Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8

Senate Conmittee on Undergraduate Studies

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

From ..... ?

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

Change in grading system - Criminology

18th ......

1976

Sub

ject..36O-5.,...46O-5.,...465-5...(Crimir1Ogy

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

Date

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

Field Practice)

Action taken by the Senate Camittee on Undergraduate

Studies of November 16, 1976 gives rise to the following notion:

IDTIN

That Senate approve, and recormnd approval to the

Board of Governors, the application of a

PASS (P) / WITHDIAW)

grading system

in Crim.360-5 Field Practice 1, Crim.460-5 Field Practice 2, and Criin.465-5

Field Practice 3, as set forth in S.76-I.

Note - The recommendation is to apply a grading system of Pass (P) or Withdrawn

(W) as presently applied in Education 401, 402, 405, and 406, and as approved

for Clinical Chemistry 397, 398 and 399.

The report of the SCUS Sub-Corrmittee on grading (currently

before SCUS) includes the recommendation that the designation "W" be retained

with the following tern:

The designation "W" will be given when a student

withdraws (or is withdrawn) after the normal course drop period from a course

graded on a pass (P) or withdrawn (W) basis. This form of grading is normally

used in courses of the practicum type in which a student is working with human

subjects, eg, Education, Criminology

Daniel Birch

DB/cp

SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

7/4/9

MEMORANDUM

M...H

Nagei...... ?

i,e.c.to, ........... ........ .

From ..... ?

..J. Blanchet,.. Secretary,.........................

Secretariat Services, Re gistrar

Office.

Subject...

system of evaluation for

Criminology Field Practice.

I.S.C. 76-32.

•. . Faculty of Interdisç ip

a.y...$tu

Undergraduate Curriculum Committee.

Date ...... ....... ?

October ... 2.7./76... .... ....

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

Attached is a proposal for a Pass /Withdraw method of

evaluation for criminology Field Practice. This proposal was reviewed

by the Faculty of Interdisciplinary Studies Undergraduate Curriculum

Committee at a!

meeting held on September 29/76, and approved pending

receipt of further documentation. As the requested documentation has been

received and is attached, would you please place this item on the agenda for the

forthcoming meeting of the Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies.

Registrar's Comment - Currently Field Practice involved

CRIN 360-5, 460-5, 465-5

The basic request is to apply a grading system of P, W as pertains to

EDUC 401/402, 405, 406 and approved for Clinical Chemistry 397, 398,

399; - e.g.

Grades

of P

and

Students enrolled in Education 401, 402 and 405 are graded

PASS (P)

WITHDRAWN (W).

The grades of

and

have no numerical equivalent and

do not affect either Semester Grade Point Average or Cumulative Grade

Point Average.

SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

MEMORANDUM

anet Blanchet,. Secr,.Un e 

?

a.............. 

?

J3uckley, ? 

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

Curriculum Committee, Faculty of Inter- 

?

Field Practice, Dept. of CriI.ino1o;: 

Disciplinary Studies 

?

Subject....

Fixti 

i

er...ç. our 

iiO

of

.

1.*t26.

Sept 

Date

......... 

ptmbor 

30, .976.

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

Further to the criteria of evaluation in the Criminology Field Practice 

programme, we would like to emphasize the following 

points 

in support of a 

Pass/Withdraw system. 

As you are aware, the Pass/Fail approach involves the assignment of a 

pass or fail judgement upon completion of the practicum period, whereas the 

Pass/Withdraw system allows voluntary or advised withdrawal with impunity 

up to a given date. 

We feel that early termination of internship when indicated has the 

advantage of eliminating non functional expenditure of resources and possible 

hardship for prolonged periods. It should be kept in mind, as we have indicated 

earlier, that this training programme has no pure academic goals as such, but 

is designed, among other things, to determine the suitability of the student 

and to allow the student to judge this himself or herself. In this light, it 

seems that judgements involving failure are inappropriate and misleading 

since we aim to establish suitability and personal preference of the individual. 

For this reason, it is also advisable that withdrawal would be suggested by the 

upervisory staff on location and at the departmental level as well as by the 

tudent's own free -choic. 

