a

amendment.

vote

and

taken.to

replace

to add

one

one

Senator

alternate

at large

faculty

IMENDNENT CARRIED

19 in

favor

2 opposed

Amendment was moved by H.

Weinberg,

seconded by K.

Rieckhoff,

"That the following

statement he

added tinder

Membership of the Senate Appeals Board (SAB),

'tine member it large to he elected by the

other Committee members."

Fl. Weinberg stated that this additional member would preclude the

possibility of a split vote and offer an opportunity for either a

sttident or a faculty member to

be

elected by the group.

Question was called on the amendment to add one member at large

to the Committee, and a

vote taken.

AMENDMENT FAILED

. ?

2

in favor

It was noted that in the event of a tied vote on the

Committee,

the motion would be declared lost.

---

.m ?

..-

Li

?

a

?

-5-

?

S.M. 6/7/70

Moved by G. Basham, seconded by

L.

Freiman,

"That the following words be deleted

from the

section entitled 'Operation' in

Motion 2 found

on Page

5:

'Meetings

shall be closed and

proceedings shall remain c

o

nfidential. Policy

statements will be publicized through normal

channels.

It was claimed that the Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board is

dealing with policies relating to undergridunte admissions,

re-

admissions, standing, and credit transfer, not individuals, and that

if Senators were to influence policies in these areas, it was important

meetings

for them

to

to

be

know

held

what

by

was

the

going

Senate

on

Undergraduate

with regard

Admissions

to these policies

Board.

in

the

However, it was claimed by some Senators that there would be numerous

times when individual cases would have to be discussed for the formation

of new policies and that where this was the case meetings should be

closed and proceedings kept confidential. it was felt by some Senators

that discretion should be exercised by the Committee on

whether or

not

to keep some of its proceedings confidential, for instance when it is

dealing with individual

cases. The Chairman of Senate stated that if

this amendment passed the Committee Is to use its own discretion in

deciding upon whether or not-meetings are to be closed and proceedings

confidential.

Question was called on the amendment. to delete the formal statements

relating to closed meetings and confidential proceedings, and a vote taken.

A>IENDMF.NT CARRI El'

3 opposed

Question was called on the main motion to adopt Motions 1, 2 and 3,

as amended, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

mm

5.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Paper

S.

382-Senate Committee on Examination and Grading Practices -

Terms of Reference.

The Chairman of

Senate pointed

out that the Senate Agenda Committee

had asked

Dr.

L. Roland, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Examination

and Grading Practices, to be present at this meeting to speak on the

Terms of Reference for this Committee and to answer an

y

questions which

Senators may have on these Terms of Reference, or the specific charges

placed before the Committee.

.

---

Appendiv

SUAB1

(As amended and

r ?

approved by SUAB,

October 1.5, 1970)

TO SENATE UDIRCI.ADUATE ?

FROM: DR. D. NEAKIN

ADMISSIO;S BOARD

DIRECTOR OF ADMISSIONS

DATE: 21st OCTOBER, 1970

SUBJECT: PROCEDURES AND TERNS OF REFERENCE --

SENATE UNDERGRADUATE ADMISSIONS BOARD

AND SENATE APPEALS BOARD

The Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board and the Senate

Appeals Board were established by Senate on July 6th, 1970,

according to Paper S-381 (copy attached). Paper S-381

gives considerable detail on relationships between the two

committees and also, in a more general way, the terms of

reference.

I feel

that it is advisable from the outset to have the

• ?

terms of reference, and the procedures and mechanisms

clearly defined. Since, the terms of reference of both

committees constitute part of the Un,iversity's admissions

policies.,

they fall within the province of SUAB. However,

0 ?

it is

probably desirable for SUAB to consult with SAB

prior

to any final.decisjon.

DtI:bc

'I.

---

1.

SENATE UNDERGRADUATE ADMISSIONS BOARD

PURPOSE:

?

?

To recommend to, and receive from Senate

policy decisions an undergraduate admissions,

readmissions, standing, and credit transfer

and, where necessary, to provide general

direction in the interpretation of such poli-

cy.

iEMBERSHIP: Academic Vice-President or a Senate designate

of his choice as Chairman (non-voting, except

in case of a tie.).

A Senate appointee to the Academic Board,

plus alternate. (There are two Senate appoin-

tees.to the Board - they should decide which

?

•

?

shall serve on the committee as prime member,

?

•

?

and which as alternate). Term of office to

coincide with term of appointment to the

?

• ?

Academic Board.

Director of Admissions.

Two student Senators elected by Senate. The

third student Senator to serve as alternate.

Term of office - 1 year.

a

;p.

?

?

One student, plus alternate, elected by Stu-

dent Council. Term of office - 1 year.

Three faculty members (one elected by each

Faculty from its Undergraduate Curriculum

Committee, with each Faculty also providing

an alternate). Term of office - 2 years.

One Senator, elected by Senate. Term of

office - 2 years.

Recording secretary (non-voting).

NOTE: • Expiry dates will be September 30th in

- ••

?

•

?

accord with Senate practice.

?

0

---

o

I

2.

• ?

OPERATION: ?

A quorum will be five voting members.

Decision will be based upon majority (of

those present) rule.

The Director of Admissions will be

responsible for preparing the Agenda of

the meetings, sending out notices of meeting,

preparing and distributing minutes of each

meeting to the members of SUAB and SAB.

Alternates have theright to attend any

meeting and will be granted debate privi-

leges Qt the discretion of the chair. Alter-

nates may vote only in the absence of the

member they replace.

• ?

The Board shall operate under Senate rules.

Members should inform the Director of

Admissions when they have items for the

agenda, and if possible, supply supporting

papers.

The Board is a policy committee. Cases of

individual students will not be considered,

although the Registrar's Office may seek

policy clarification to enable them to deal

with a particular case.

A report shall be submitted to Senate annual-

ly (prepared on the basis of the academic

•

?

year: Fall, Spring, Summer).

L

Fr__7

---

3.

S ?

SENATE APPEALS BOARD

PURPOSE: ?

To consider cases wherein an individual

feels aggrieved by the decision of the

Registrar to apply a particular admission,

•

?

readmission, standing, credit transfer or

• ?

course change policy in his specific case.

MEMBERSHIP: ?

The Registrar or his designate (non-voting,

Chairman).

One faculty member of SUAB, plus alternate,

elected by SUAB.

Two students, plus an alternate, chosen in

a manner to be determined by student coun-

cil.

