SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
?
S-
17-3
9
MEMORANDUM
fts
?
P-1
e me '( A
ti
_
e
_
i-o(
4y
Scno.'
•/
SENATE ?
SENATE UNDERGRADUATE ADMISSIONS
To. ?
....
?
...............
.
From
?
.j.....
BRITISH COLUMBIA COLLEGE -
Subject ?
UNIVERSITY CREDIT TRANSFER
?
.
Date...
March 15, 1977
GUIDELINES
MOTION:
"That Senate approve
in principle
the report on
transfer credit guidelines, as set forth in
.77-38 ,
together with the attached recommenda-
tions and comments (in italics) that are necessary
for clarification of current policies at Simon
Fraser University and are considered to be appro-
priate to the document."
?
C
.
(Registrar's Note: This present paper with comments is taken as
falling under the contexts of Paper 5 381, approved in July 1970
identifying in the matter of credit transfer the general relation-
Ii
L1,
responi.hi 1i ties and procedures as between Senate, SUAB, SAB,
Req i trir ';. ?
It is riot
i rrt:encled to chanqe
those ?
r:-es -
•
rairer
1'7 ?
/7
o
£)A,t ?
f#i71
?
;e'o(ø
f.
C
?
e -
1'7o ,
?
o ?
e ?
A
?
7 7
?
P/°
D4
S
LA 4 f3
eofe!
/Jrc
cJpi
P
1 ?
e ?
4
74
&
d
?
'
A
17 ?
/
TO: SENATE
?
FROM: SENATE UNDERGRADUATE
ADMISSIONS BOARD
Senate, at the January meeting, referred SUAB paper 75 back
to the Board to allow Faculties, Departments and Curriculum
Committees more time to respond to the proposed University-
College Transfer Guidelines.
Since January, the SUAB has held two meetings (February 16th
and March 15th), at which time, the sixteen (16) responses
to the Guidelines have been fully reviewed and considered
before drafting the recommendations and comments (in italics)
which are contained in the attached paper.
In preparing an appropriate response, the Board has attempted
to incorporate many of the suggestions made in the replies
from Faculties, Departments and Curriculum Committees. However,
as the replies varied, it was not possible to incorporate
all opinions. Appendix A is an abbreviated summary of the
responses which served as a working document during the SUAB
discussions.
It should.be
noted that the Post-Secondary Coordinating
Committee has received responses from most colleges and from
the University of British Columbia and the University of
Victoria, with minor changes recommended by the Senates of
these two Universities. It is the intent of that Committee
.
?
to consolidate appropriately responses from the institutions.
/..
11
-2--
fl
This paper with recommendations and comments is forward to
Senate with the SUAB's recommendation that it be approved in
principle.
BRITISH COLUMBIA COLLEGE-UNIVERSITY CREDIT TRANSFER GUIDELINES
PREAMBLE
1.
For the purposes of these guidelines, credit transfer is
defined as the awarding of academic credit by a College
Council, or University Senate, for academic achievements
at another institution. Students who are awarded academic
credit by one institution for work carried out at another
are referred to as "transfer students."
RECOMMENDATIONS:
-
In the case
of
Simon Fraser University
.
, this would
not include "visiting students" or other similar
special cases.
- The interpretation
of
"academic credit" should be
clarified such that it differentiates university
• transfer courses from Career, Vocational and Tech-
nical courses.
2.
The ultimate aim of the British Columbia Credit Transfer
Policy is to provide a service to students by facilita-
ting their obtaining the best possible education in the
. ?
most economical and efficient manner. This principle of
economy and efficiency implies minimum repetition or
recapitulation of studies, and maximum recognition of
demonstrated knowledge and skills. Thus, claims on stud-
ents and faculty time and effort are minimized.
-
Siman Frr Univ±siki reeannás the
of
the word "ooursc&" for th
71/'m
"tudQs
it
COMMENTS:
-
It is necessary to ensure that all students are
treated equally.
- It should be noted that some university programmes
have responsibilities to outside agencies (eg:
Nursing, Engineering, Education).
3.