Furthermore, it should be emphasized that judgements advocating withdrawal 

are not arbitrary, but involve a committee action; the committee, composed of 

both departmental staff and field supervisory staff, shall also deliberate and 

advise on cases where students wish to withdraw voluntarily and for reasons not 

connected with performane in the field setting. A further safeguard against 

arbitrary judgements rests in the availability of appeal mechanisms; this appeal 

procedure is identical to the standard procedure presently in effect. In addition, 

students who have withdrawn under departmental advice or on their own accord, are 

eligible to revision prior to the subsequent academic trimester. That is, 

applications for reentryto the field practice programme are considered by the 

committee without prejudice. 

In consulting with the Department of Education, it would appear that their 

decision to have a Pass/Withdraw system of evaluation was based on similar 

perceptions of a field piacticum programme. 

I hope that these points appear as relevant to you as they seem to us. 

As you can see, they are based on the assumption that our purpose is best 

served if we prevent a confusion between academic assessment and optimal 

professional exposure inan applied setting. 

Attached is a list of specific procedures, definitions,etc. 

. ?

..

.........

- 2 - 

Definitions: 

1.

A grade of P (Pass) would be assigned to a student who has success- 

fully completed the requirements of the course and who has also 

demonstrated suitability with respect to specified evaluative 

criteria. 

2.

A grade 

f W (Withdraw) would be assigned in any of the following 

instances under the operating principles described below. 

After the first nine weeks of the semester - 

a)

?

the student wished to withdraw from the programme; 

b)

?

the student is requested to withdraw because it is evident 

on the basis of specific evaluative criteria, that he/she 

has not demonstrated suitability; 

c)

?

the student is requested to withdraw because of serious 

violations of the conditions of the field practicurn (e.g. 

breach of confidentiality). 

Operating Principles: 

1.

A student can withdraw or be asked to withdraw from the course 

without academic penalty within the first nine (9) weeks of the 

start ofthe semester, without grade on transcript. 

2.

If a student withdraws or is asked to withdraw from the course                                    

•

after this period, except as a result of extenuating circumstances, 

he/she would be assigned a grade of W (Withdraw). 

3.

If a student withdraws from the course after the nine week period 

due to substantiated extenuating circumstances, he/she will 

receive no grade on his/her transcript. 

4.

In terms of refunds, these will be dealt with following norpial 

university procedures. 

5.

Request to a student to withdraw would be made on the basis of 

specific behavioural evidence. 

6.

Every student is ensured the right to appeal after a requet to 

withdraw. ? 

The appeal procedure used will be identical to the 

standard procedure presently in effect at this university. 

7.

Students' who have withdrawn under departmental advice or on 

their own accord may apply for re-entry to the programme at' a 

later date. 

?

These applications will be considered by the 

departmental committee without prejudice. 

-3-

Further Definition of Terms 

Re: the terms "behavioural evidence" and "on the basis of specific evaluative 

criteria" - the Depatment of Criminology will be supplying the Field 

Supervisors with a detailed evaluation form which refers specifically to 

such categories/criteria as: "demonstrated ability to work and relate 

constructively with staff.. .public... client system"; "demonstrated ability 

to handle stressful situations"; "professional behaviour -

confidentiality, 

discretion,ethical behaviour"; etc.

Re: the term "extenuating circumstances" - this would refer to a major

illness which is substantiated by a doctor's certificate (medical grounds) 

or substantiated compassionate grounds. 

( ?

)C{

7/7

Vy\-14 

\A^ N\ 

-

\

-

- UL^kA 

• ?

.•.

?

• ?

:1 ?

Dr. Jay Weinkam 

Chairman 

Faculty of Interdisciplinary Studies 

Undergraduate Curriculum Committee 

Computing Science Program 

?

Sept.]3 1976 

Dear Dr. Weinkam 

I have enclosed a copy of Ms. D. Buckley's commu- 

nication to me regarding our field practice grading suggestions. I feel 

that the rational outlined for a pass/withdraw system is in this instance 

convincing and I hope that you will find it equally acceptable. 