One faculty Senator, plus alternate, elect-

ed by Senate.

One recording secretary (non-voting).

Term of office -.1 year from September 30th.

OPERATION:

?

A

quorum is three voting meibers. Meetings

shall be closed and the proceedings shall

remain confidential.

Regular meetings will occur three times a

semester -- in the week. prior to registra-

tion; after registration, but before the

final date to change courses;

in

the ninth

week of the semester. Special meetings may

• be scheduled as deemed necessary by the

Registrar or his designate and shall, be

announced well in advance of the. meeting.

The minutes of each meeting shall be distri-

buted to members of SUAB and of SAB.. Since

they deal with individual

students,

the

minutes are considered confidential.

•

?

Alternate ,

; n'v at td

I

etili ?

nd

h3vc

speaking rights, but my only vote in the

- ?

absence of the member they replace.

---

4.

PROCEDURE: ?

In cases where a student request with

respect to admission, readmission, standing,

credit transfer, or course chance is denied

by the Registrar, the student will be in-

formed, in writing, of his right to appeal

• ?

the application of a particular policy

,

in

his case. If he wishes to appeal, he will

be informed of the date of

.

the next meeting

• ?

of the committee in writing, and of his

right to appear before the committee in

person, via a representative, or both. The

decision of the committee is final.

POWERS: ?

A student has the right to appeal the vali-

dity of application of a particular policy

in his specific case. The Board may reject

orsustain anappeal on the, basis of-whether

L.

or not existing

policy has been properly

applied, or whether because of. extenuating

circumstances, the application of. that policy

should be waived.

,.

?

a) The Board may question whether the

regular practice being followed is-con-

sistent with the intent of the policy.

In such cases, the Appeals Board should

ask STJAB for an interpretation of the

policy, and whether the application

thereof is in keeping with the intent of

the policy, prior to making a decision

on the appeal.

b) Consideration should be restrict

ed

to

those factors which have a direct bear-

ing on

the reasons for the decision made.

The Board should endeavour to ensure that

prime consideration is given to academic

factors,

but may consider other factors

in marginal cases. For example, in a

case

where an applicant Comes slightly

•

?

below

the admission requirements, a docu-

mented Illness during final examinations

may have impact on the decision.

0. ?

DM:bc

---

:5

?

t'

As revised and arrv((!

by .Sctiatc at its :ic• t

of July 6, 1970.

A PROPOSAL FOR Till: ESTELIS1lMr::T OF THE

?

SENATE U:LEI'.GkALUATE Ar;::[sS I o::s 50MW ;

,

-N 1 ?

TILE SENATE' /J;ALS 0MW

by

Dr. Robert C. Brown

History of the Problem

At the March Ileeting of Senate, Paper S.329 was presented

as a su ation of the several previous attcr.ipts to establish a Senate

Undergraduate Admissions Board and a Senate Appeals Board. After

considerable debate, during which some sections of the paper were

approved, Senate referred the matter to the Academic Vice-President

for reassessment

"with

-

a view to making sure there are appropriate

appeal mechanisms ... that it not be so complex and that the bodies

be not so separate (so that) more problems are likely to occur."

With thcse instructions of

Senate

in mind, lengthy interviews

were conducted with Admissions personnel, members of the present Ad

Vol: committees, Senators and administrators. These discussions

indicated the need for a complete re-thinking of the problem. Thus,

since Senate (lid not approve Paper S.329 in total and thus none of

its parts are yet accepted policy, I have chosen to completely re-

define and restructure its proposals. Those wishing to review past

debate on this matter are referred to Papers E .305, S.293, S.308 and

S.329, plus the minutes of the meetings of December 1 and Dacember 8,

1969 and January 12, January 26 and March 2, 1970.

Re-Statement of the Problem

At a special meeting of Senate in November 1968, two Ad Hoc

Committees were struck in response to strong student-faculty criticism

of existing admission and transfer policy. The first, the Senate

Undergraduate Admissions Board (SUAB), was charged with directing the

admissions, standing and credit procedures of the University; and the

second, the Senate Appeals Board (SAB), was charged with hearing

student appeals.

The Registrar was instructed by Senate to direct to these

'committees all cases for which a definite policy had not yet been

established or which would require individual interpretation. The

cases were

to go to

SUM for interpretation and decision. In cases

where the request of the applicant was denied,

be

was Informed of his

right to appeal either in person, via representation, or both, to the

•

Appeals Committee. The dacision of the Appeals conittce was final

• and binding.

While there is merit in some of the aspects of this

system

.

(r.tudcnts were provided with an appeals mech;n ism allowing

them

p

ersonal rnrcsentiLwn •

and some Senators

did

become

familiar

With

the complex problems of auission:; , trns Let and standings

policy)

there wer' also several negative results. They are 'too

S

1 ]

---

-2—.

. ?

'numerous to list them all here, but perhaps the most serious were the

lack of cc:fidence which devcleped het:c:tt

thC

CO!:aittC:eS that

resulted from the freqtient reversa). of SUAJ: decisions by the Appeals

Cnmr:ittcr ; Lh

• . general 3.ck of cot idence

?

ad;

s510n5;

pr;o-.:eJ

in the consistency of

the

corn:liittees; and the general malaise generated

within the registrar's Office in having Senate Committce; doing their

jobs for then. The general problem facing Senate now then is to

• ? reconstruct these committees within the spirit of the Ellis Report so

that. the problems encountered within the previous system are minimized

or eliminated. The ultimate goal is to provide a mechanism for the

establishment and review of policy, a mechanism which provides students

• ?

with rights of appeal, and which, at the sac: time, will allow the

•

registrar's Office to perfom in a confident, efficient manner.

Justification of the Two Committee System

While the Ellis Report, as accepted by Senate, calls for the

formation of the SUAB and the SAB, .a few qualifying comments are in

order here. As seen in the previous paragraphs, these committees were

generated as a result of alleged inadequacies in admissions procedures

within

the

Registrar's Office. This, it seems to me, has been a

misinterpretation of facts. If there was a problem, and it has never

been clearly demonstratedthat there was, it was that Senate had not

provided sufficient guidance in the form of University policy so that

. ?

the idr.iissions personnel

cold adequately screen applicants, particularly

student transfers. Thus what is required is a body, like SUAB, which can

generate new policy and review existing policy; not commit tees 'which

review hundreds of individual cases. That is the job of the admissions

personnel. So while there 'is a clear need for the two committee system

at present, Senate may. want to reconsider the situation within two or

three years when we have generated needed policy and procedures. At

that time "exceptional" cases should be rare, and could easily be

handled within the Registrar's Office as they are in most Universities.'