The transfer of students between colleges and universities
in British Columbia should be carried out in ' an atmosphere
of mutual trust and respect, based on full ad free ex-
change of information between these institutions. To this
end, the major requirement for transfer policy implementa-
S
-2-
.
tion is the establishment of active subject-discipline
articulation committees, with equal representation by
all colleges and universities offering courses and pro-
grammes in the subject areas. An Articulation Committee
shall provide the major forum for the discussion of all
matters relevant to the transfer of credit within or
associated with the discipline.
COMMENTS:
=
-
?
The
WILF
document places too much emphasis on the articu-
lation committees. Discussions on transfer credit
should be dealt with between the College and Univer-
sity departments. Decisions on transfer of credit
must continue to be made by the appropriate Univer-
sity departments. The articulation committees should
not replace the desirable and necessary liaison
between the colleges and universities, but should
act as a forum for discussions on transfer credit
of
•
?
a broader nature. For this reason, reference to
"equal representation" should be deleted and substi-
tuded by the following statement: "that each public
university and college be strongly encouraged to
participate in the articulation meetings".
GUIDELINES
1. ?
Discussions concerning individual courses or programmes
of study at public colleges and universities in British
Columbia should, in general, be initiated with the rele-
vant Articulation Committees, so that questions of
suitability of course content, adequacy of supporting
facilities and related matters, may be discussed at an
early stage of negotiations between institutions.
To this end, both colleges and universities should be
prepared to provide the following information: course
name, course number, hours per week (lecture, lab,
seminar), objective of course, outline of topics covered,
texts and required readings; and, although subject to
change without notice, the initial proposals for method
of instruction, method of evaluation, and the names and
0
.
-3-
qualifications of instructors. A standard form might be
used by all colleges and universities
to
exchange this
information.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
- Replace ". . . with the relevant Articulation
Committees . . .
11
with ". . . between the relevant
Colleges and Universities with information provided
to the Articulation Committees . . ." in lines 3
and 4.
- Simon Fraser University recommends adding the follow-
ing statement as the second sentence in Guideline 1 -
"Prior discussions by the appropriate departments
should be required".
- The principle behind transfer credit from a college
to a university has been based on an understanding
of
the content and quality
of
the college courses
developed through liaison between the institutions.
In view
of
this and the fact that the monitoring
of
the instructor(s) for all college courses would be
extremely time-consuming, all reference to the screen-
ing of the names and qualifications
of
instructors
should be excluded, i1
?
tl..e ?
ptei. e
f
VV/'
'
)
A
1iv-M. ?
fr1e ?
it
2.
The final decision on the awarding of transfer credit rests
with the College Council or University Senate concerned.
RECOMMENDATION:
- This statement has precedence over all others, and
therefore
.
, preferably, should become either the first
or last statement in the final document.
3.
A college or university which denies the transfer of credit
requested by another institution shall state the reasons
for this refusal. .
- M. ?
C..-o
V
Ptfl
ê1
RECOMMENDATION:
Delete
reforonc
to "collogo" in lino 1.
4.
Agreements on transfer credit must be made between
specified authorities in the respective institutions,
in order that contracts once made would be duly record-
ed and recognized.
-4-
S
RECOMMENDATIONS:
-
Substitute "finalised" for "made" in line i.
- Substitute "agreements" for "contracts" in
line 3.
5.
Once an agreement has been reached on the conditions
of credit transfer of an individual course or programme
of study, it shall not be abrogated withOut reference
to the specified authorities in the institutions affect-
ed, and the relevant articulation committee.
RECOMMENDATION:
-
This guideline is ambiguous and we recommend replacing
the word "reference" by "prior notification" in line 3.
6. A university planning changes to its curriculum which
will affect the requirements for credit transfer must
inform the members of the relevant articulation committees
as.soon as possible, preferably a year in advance of its
implementation, so that other institutions can consider
. ?
the desirability of alterations to their courses and
programmes.
RECOMMENDATION:
-
It is unrealistic to expect one year's notice.
Therefore, we recommend deletion of the following,
". . . preferably a year in advance
of
its implemen-
tation" from line 4.
7.
The colleges and universities have a responsibility to
fulfill the commitments in the course descriptions, and
to notify the other institutions in the system should
any major change in the course content or level occur.
-
No
comments.
8.
