-w
SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
MEMORANDUM
Members of Senate
S
From
Bruce C layman
................
Acting
DeanofGradMateStud
is
Subject
.
L!
PROGRAM
Date. .
December
.
........977
............................... .
Upon the advice of a distinguished member of Senateo and because I
will be unable to attend the additional meeting of Senate on December 12,
1977, I have cómpilód a chronology of the events leading +0 the placement
before you of the proposed M.A. and Ph.D. programs in Applied Clinical
Psychology. The supporting documentation
will
be available at that.
meeting.
The original form of the proposal was received by J. Wheatley in
early December, 1976. He replied to M. Bowman with his initial reactions
on January 10, 1977, pointing out some weaknesses he identified. He
also notified the Faculty of Arts Graduate Studies Commltteeof their role
In the consideration of the program (approval in principle)
In late March, 1977, the Library prepared a report on their ability
to support the program. On April 18, 1977, the Senate Con,ml.tteó,.or
the Assessment of New Graduate Programs (Assessment Commiftee) met with
J. Wheatley, as Chairman, to consider the program which
5
hd..bøp.
modified in light of J. Wheatley's comments and the Libray's repor+.
The Committee identified a list of 12 concerns, and proposed ameting
between the Library and Psychology representatives to arryèaf',
determination of minimum additional Library resources.
On April 27, 1977, M Bowman provided a detailed
repy tTh
concerns raised at the meeting of April 18, 1977.
The Committee next met on May 18, 1977, with me as Chei*J and
,I
:•
.
IL.
1
.qL.t
V)IIL!........
.
S
-
.
. .
-2-
concluded that one main area of concern remained: the criteria
end
mechanisms
.
for the selection of the adjunct instructors for the field piactIca nd for ihe
evaluation of their performance and thai of the students. Representatives
of the program were invited to the next meeting of the Committee on June. I,
1977. in +hó Interim, I convened an informal meeting of departmen*eL.
and Library rept-esentatives, and arrived at an agreement abolit
1h4
8urces
to brequlred
At the meeting of the Assessment Committee on June I,
1911)
a dis-
cussion was held concerning the adjunct instructors and thet.'rotñ
the program. The question of the funds needed to provide
se1SfOtory
library resources was answered. It was agreed that the proposal was now
in a form appropriate to be sent to external assessors. Five external
V.
K.
S.
P.
P.
assessors were selected - Dr.
Dr.
Dr.
Dr.
•
Dr.
Douglas, McGill University
Bowers, Waterloo University
Sulzbacher, University of Washington
McLean, B.C. Psychological Association
Davidson, University of British Columbia
During June, the assessors were contacted. Drs. Douglas and Davidson declined;
Dr. Douglas because of lack of time, Dr. Davidson because of previous
involvement in this program.
By
mid August, the three completed assessments were In hand. All
three assessors saw a great demand for graduates, and recommended the mounting
of the program: all three also had suggestions for improvement:
a)
Bowers' main area of concern was the adjunct instructors and the
amount of supervision they were to provide - both amount per
week
and total duration of the field experience. He also felt4
-,,'ibd
firm
committhents from external agencies should be provided.
some specific but minor concerns about several of th course pfferings:
PSYC 802 and the advanced topics seminars.
........
.
II 4.
b)
Sulzbacher also Identified the adjunct Instructors as
critical area needing more detail.
•
'1..••
•'l'•
4.
• 4 .
. •
-
-3-
c) McLean also felt greater detail was required in the area
of the
adjunct instructors' role. He also suggested some minor re-
structuring of some of the courses, including 802.
On September 8th, the Assessment Committee met to consider the assessors
reports. They concluded the only major outstanding problem was the role of
the adjunct instructors, so I wrote to M. Bowman asking her to respond
to this. Her reply in mid October was an extensively revised proposal
which, in addition to many editorial clarifications, contained an 8 page
description of the principles and procedures for the selection, performance,
and evaluation of the adjunct instructors.
On November 3, 1977, the Assessment Committee approved the program and
forwarded it to Senate. At the same time it asked M. Bowman to address one
remaining criticism from an assessor: he felt that 7 hours/week of direct
supervision were required during the internships (compared with the 2 hour/
week minimum specified in the proposal).
in early November, 1977, M.
Bowman responded to this last point in an entirely adequate manner. Thus
the Assessment Committee's task was completed.
The Senate Graduate Studies Committee received the report of the
Assessment Committee and acted on it on November 14, by giving it. unanimous
approval
Bruce Clayman
Acting Dean of Graduate Studies
BC/lg