The Notions

It is

moved that Senate accept the following:

(1) ?

The Registrar's Office is charged with the administration

?

and application of policy emanating from the Senate. If a need is

felt for interpretation of such policy, the Registrar shall

,

seek the

guidance of the Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board (SUA.13). It

should be clearly understood that the decision to apply a policy of

Semite (interpreted if necessary by the Senate Undergraduate Admissions

Board (SUAi)) 'is the responsibility of the Registrar.. -

It.

follows

that if such a decision is appealed, only the propriety of applying

a policy in a particular case can be disputed. in other words, appeal

does üoc involve questioning t!-..a avisbility of th politics of

---

-3-

'S

Senate.

?

This does not mean that the rules of Senate are immutable,

but simply points out that there is a difference between policy

reform and appeals of specific cases.

?

Where policy reform is

deemed necessary, it shall be conducted by Senate acting either on

its own initiative or upon a recommendation from* the SUAB.

(2) ?

The Senate Undergraduate Admissions board (SUAB)

• ? Purpose: ?

To recommend to and receive from the Senate policy

decisions on undergraduate admissions, re-admissions,

•,.

• ?

standing, and credit transfer and, where necessary,

to

provide general'direction in the interpretation

of

such policy.

Procedure:

?

It is the general responsibility of the Registrar

•

?

to

apprise the committee of areas in which policy

ndsto be formulated or of circumstances which

necessitate the review of existing policy.

?

Then,

• ?

in

line with the purpose above, there are three

•

?

• ?

• possible procedural routes which the committee shall

•

?

follow:

• ?

a) Recommendations to Senate; the Registrar will

-

notify SUAB of need for review or establishment

of policy'; SUAB will forward recommendations to

Secretary of Senate for inclusion on the agenda

• ?

of the next meeting of Senate.

•

?

• ?

OPERATING MODEL (SUAB and SAE)

Registrar's Office:

?

•

Students apply to Registrar's Office

• ?

• ?

Processed under Senate Rules

• ?

• ?

•• ?

Notification of, Right to Appeal

given where appropriate

no

( ?

(brinns ences

?

to)

• ?

.. ?

•

i'

?

••

SUAB

• ?

1) Develops new policy where

?

Hears appeals on propriety

• ?

needed and reviews existing

?

of application of

of policy in

•

policy - recommends to Senate

?

specific cases.

2) Interprets existing. policy

3) Receives policy from Senate

A

?

•

(Membership

• ?

1 ?

.

?

overlap)

SFNATE

• ___

?

•:

---

-4-

• ?

b) Receive policy decisions from Senate: Senate will

• instruct the Secretary of Senate to pass policy

decisions

to

the SUAB, and the

SUAI3 will,

where

necessary, provide gencral direction to the Registrar

•

?

in the interpretation of the policy. In cases where

•

?

Senate requests a recommendation from the SUAT3, they

will be handled as

in

a).

• ?

. ?

c) Interpretation of existing policy: The Registrar

• ?

will inforurSUAB of

the need for an interpretation

of an existing policy. The interpretation will be

•

?

made and transmitted to the Registrar's Office.

•

?

a; Recommendations to Senate:

Etra .,

Secretary

Senate 1

of Senate

b. Receive Policy Decisions from Senate:

II I

?

rn

L

Ccret ?

41J

• c. Interpretation of existing policy:

[Registrar

Membership: ?

Academic Vice-President or a Senate designate of

?

• ?

his choice as Chairman (non-voting except in case

• .

?

of tie)

?

• ?

••

?

A Senate Appointee to the Academic Board, plus

alternate. (There are two Senate appointees to

?

• ?

•

?

•

?

the Board - they should decide which shall serve

•

?

on the committee as the prime member and which

?

• .• ?

•

?

• •

?

as alternate.)

•

?

•

?

•

?

The Director of Admissions.

Three Students (One elected by

Student

Council,

?

• • ?

with provisions for an alternate, and two student

Senators elected from Senate, with the third

•

?

student Senator to serve as

alternate;

one year

term).

?

•

? -

---

.

/

5

:

'Three faculty members (one elected by each Faculty

from its Undergraduate Curriculum Committee, with

each Faculty also providing an alternate;

?

two year

•

term). ?

..

One member of Senate elected by Senate for a two

year term.

Recording Secretary (non-voting).

Operation:

A quorum will be five voting members.

Decision will be based upon majority (of those

present)

?

rile.

The Director of Admissions will be responsible for

preparing the Agenda of the meetings, sending out

notice of meeting, preparing and distributing

minutes of each meeting to the members of SUAB and

SAB.

(3) ?

The

Senate Appeals Board (SAB)

Purpose:

To consider cases wherein an individual feels aggrieved

by the decision of the Registrar to apply a particular

admission, re-admission, standing, credit transfer or

grade change policy i

?

hi ?

snecific case (see (1) above).

Procedure:

In cases where:a student request with respect to

admission, ?

re-admission, standing,

?

credit transfer,

or grade change is denied by the Registrar, the

student will be informed,

,

in writing, of his right to

appeal the application of a particular policy in his

case. if he wishes to appeal, he will be informed of

•

the date of the next meeting of the committee in

writing and of his right to appear before the committee

in

person, via a representative, or both.

?

The decision

•

of the committee is final.

Nembrship:

The Registrar or his designate (non-voting, Chairman).

One Faculty member of

SUAB,

plus alternate, elected

by

SUAB.

Two students, plus alternate, chosen in a manner to

•

be determined by Student Council.

One faculty Senator, plus alternate, elected by

•

Senate.

One Recording Secretary (non-voting).

---

•

?

—6--

S ?

.

Operation:

A quorum is three voting members.

Meeting shall be closed and proceedings shall remain

confidential.

Regular meetings will occur three times a semester;

in

the week prior to registration; after registration

but before the final date to change courses; a

I

nd in

the ninth week of the semester. Special. mectings may

be scheduled as deemed necessary by the Registrar or

his designate and shall be announced well in advance

• .

• . •

?

of

the meeting.

o

---

PAPER SUAB 25

?