Institutions should consider transfer students on the same
basis as their continuing students except that admission
of college students to university should normally be sub-
ject to a minimum overall average of "C". Colleges must
accept the responsibility of ensuring that "C" represents
an acceptable level of achievement relative to further
studies; maintenance of relative standards should be one
0
.
-5-
of the functions of the Articulation Committees.
Notwithstanding this general provision, a university,
while recognizing the right of a college student to
transfer, may require a higher level of achievement on
transfer to match the level required of its own stud-
ents for admission to programmes of study to which
access is subject to limitations. Universities must
make provision, whilst maintaining confidentiality of
the records of individual students, for reporting the
progress of transfer students to the colleges from
which they had transferred.
RECOMMENDATION:
For S.F. U., the confidentiality
of
the records
of
individual students must be maintained
3
but must
not unduly inhibit appropriate institutional and
non-institutional research. Studies requiring
review
of
individual student records may be under-
taken following the notification and permission
of
the student(s) involved. The Registrar will have
authority in these matters.
COMMENTS:
-
The maintenance
of
standards must continue to be
the responsibility
of
the appropriate agencies and
individuals within each institution.
CsZigs must Pe
g
ognize that a
?
may funt-o of -
-their "acadomic" progrcmv
?
s
ta prepar p
students
for
trans for to thci univorsities.
9. ?
Transfer arrangements between colleges and universities
are assumed to be based on "lower division" (ie; first
and second year) studies. It is recognized that the
assignment of "year level" to any individual course
might vary at different institutions, and therefore,
specific exceptions to this rule might occur under inter-
institutional agreements.
COMMENT:
Attention is drawn to the fact that colleges are
offering more specialized "subject" work than was
ever intended.
.
0
-6-
.
10. Transfer of credit would be identified in the following
categories by the universities:--
(i)
specific equivalent of a given course
(ii)
unspecified (elective) credit in a discipline
or department
(iii)
unspecified (elective) credit in a Faculty
(iv)
unspecified (elective) credit up to 9 semester
hours (4.5 units) for college courses not
identifiable with university course offerings,
but which the colleges evaluate as being appro-
priate for academic credit on transfer.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Simon Fraser University at present does not grant
Faculty credit (iii above) but does grant General
Elective Credit (iv above) in some cases well
beyond the above maximum (9 semester hours) but
only on courses recognized for "academic" transfer
credit. Simon Fraser proposes to continue this
•
? policy.
- It should also be added that the overall limitation
on the amount
of
transfer credit is sixty (60) semes-
ter hours or thirty (30) units, but that this would
not imply that a student would necessarily complete
a degree in an additional sixty (60) semester hours
or thirty (30) units.
COMMENTS:
- This would place university students in a less
favourable position than college t
r
a
ns
f er
students.
-
If
the proposal were accepted, students
.
may find
their type
(iv)
courses denied credit by other
agencies within the Province (eg; Department
of
Education, Professional Agencies).
11. Provision should be made for a forum (such as the Post-
Secondary Coordinating Committee) where questions of
transfer of students among institutions in British
Columbia can be discussed by representatives of all
the public colleges and universities of the Province
and where, if necessary, recommendations can be formu-
lated for submission to College Councils and University
0
Senates. Appeals on any aspect of transfer policy,
unresolvable at other levels, may be made to this
body.
RECOMMENDATION:
-
Delete the last sentence
of
Guideline ii.
COMMENT:
- If
the last sentence is retained, then it is
essential that this be interpreted as being appeals
only by a department, a faculty, or an articulation
committee, with the understanding that a recommenda-
tion from the Post Secondary Coordinating Committee
would have only advisory status and that Guideline
2 would remain in effect.
.
.
0
.
?
-8-
PROCEDURE MANUAL
I.
?
Colleges seeking transfer credit for new or revised
courses shall make a formal submission to the rele-
vant university official (see Appendix 1.) with copies
or abridged statements to all members of the perti-
nent Articulation Committee(s). However, it would be
desirable for all proposals to have had preliminary
screening in the Articulation Committees prior to
their formal submission. Although submissions may be
made at any time, each university will establish a
deadline in terms of inclusion of proposals in its
published list of college-university course equiva-
lencies.
Information should be provided in Guideline 1.