I ?

Yours sincerely 

Alfred A. Keitner, Ph.D. 

Criminology 

Copy to: Mrs. J. Blanchet 

Secretary to the IDSUCC 

.

rL.L

.

TO: Dr. Alfred Keitner, Chairman, !Jnderrraduatc Curriculum Committee 

FROM: Deanna Buckley, Coordinator of Field Practice, C;irni.nolopy D:pr,rtment 

DATE: September 14,1976. 

RE: Pro p osal for a Pass/)ithciraw system of evaluation ior t 

?

Criminology Field? 

Practice Programme. 

The Department of Criminolgy requests approval for the 'ollo;;in change: 

that Field Practice (Crim.60-5; Crim.460_5; 

Crim.65-5) 

he evaluatodi on a 

Pass/Withdraw basi rather than on a letter grade basis. 

The Department of Criminology has initiated its Field Practice programme 

this Fall 

'76

semester. The purpose of the programme is to give the stud 

?

an ? 

opportunity to synthesize theory and practice in a realistic milieu. he 

students are expected to complete three semesters in the field (ic. to days 

per week) as part of their prerequisites for a Bachelor of Arts Dcgro with a 

major in Criminology. Crim.360-5 is comprised of placements in the field of 

Law inforcement; 

Crim.460-5 

is comprised of Institutional Coerrections 

placements; and 

Crim.465-5 

is comprised of placements in Community Correctionn. 

It is important to note that the students will be placed in difN'rcit 

settings within each sector of the Criminal Justice System, with acF.aiin 

his/her own field supervisor and each being involved in a unique lcarM.n; 

experience. The field supervisors are appointed by the field traininr o;encies 

and are res 

p

onsible for coordinating his/her student's ex 

p

erience while at 

that agency. The supervisors are also responsible for evaluating the btudent'z 

performance at the training agency based on evaluation criteria given 

,

to them 

by the Department of Criminology. 

In terms of evaluation, a rating of A-B-C-D can only be meaningful if: 

1.

The students' performances can be compared relative to each 

other; and 

2.

We can look at the ratings and meaningfully apply them to 

1' bur own criteria. 

Whether a rating system fulfills these two functions is dependent on it 

level of standardization. In this type of programme, it is impossible to elicit 

n appropriate level of standardization because: 

1.

Each field situation is unique and not comparable to other 

settings; 

2.

Each student is evaluated by a different judge; therfore, there 

is no way to achieve a high inter-judge reliability. 

Basically, the standard evaluation format goes against the overall 

philosophy of the practicum system we are setting up; ie. that the students 

are being removed from theoretical study and are being tempted to learn from 

practical experience. Our belief is that this can best be achieved by alleviating 

?

• ? 

as much as possible many of the pressures which apply for purely academic 

endeavors; ie.: the gearing of one's performance purely to attain grades. 

We hope to liberate some of the emotional concerns regarding rating and 

?

( ?

channel them into productive work. 

Further, it is evident that for similar reasons, many other tpos of 

practicums utilize a Pass/Withdraw system; em. S.F.U. Dept. of duçation 

practicum programme; the Ontario Clinical Psychologist training prograrnme;etC. 

Ile feel that the Pass/'/ithdraw system is an important part of trying to 

optimize our practicum training effect. 

The attached Field Practice Manual contains a copy of the evaluation 

form which the supervisors utilize in evaluating their students. As you note, 

thestudent receives an indepth evaluation. In essence, then, this proposal is 

not oriented to the avoidance of a thorough evaluation, but rather, is suggesting 

the avoidance of a marking system that could, in this particular instance, 

detract from the learning process. 

Therefore, we strongly urge the acceptance of this proposal. Thank you 

for your consideration of this matter. 

We would appreciate your sending this as soon as possible tothe 

Faculty of Interdisciplinary Studies Undergraduate Curriculum Comrpittee 

so that it may be forwarded to SC.U.S. and to the Senate meetingin November 

in hope that it may be used in evaluating students at the end of the Fall '?6 

semester. 