S

TO: ALL MEMBERS OF SENATE

UNDERGRADUATE ADMISSIONS

BOARD

FROM: DR. D. MEAKIN, SECRETARY

SENATE APPEALS BOARD

DATE: 25TH OCTOBER, 1971

SUBJECT: COMPOSITION OF THE SENATE APPEALS BOARD

The Senate Appeals Board requests that the Senate Undergraduate

Admissions Board approve the following motion and submit it to

Senate for consideration:--

of

?

That the composition of the Senate Appeals Board be

as follows:.

Chairman, selected by the Senate Appeals Board and

ratified by S.U.A.B.

One faculty member of S.U.A.B., plus alternate,

elected by S.U.A.B.

One faculty senator, plus alternate, elected by

Senate

Two students, plus two alternates, chosen in a manner

to be determined by Student Council

:The Registrar or his designate (non-voting, Secretary)

The only change (underlined above) is in the provision of two

student alternates instead of the present one. This would be con-

sistent with having an alternate for each faculty member on the

Board, and allow the students greater flexibility in planning

their schedule. ?

.

The above motion was approved unanimàusly.at a meeting of the

Senate appeals Board on October 14th, 1971.

DM : be

S

0

---

( ?

.'.

$pvnmy

'S

'S.434

,

?

TO: ALL MEMBERS OF. SENATE ?

FROM: DR. D. MEAKIN

SECRETARY, SENATE UNDER-

GRADUATE ADMISSIONS BOARD

DATE: 9TH NOVEMBER, 1970

SUBJECT: COMPOSITION OF THE SENATE APPEALS BOARD

During its consideration of Paper S-381, Senate approved the

following composition for the Senate Appeals Board.

Registrar (or his designate), non-voting Chairman

One faculty Senator elected by Senate (with alternate)

One faculty Member elected, from SUAB (with alternate)

Two students chosen by the Student Society (with one

alternate)

This has produced

.a polarized situation, and with no means of

resolving tie votes, decision has had to be deferred on a

number of cases. The Senate Appeals Board, therefore, requested

the Senate 'Undergraduate Admissions. Board to fin4 a solution to

this problem. Since the solution proposed involved a modifica-

tion to' the composition of the Senate Appeals' Board,

,

the matter

is now being presented to Sënate'for approval. Since decisions

on several appeals art being held in abeyance,' an early decision

• on this matter is requested.

The Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board, on the recommendation

of the Senate Appeals Board, proposes that the composition of

the Senate Appeals Board be amended' as follows (approved by a

,vote of5to3):

Chairman, non-voting except in case of a tie.

One faculty Senator elected by Senate (with alternate)

One faculty Member elected from SUAB (With alternate)

Two students chosen by the Student Society (With an

Alternate)

Registrar, or his designate, non-voting Secretary'

Recording secretary, non-voting

---

The Chairman shall be selected by majority vote of the

voting members of the Senate Appeals Board. The selection

is subject to ratification by the Senate Undergraduate

Admissions Board.

In addition to providing a mechanism for breaking tie votes,

the proposal also provides the Board with a Secretary, a

position previously omitted.

EM: bc

( s .-

?

.

---

-

C

-

10 - ?

S.M. 9/11/70

b ?

II . METHOD OF SEI.EC'i'TO

A.

The chairman shall be the Dean of Science.

B.

The remaining representatives from the departments of the

Faculty

of

Science shalt be named by the Chairmen of the

respective departments.

C.

The representatives from the Kinesiology group shall be named

by the Chairman of the Kinesology group.

D.

The representative from the Faculty of Arts shall be named by

the Dean of Arts.

III. TERMS OF OFFICE

Members on the Committee will normally serve, a three-year term and

will be eligible for reappointment. In the first instance it is

recommended that two of the members from the Faculty of Science and

one of the members from the Kinesiology group be named for a two-

year term in order to ensure. continuity and overlapping membership."

It was noted that in the event the Dean of. Science was from the

Mathematics department, some adjustment to item I. A. above would be

required.

• ?

. ? K.

Rieckhoff expressed reservations and described the procedures

r ?

which had pertained previously.

• ?

Question was called, and a vote taken.

• ?

.

?

.

?

.

?

MOTION CARRIED

d) Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board

Paper S.434 - Composition of the Senate Appeals Board

Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by D. Birch,

"That Senate approve the reconstitution of

the Senate Appeals Board as set out in

Paper S.434."

B. Wilson stated that the reconstitution had been recommended

by the Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board as tied votes had,

caused decisions to be deferred in a number of cases.

Amendment moved' by K. Rieckhoff, seconded by D. Sullivan,

"That the words "in which case

it

would be

mandatory that he vote' be added after

'Chairman, non-votitg except in case of a

tie.'"

Question was called on the amendment, and a vote taken.

AMENDMENT CARRIED

---

S.M.

9/11/70

CAmendment moved by J. Ellis, seconded by D. Birch, incorporating

a suggestion by R. Bradley,

"That the first paragraph on page 2

of Paper

S.434

be altered to read,

'The Chairman may

be a student, or a member of faculty, or a

member of the Registrar's Office, who is not

otherwise a

iember

of the Senate Appeals Board,

and shall be selected by majority vote of the

voting members of

the Senate Appeals Board.

The selection is subject to ratification by

the Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board."

Amendment to the amendment moved by C. Basham, seconded by R.

McAninch,

"That 'or'a member of the.Registrar's Office'

be

deleted."

C. Basham and R. McAninch noted that decisions under policy

were first made by the Registrar's Office and believed it inappropriate

to have as chairman on Appeals a member from that office.

Question was called on the amendment to the amendment and a vote

• taken.

?

.

AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT CARRIED

• ?

12 in favor

11 opposed

•

A further amendment to the amendment was made "To delete the

clause 'who is not otherwise a member

.

of the Senate Appeals Board,"

but was defeated.

K.

RIeckhoff noted that difficulties could arise in obtaining a

Chairman if the voting members tied.

Amendment to the amendment was made by K. Rieckhoff, seconded by

D. Sullivan,

"In the event that the regular voting members

of the Senate Appeals Board are unable to agree

by majority vote on the selection of a Chairman,

the selection shall be resolved by the Senate

Undergraduate Admissions Board."

W. Vidaver and R. McAninch opposed the motion, noting that SUAB

has more faculty than student members, and felt the matter should be

left to SAB. D. Sullivan argued that there should not be fear of a

(., ?

SUAB decision..