The responsible university official who receives a
proposal will be expected to respond as promptly as
reasonable to the initiating college with a copy to
the office at the university that is responsible for
the publication of a list of course equivalencies
and a copy to the chairman of the relevant Articulation
Committee(s).
.
3
0
APPENVIX 1.
University officials responsible for receipt of requests
for transfer credit:
S
rj
University of Victoria
Simon Fraser University
The University
of British Columbia:
Arts courses
Commerce courses
Education courses
Physical Education and
Recreation
Science courses
Any other courses
-
The Administrative Registrar
-
The Registrar
-
Associate Dean, Faculty of Arts
- Director, Undergraduate Programs,
• Faculty of Commerce & Businss
Administration
- Assistant to the Dean, Records ?
Office,. Faculty of Education
- Director, School of Physical ?
Education and Recreation
- Associate Dean, Faculty cf
Science
-
The Registrar
J EM' / m r
April
28,
1976.
RESPONSES TO GUIDELINES FROM SFU DEPARTMENTS
GROUP A
?
No changes.
1. ?
Physics
3. ?
Political Science
13. - Geography
GROUP B
?
Comments
I. ?
PREAMBLE
1.
Crim - wish statement clarifying that
guidelines are for university
.
?
transfer courses only (excludes
Career, Vocational and Technical).
- Also intention that College-
?
University transfer only..
2. S/A ?
- point #3 - statement.
Educ - programmes that report to outside
agencies (eg; Education) must have
the flexibility to react.accordlngly.
3.
Crim - would like to see guidelines include
U to U transfer.
- no such thing as U to C transfer
(C to U only)
- AC's informal: no need to mention
equal representation.
.,
.
?
-2-
Chem - question "equal representation" -
what is meant?
- imbalance for U's.
Phil - function of
ArticulattonCttes
--
if to keep committees Informed,
then reports are
all thetis
necessary.
Educ - equal representation?
This Is N.B.
if committees decide by majority.
- Proposes from 1 to 3 committees
with technical competence.
H.
?
GUIDELINES
.
?
1. ?
Educ (McLaren - U.B.C. power.
Arch - line 4, "Academic Departments"
DML - exclude method of instruction
evaluation
names and quality of instructors
S/A ?
- confusion re: Articulation .Committees;
suggestion in guidelines that AC take
on departmental functions - (not
favourable).
Arts - AC's seen as weak with no continuity.
Prior discussion "required"
Phil - Responsibility for assessing must
remain in hands of Departments.
0
S ?
-
3 -
2.
Arts - this must take
precedence;
le: final decision with Council
and Senate.
3.
No
coninents.'
4.
- Crim - "finalized"
for "made"
"agreements" for "contracts"
Chem - word "Contracts"
Inappropriate
5. Phil - "reference to t ' --
what Is meaning?
-
no specific reference to periodic
review of transfer.
6.
Arch - delete members of AC for members
•
?
of Academic Departments.
Ec/C - necessity to inform AC will restrict
•
?
transfer process.
- not all changes are approved inter-
nally.
S/A ?
- what is meant by "in certain circum-
stances" the SFU Registrar may
provide data?
Arts - sharing of curriculum change plans
with AC's needs further consideration.
SFU note could be stronger.
7.
No comments.
8. DML ?
- inform colleges of students' admission
and placement, but not progress --
breach of confldent1ality.
Phil - maintenance of relative standards
by AC's seen as task that belongs to
instructors and administration in In
each Institution.
S
S
9.
E/C - transfer between Colleges and SFU
should cover 100 and 200. level only.
Educ - some colleges are offertng upper
level and more specialized work
tharc originally intended. This
should be controlled
in
"central"
fashion.
10.
Phil - do not accept concept of colleges
identifying up to 9 sem. hrs. of
unspecified elective.credit.
Educ - 60 hour maximum.
- also 60 hrs. transfer credit should
not imply that in all cases only 60
hours for degree.
11.
Chem - "Appeals" mechanism too ambiguous.
5 ?
E/C - "Appeals" gives Post-Secondary
Coordinating Committee too, much power.
- could override Councils and Senate.
Hist - delete "appeals".
Phil - do not accept Post-Secondary Committee
role as appeal body.