Vote on the amendment to the amendment was undertaken;

AMENDMENT TO

THE AMENDMENT CARRIED

---

2.'.'.

(.

- 12 -

?

S.M. 9/11/70 .

Vote was then undertaken on the motion as amended, as follows:

"The composition of the Senate Appeals Board

shall be as follows:

Chairman, non-voting except in case of a tie,

in which case it would be mandatory that he

vote;

One faculty Senator elected

by Senate (with

alternate);

One faculty Member elected from SUAB (with

alternate);

Two students chosen by the Student Society.

•

(with .an.alternate);

Registrar, or his

designate, non-voting Secretary;

Recording secretary, non-voting.

?

S

• ?

The chairman may be a student or a member of faculty

who is not otherwise .a member of the

Senate Appeals

Board, and shall be selected by majority vote of the

• voting members of the Senate Appeals Board. The

selection Is subject to ratification by the Senate

°•

?

•Undergraduate Admissions Board. In the event that

the regular voting members of SAB are unable to agree

by majority vote on the selection of a Chairman, the

selection shall be resolved by SUAB."

MOTION CARRIED

6. REPORTS OF FACULTIES

Science -.Curriculum Changes

i) Undergraduate

Paper S.429 - Biological Sciences - Individual Study Semester

and Bio Science 490-5. 491-5. 492-5

• ?

Moved by.L. Funt, seconded by K. Rieckhoff, '

?

S

• ?

"That the proposal outlined in Paper S.429,

related to an Individual Study Semester in

Biological Sciences, be approved by Senate."

This includes the courses Blo-Science 490-5, Research Design,

491-5, Research Technique', 492-5, Research Reporting, and requirement

that they be taken concurrently to constitute the Individual Study

Semester.' ?

•'

•

?

S

Question was called, and a vote taken..

?

• S

MOTION CARRIED

---

SUMN

(

TO

?

im.w o, swu

?

a.

G. VILSOU, ACADUC

SATE .UDlAra AIUSSIO IO*

Ms

?

IPRM

SIM

07ALTXATU &

?

Dii. WOVVER 18, 1971

)fls "That 8.ate

.ppz ov.

the proposal for

C

h 1%

the

eltersat. eyatm of

the Seust.

£ppsla

3osrd, w ost forth in Paper 8.71-142."

(•

?

.

(

?

.

---

S

?

là

?

.

S.7i•i

TO: )Sfl$ 07 SENATE

?

PEN: DR.

B.G. WILSON

ACABIPUC VICE-PUS IDENT I, alA! MIW4

JATI UPDI'G$Al)ijAT

g

AIaSSIoiss BOARD.

US 1$I'N NoV•

g

i, 1971

SUBJECT:

PROVISION OF ALTEM&T$S FOR ThE

SATE APPEALS BOARD

The Senate Appeals Board have requested that a change be

made

in the

provision of alt.rn.t.s for aenbers of the Senate Appeals Board.

The Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board at a aseting on Pridsy,

November 12th,

tm v l

taousiy approved the folloving propoSal for changing

the alternate system of the Senate Appeals Board, and ask that- Senate

also approve it.

P

rime

(no

$tabership

hpkte)

?

.

?

-

Present Alternate

S y

s te.

Chairagn, selected by SM 189 alternate.

and ratified by 51MB

One faculty amber elected Alternate faculty aeab.r

by and from 81MB elected' by and from SUM

One

faculty

umber

elected Alternate faéulty umber

by and from Senate

?

elected bp and from

Senate

PropoSed Alternate ?

Si. tee

No alternate.

)Two faculty alternates,

)one to be'.l.ctd by and

)from

SUM, and one

to

be

)elected by and from Senate

)

).

Two, students chosen in a

manner to be determined

by Student Council

Registrar or his 'designate

(non-voting) Secretary

One student alternate

chosen

in a ainner to be

determined by Student

Counc#].

TWO student alternates chosen

in a manner to be determined

by Student Council

QANGEs

1. That the tvo faculty alternates not be specific alteráats., but that either

Of the

alternates be able to substitute for either of the prime faculty

members.

40

---

1

-2-

2. That

an

additioal student alternate be

provided,,

and

that

either of

members.

the alternates be ibis to

substitute

for either of the

prime

student

The aim of the. recommended changes is to increas, the flexibility of the

• A.tórnate syatam of the Board, and to give the student members the same

umber of alternates as the faculty aenbers.

It has been found

that

the Board operates better with a full complement of

four voting amebers, and the changes viii help achieve a full complement

more frequently.

S

.

0

---

0

-.- -- s-.... ?

- -- ?

--

1)

?

.

?

is

?

S.N. 6/12/71

Question was called on the amendment, and a vote taken.

AMENDMENT FAILED

7 in favor

13 opposed

Motion wa6 made by J. Wheatley, seconded by A. Lachlan to

divide the question, and as there was no objection, the motion was

divided.

Vote was undertaken on the first portion,

"That Senate approve that the age of mature

students be reduced to 23 years of age."

MOTION CARRIED

Vote was undertaken on the second portion,

"All non-matriculated 4piièants intending

to take advantage of this admission pro-

cedure are strongly advised to communicate

with the University at least 12 months

prior to the expected date of admission."

NOTION CARRIED

Concern was expressed as to the meaning of non-matriculant.

K. Gilbert enquired if the usual two-semester time lag was applicable

in this instance, and the Chairman advised that it was the intention

to put the regulations into effect as soon as possible. The Secretary

of Senate was ofthe opinion that the regulations could be effected

for the entry of students into the Summer semester, 1972. C. Basham

requested that an explanation sik6uld be included in the regulations

as to the intent of. the 12 months advance notice, counselling and

course selection, and he

w4

assured by the Chairman that this would

be done, that appropriate tIitorial changes would be made, and a

report would be sub

mitte4 ?

Senate.

2.

per S.71-142 - P*ovision of Alternates for the Senate Appeals

Board

Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by D. Birch

"That Senate approve the proposal for changing

the alternate sYstem of the Senate Appeals

:

Board,

as set forth in Paper S.71-142."

Question Was called, and a Vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

---

^m

E

0

5-

(0

4)

0

I-

a)

0

U,

(0

5-

a)

4-'

U,

-

.'

0'-

-

(0

U)

a)

E.

u)(0a)

C')

(0

I

(0(00

WO

(.0

Cl-

N--

• ?

•

?

• .

?

.

I-

a)

-

4-'

4)

C

C

C

• ?

a)

a)

.'

C'JC')V)

C')U)

• ?

I I(U )

LC)(.0S..

-5-.

C

I-

N-N-

4..4)4)

000

I ?

-Lfl0

C')

I ?

C')

Q.

I

.4-+-

N-0.

00

I

?

--

I -

43'

4-'.

(v

E

a)

-

N-N-N-

N-N-

-

4-

a)

•

I

I-

>-

LU

LU

—

U)

C.)

I-

C.)

=

U)

LU

0

.

^m

LD

N-

I-

0

I-

I-

N-

(I)

I

-

LU

LU

N-

C'J

(.J

C.J

C)

C'

V)

C)

C)

C)

C)

C

N-

N-

LL.

C')

r—

CJ

C')

C')

i-

V)

Cfl

qqr

C')

Y)

N-

N-

LL

C')

.-

'-

C')

C')

4c

C')

V)

C")

C')

C')

C')

C

N-

LL.

i-

i-

C')

i-

_

C')

r-

C')

C')

C')

C')

0

N-

LL.

C')

C')

C')

,-

C')

C')

C')

C')

C')

I-

/)

0.

N-

LL.

C')

C') C')

,-

C')

?

,-

C')

C')

C')

Cr)

LC)

N-

LI..

C')

C')

C')

C')

C')

r

L)

N-

LL

C')

C')

C')

C')

i -

V)

C')

C')

N-

L&

C')

C')

C')

U)

C')

C')

r-.

I-

C')

N-

C')

C')

C')

C')

C')

4

(I)

C')

C')

C')

N-

LL

C')

C')

i-

(I')

C')

C")

0

0•

N-

LI..

C')

C')

C')

C')

.r.

•

0(()

_(D

04-.

U.

Cl)

r-

C')

C')

qdl

I))

to

?

N-

Cl)

I-

LU

>-U-

(D

V)

LULU

.I—

-j

.JUJ

U)

LU

I-

•

u)

U..V)

E

><

LU

0

---

U)

I-

4-,

0

S.-

>-

a)

N.

C.')

N.

N.

N.

>-

'U

S..

a)

C..)

'.0

C-.

CJ

'.0

N.

DC

CC

'.0

LU ?

r-

>-

'U

I-

a)

>-

DC

V)

I

LU.

-

??

U)

N.

C.)

I

LU

C.')

L/)

LU U)

1-.

N.

L

cli

'U

0)

4

C.)

C-..

4

'a.

N.

r

LU

0

.

r-.

N.

N.

C

co

V)

>-

-J

LU

0

>-

0

>-

DC

(5

LU

I-

CC

C.)

.

0• ?

'.0 ?

0)

U)

C'.)

?

CO ?

0) ?

C'.)

N.

U)

?

U)

C'.) ??

'.0

'.0

?

'a.

C')

Cl)C'4

'a

.

?

CV')

'.0 ?

UI

'.0 ?

C'.)

'a-

Co

?

0

U)

C') ? -.

N.

C.) ?

N.

U)

Co '-

N.

U)

?

'a ?

'a•

C")

C-)

'.0 ?

C')

N-

m

Co

?

C') -

C.-

C')

0 ?

Co -

U)

Co ,- ?

0) U)

Co Co ?

U) C')

U)

C')

C') ?

C') 0

Co m

?

U) CD

I!) ?

Cl).

?

(')

'.0 ?

'0• ?

'a

?

'.0

'.0 C')

?

U) 'a-

C')

aD 'a-

'a .

'.0

?

U)

N.

C

l

) ?

C'.)

'U CD. ?

N.

C'.)

U

c

C l

l i

)

?

?

'-0 ?

C') ?

'a ?

'.0 ?

U) ?

41

C))

4.)

S.-

a)

LU ?

U

0

• 0 ?

'4

?

0 ? - ?

5.-

o ?

G) ?

(I) ?

a) ?

C))

?

C)) ?

C))

-

C ?

5/) C ?

L)CC C

?

4..

?

C

5/)

V.)

-

CC

CD

?

5/)

•'-

4..)

U)

Da)

'a

CD

•

?

C

.,-

wm

DC

CC

-

CD

LU

?

•-

V)

41

U)

'a

D

CD

-

a)

•,-.

?

a)

C

DC

U4

0

DC

CC

I-I-

?

?

CD

DC

-

?

?

in

5/)

+-

'a

?

C

C))

CD

a)

?

5-.

DC

U)

0

5-

?

'U-

(/)

S-

.. ?

?

C

4.)

5/)

'a C))

CD

C))

C

- ? - ?

-

C')

Co

Co

aD

I-

'a

-

?

Cl)

0-I

aD

C')

0

0)

CO

'.0

U)

N. C'.)

0) CV)

U)

C'.)

?

GO

U)

CO

U)

0

-a-

N.

0. ?

C'.)

'.0 ?

U)

U) 0

'.0

'.0

?

'a-

C')

0) 0

'.0 -a-

M

---

C)

I-.

1

•

9-.

0 ?

ww(

Ir-•

-

_

N-

V)U)S...W

S

S...

0

a)0 r-

3

a)

><

'

0 ?

a)

5-

C)

-

4) r —

?

4)

a)t

0

LU

C)

LU

0VGj

w

0..

>5

C-)

-

•

LU'

'- >

a)

C

LL

•

V)

r- >

Q)

E

V ?

.0

N..

N..

Li.

cc

C)

CD

LU

0'-4-)

C ?

C>5

•-

4-'

C

'(1)

C)

-

CL

V

-0

4-' 0

?

C

V)

>

a)

C%J

N-

C)

LO

C'.)

C)

-

E

:

V)

-

LU'

.

0

C'.J

C)

w"-

G)

-

;

?

•

C)

=D

F-

S_U

,

co

cc

0a 0)

.

r

•

a)

U)

4'

a) ?

V 9-

9-

.<

S..

LU

>5

4-'

a)

C

:-

U)

C)

C

cc

'.0

'.0

cc

N.

Cs

4-

0

F-

C)

Lfl

Cs

9-

(U)0

o to

r

?

4-3

.

cc

.

.

.

3

a)

.

c'.j

cc

-

cc

'.o

C)

W.

(D

•r-

(A

:C)

LU

a)

S..

C)

U ..0 Cfl

4.) ?

4-)

r

.

F-

F-

C

05

05

05

05

_J

V

LU

F-

05

LU

CD

0 ?

5...