- 6 ?
S.M. 4/4/77
in S.77-37, be approved and recommended to the Board
of Governors for approval."
Note: The proposed changes are designed to bring the regulations of
the Political Science program in line with the general Faculty
of Arts regulations.
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
iv) Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board
a) Paper S.77-38 - British Columbia College-University Credit
Transfer Guidelines
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by J. Catalano,
"That Senate approve in principle the report on
transfer credit guidelines, as set forth in S.77-38,.
together with the attached recommendations and
comments (in italics) that are necessary for clarifi-
cation of current policies at Simon Fraser University
and are considered to be appropriate to the document."
A. McMillan, Director of Admissions and Secretary of the Senate
Undergraduate Admissions Board, was seated to respond to questions.
S
A. Kazepides asked for an explanation of "in principle" approval.
He was informed that because of the nature in which the proposal came
to the university and ultimately to SUAB, the post-secondary coordinating
committee had requested that each of the fourteen colleges and three
universities respond to the guidelines on the understanding that once
the responses had been received they would be consolidated for a final
statement on transfer guidelines. J. Munro referred to Guideline 1,
which had undergone a strengthening evolution from the original sub-
mission, and A. McMillan said that the strengthening was a result of
sixteen responses from chairmen of undergraduate curriculum committees,
faculties and departments which had been considered by SUAB.
Amendment was moved by A. Kazepides, seconded by I. Wemyss,
"That the words 'in principle' be deleted
from the motion."
A. Kazepides felt the term was redundant and Inappropriate. The
Secretary of Senate wished to ensure that deletion would not affect
understanding that the exact wording of the final statement on guide-
lines would be formulated on the basis of the overall considerations,
and there was not opposition.
Question was called on the amendment, and a vote taken.
0 ?
AMENDMENT CARRIED
- 7 -
?
S.M. 4/4/77
It was confirmed that if the document underwent significant change
•
?
in detail it would be brought back to Senate for comment.
R. Carlson objected to the recommendation in Guideline I for the
exclusion of screening of names and qualifications of instructors.
An amendment was moved by J. Munro, seconded by R. Carlson,
"That the third recommendation in Guideline I,.
page 3, be deleted."
J. Munro expressed the opinion that an opportunity should be avail-
able to examine qualifications of instructors of courses accepted for
transfer credit. A number of members spoke in opposition.
Following considerable debate, question was called, and a vote
taken.
AMENDMENT FAILED
An amendment on the same section was moved by R. Carlson, seconded
by A. Cunningham,
"That the words 'with the exception of review at
the time a new program is established,' be added
to Recommendation 3 of Guideline I, page 3."
.
?
?
R. Carlson stated that the amendment reflected the agreement of the
articulation committee of his group.
Question was called on the amendment, and a vote taken.
AMENDMENT CARRIED
20 in favor
15 opposed
In response to a question from R. Carlson, A. McMillan confirmed
that no changes to existing responsibilities and current procedures are
intended for SFU and the Secretary drew attention to the footnote on
the blue motion sheet.
Attention was drawn to Guideline 3, and an amendment was moved by
J. D'Auria, seconded by B. Wilson, which after considerable discussion
was altered to
"That the recommendation in Guideline 3, page 3,
read 'No comment,' and that the first comment on
page 2 following Preamble 3 be deleted."
Question was called on the amendment, and a vote taken.
AMENDMENT CARRIED
28 in favor
1 opposed
-r
- 8 -
?
S.M. 4/4/77
An amendment was moved by J. Hutchinson, seconded by J. Catalano,
"That the second comment on the recommendation
related to Guideline 8, page 5, be deleted."
J. Hutchinson stated that the deletion was necessary if
recommendations were to be taken seriously.
Question was called on the amendment, and a vote taken.
AMENDMENT CARRIED
An amendment was moved by R. Carlson, seconded by J. Catalano,
"That 'No comment' replace the recommendation following Preamble 2."
Following discussion it was agreed that the amendment would be,
"That the recommendation following Preamble 2
be deleted."
Question was called on the amendment, and a vote taken.
AMENDMENT CARRIED
Question was called on the motion as amended, and a vote taken.
MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED
.
0