C

4.)

4) V

—

.'

-

•

.0

4-'

: —

F-

: ?

C

•

Cs

•

. 05

J

C U

.

C)

.

C'.)

.

C'.)

I—

vs U U

.

I

I

I

C

F-

3

C)

:

.

C)

0

LU

U ?

EU

'

0

'

$

I

I

I-

V

0i-

to 4..)

?

.0

4-3

:

?

v)

=

c.

•.

C

•

C

.c

.

o..

C

C)

LU'

•

r- 0

00 C >

LU

C-)

C)

C'..)

C)

.

3

U)

LU

(

C-)

C')

C'J

C)

U ?

.0

4)

vs

I-'

U) V V

U

:

LU

V

a)

'LU

.0

a)

43

V

r

4) -i- S

•

-

C)

U

43

vs

:

U

>4- ?

V

'

Crn.)

S..

CO

LLJ

r- 04-'

LU

LU

a)

C > ?

a)

0..

U)

>

'

0..

.

>

F-

•r43>5..

,

cl)

S_ to

Li-

.4'

C

C

'

4-)

C)

C) LU

C/)

•

t

VS

o

I

0

?

V

0

(A

C

C)

•1

0

C)

Li.

S

.

.

,

0..

4-'

5

0

LU -i

.-E U a) ?

:'

U..

-

U) cc

CZ

F-

>,

a) U)

U V

(I)

.

U.

'

V

V

U..

U)

U

S... C

?

I ?

43

.

S

I-

- LU ?

. 4'I-

4'

vs

. S.

C

ea

5-

C

LU ?

0.

S

LU

.

CD

Li- .

' ?

' ?

• 0.0

C-)

U

'

U

LU

C-)

a)

C-)

F- LU

•,-

( ?

-,-

0 U) U)

•r

4-)

5-

U

UcflO

?

•

I

3

4)

C/)

a) (A,-

?

V

C)

r-

a)

C)

LU

0.-.-- >

4-)

5-

Li..

1

C-) 1/)

U)

V

E

S...

a) C

U

to0

E

U

E

CC cc 0. E ca

LU

LU

cn

CI

Li-N.

Li)

I-

LUC)

C)

CC

cc

---

0)

(0

LU

0

CC

.

C?

•

r-.

-

o

3

N-

0•i

a)

U,

I-

0

5-

cY).

1'

3

o

o

u,

w

v)

S-

C)

C

cc

,

0

CD

>3

C

LL-

C

4-)

(.ñ•

U

LU

0)

I —

C

to

qdl

CD

•r-

E

o

CD

()

C\4

4-'

U

o

•

I-

0

a)

(.D

5-

0

o

LLJ

'.0

c'.o

Lr

o

4-

CD••

CD

C'.

.0

Q)

cc

-

o

Oct

, •

c

c'

C)

s -i

*

4-

o

a)

U

5-

5-

.0

S.

o

o

-

-

4-'

4-'

o

U

(fl

33

C

<'

CD

LU

LLJ

LU

CD

C.)

CIL

: ?

CDCD

c'

I

•:

•

cs-j

C

CD

ON

. J

I

••

•:

,

Q

ON

CDI

•

•

0

_t

I-

4-)

4i

0

U

3

3

3

.

U)

CC

U

4-)

s-fl

I-

(0

L)

a)

C

0)

N-

o

(0

-•1•

4-)

Cl)

CD

LU

>

U

•

Lt)

(0

(0

C

(0

-

4-'

C

0

4-'

0

C

a)

LL

5-

C/)

a)

V

a)

-

(0

3

I—

(0

5...

C

U

CD

(0

5-

U

L)-

LU

a)

U

LU

5-

I —

•ZCD..

•r-

a)

4

. )

3

V)

(0

U

LA...J

5-

L)

•

E

a)

LLJ

0

---

4.)

5-

a)

C-,

5-

cm

U)

I-

4-)

4.)

4)

C

a)

a)

a)

o

C-)

C-)

C-)

4-)

a)

U)

U)

U)

o

E

0

5.-

5.-

5.-

a)

(0

(0

(0

(0

(0

o

w

•

w

-

w

C-) C)

.....

0 0 C-)

0

0

r

•

U)

U)

U)

W

0

0

0

D

a)

.

.

.

a)

a)

a)

•

a)

a)

.z

a)

0

a)

a)

a)

a).

c

a)

-I-

4.)

o

5-

a)

5-.

-c

.

a)

.-

a)

.-.

-D

a)

•,-

4)

.(0

.,

4.)

(0

.,..

4)

(0

.

a)

.,...

4.3

(0

•

4)

(0

•r

-

a)

U)

4-

a)

C

a), a)

C

a)

C

U)

U)

(A

(U

C

U)

U)

C

a)

(I)

fm

m

im

U)

(Ei

(P1

In

(I)

(P)

•

- ___

•

çt,

u

C%J

I

'-

I

C)

I

C'.JI

.-

N.

N.(f)

0)

I

N.

Ct)

CtJI

N.

i-

I

N.

•

(I)

U)

U)

U)

(1)

4)

4)

a)

a)

a)

Q)

(U

a)

S.-

a).

5-

U)

5-

U)

5.-

(I)

5-

U)

5-

(fl

5-

(I)

5.

U)

S.

•5.

U)

U)

5....

.

4.)

a)

U)

5...

4)

4)

.

U)

U)

o

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

a)

0

(U

O

U

0

0

0

0

0

U

0

a)

0

E

G)

p. --

r-

LC)

CtJ

r-

r

,-

i

U)

Kt

U)

(A

U

a)

0

a)4)

U)

0

C

E

tm

4J

a)

•'-

-

0

5-

•,-.4-)

> •

r-

5.-a)

LjJ

C

C-)

0)

OE

rL

0.0

a)

•.-

4)

U)

0

(

•1•

4-4-

•4)

a)

C

LLI

11

cn

to CA

CC

I;

LLI

4J CL

'-4

'-4

><

LM

w

4-

0

5.-

4-)u

4)

?

r-

(fl(0 ?

I

4)4) ?

-

0.

N. ?

,- CsJ Ct)

?

J- LC) '.0 N. 00 0) D i- C'.)

4)0..

U,

(0

a)

C-)

U)

a)

5-.

5-

U)

5.-

4.)

a) 0

U, I-

o

0 E

a)

a)

o

(0

C .

0)4)4.)

CU

sJ

•

•

U)

a)

a)

S.

.=

•0

-r-

5-

I-

(0(0

•

0.

0

U)

04)

ES-

4.)

a)

to

E

-c

.0

$.

4-

5-

.0

(0

U)

to to

1-

,-

(0

CO

S-

4)

-0

4-)

S.. ?

.0

4.)

0).

(0 ?

1

S.- 5.- 0

00

4-

C)

a)

•'-

>

a)

I-

U)

S-

-

4-)

o

(D

?

a)

0.

0.

( ?

5-

-

a)

() ?

(0 -

U) ?

4.)

a) .

(0

S-

S..

(0

a) ?

o 5- I-

5-

4-

-

a.a

?

. ?

o

.4)

a)

C (0 (n

i-

4)

(0

?

(0

...

0

S.-

.=

E

a)

a)

a)

0. 5.-

4)

•'-

4.).

4.)

(A

4)4)4)4-)

(0

C ?

a) ?

a)

CI) .0

(0

a) a)

I-

0.

5-

0

9-.

4)

U)

?

.0 0

0

U)

a)

.0

U

a)

U)

U

- (n

S-

4-)

a)

5-

U

.

.0

U)

(05-0

000

0

D

a)

4-

0

U)

a) S-

?

> a) ?

U

))

C'.)

Ct) -

(0

?

0

E

'0

O

a)

5- ?

4)

S..

C

4-'

0

?

(0

(U

0

a)

0. (0

-

4)

a)

5- 5.- 0

, a

a)

4)

(0

E

.0

I-

•D

C

(0 -

a)

(n ?

4)

a) C)

O

4)

4)

0

4.)

C

a)

C

?

(U C

•r

4..)

U)

4-

a)

?

4-

0 I-

.0

U

0

>

---

-S

r-.

N.

I-

ON

cc

-I

cc

Q ?

I

-

in

I-

?

N-

I-

-.

.5-

cc

ILU

—

-J

cC

U- >

U,

cc

LU ?

w

£-

-

?

.

cc

(I)

(-)

0

.

I—'

><

-I

0

LU

cc

U)

U

a,

'a

U

U)

.r-D

a,

U

>r

=

LU

L)

0

4)

C)

-I-

0)4-)

.,-

(I)

4-

4-)

fa,

0.0

a,

o

=

.

LU4-)

4-'

i-

C

a

>(

a

V)

4-'C

OE

m

5.-a,

='a

0.

O

U

-

L)

4-'

U)

w

5-

5.-

4)

4)

4)

II

II

,—

5.-

5.-

5-

C

c)

C)

L)

1/)

WL)

•

LU

.

•,-

4)

0

.

a,

-

()

-

-U)

-

U)

•

•

U)

0

0

5-

5.-

5.-

a,

0)0

a,

CC

s

4)4-)

'a

U)

,

I

I

r

,-

•

'a ?

. . ?

• ?

• ?

'a

'a

(0 • ?

(0 (0

U ?

LU

LU ?

LU ?

L) ?

U U

U L) ?

U

U

4)

G)

5-

U

•,-

0 ?

?

(I)

.

U).

?

?

V

;

.

Li

LU

-I— •

a, ?

. • ?

• ?

• ?

a

a,

a,

• ?

a, a,

L&JL)

.

X

E

a,

v

a,

a,

a,

a,

a,

o

C

a,

.

C

C

C

C

C

'—

$.-

-

V

V

•'—

•,—

•.—

V

•,—

•-

U)

to

5.-.

a,

a

a,

'a

'a

'a-

U.

to

'a

a,

•r-

U

a,

LI)

4J

U

4-

in

a,a,

.i—

M

C

(U

.,—G)

C

-I—

Im

a,

C

U)

4)

U) ?

L

U)

41

U)

4-)

.

a,

C

U)

4.)

U)

U)

4.)

U)

-C

.

a,

•

—..

_

-

r

()

I

I

(\J

I

,—

I

()

4-

U

o

I

-

e.j

I

'—

N-

U)

N.

C')

U)

.

.—.

I

C')

U)

-•

N.

I

U)

N.

I

cu

a

w

w

w

cu

a,

a,

a,

-

4-'

(00.

cc

0.

U)

o

U

S-

(A

U

o

5-

-U

U)

5.-

0

0

U

5..

U)

U)

0

U

5-

0

U)

5-

U

0

U

U)

5..

0

U)

U

5...

(A

0

U

5-

4)

In

a,

a,

0

0

U)

5-

4.)

a,

,—

I—

L)

C\J

,—

,—

,—

,—

U)

U)

-

4-

4..),

U)(0

a,U

5-

a,

—

?

?

?

CM

,-

I

.

?

(V) ?

IC) 1.0 N- co0)

?

0 r-

?

CJ

U)cc

U)

(0

..

---

•

>3

I-

•1

(0

•

9-

4-)

4-)

a,

•,-

C-'

U

-

(n

5-

4-)

(0

a)

U)

5-

a,

-

.43

-S

(0

0

-I-

I—

0

(0

(0

U)

U)

LU

•

LU

•

0

(0

1

0..

.

•

•i-

-

(D

0

E

V)

•

V)

•

"a

ci)

cJ

a,

0

-

I-,4

- ?

?

•i-4.)

+.3

OE

-

>< ?

0_

CL u

LU

0

U,

ci)

C, 0

•1

4)4)

>(

r

a,

0

>

5.-a)

V.)

C,

•1

I-

I —

(I)

a,

0

C--,

4-

0

5.-

5-

a,

-J

4-)

4-,

(D

I —

5-

(0

0-

•

0

>3

(0

•

(0

V.)LU

••

•r-

LL

(0

a

U...

.r

(0

E

-

a,

0

C-.)

LU

•

•

-o

a,

C-)

4.)

S.-

a)

C-)

U)

5-

-S

-3

I-

(0

C)

-

(0

.3-.

Li..

0

U)

U)

U)

.0

U)

E

I—

a,

4-

4.3

a,

)

w

•

•

..

i—

>3..

w

• r-

5.-

V.)

•

LL

(0

E

V.)

•

0

a,

?

-C•

a,

a,

5..

?

•r- ?

-I-

S..

?

(0

?

(0

9-

ci)

U)• U)

C-'.) V.)

• -S

,— ?

-

C%JC)

.4 ?

I

?

I

N.

Q c'Jc4

-5-

U)

5..

(U

?

?

4-)

a,