SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
?
MEMORANDUM
From ?
.... ?
SIONS
I.
BOARD
Date......
AUGUST.0......1975 ?
.
.....................
40
SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
?
MEMORANDUM
From... SNA1UNDERALUATEAEMI
Subject REPORT iTDMI111iE
ACTIVITIES -
?
Date ?
20th August, 1975
1970-75
1. Introduction
During the Spring and Summer of 1974, Senate laid down Iequire-
ments for the annual reports of its Committees. At that time, enate
Undergraduate Admissions Board did not submit a report to Senate. Thus,
in keeping with the practice then established of reporting on a
Committee's activities from its inception to the time of the report,
the following report covers the period from the establishment
of
the
Committee to the present.
2.
Establishment, Terms of Reference and Operating Procedures df the
Committee.
A.
Establishment of the Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board.
•
?
?
The Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board was established by
?
Senate when it acted, at its meeting of 6th July, 1970, on Senate
paper S.381. A copy of this paper is appended as attachment I.
B.
Terms of Reference.
The terms of reference for the Board were also set out in
Senate paper S.381 and have not been changed since the estab1isFment
of the Committee.
C.
Operating Procedures.
At the Committee's first meeting, the following operatirg
procedures were established and have been followed since that tiime.
i. A quorum will be five voting members. Decisions ofthe
Committee will be based on a majority vote of those
members present.
ii.
The Director of Admissions, who will act as Secretaijy
of the Board, will be responsible for preparing •the(
agenda of meetings, informing members of meetings and
preparing and distributing minutes of each meeting to
members of the Board.
iii.
Alternates will have the right to attend any meeting'
and will be granted debating privileges at the
discretion of the Chairman. Alternates may only vote
in the absence of the member they replace.
iv.
The Board shall operate under Senate rules.
I.
?
.....
V.
The Board is a
p olic y Committee; and individual stude:
cases or appeals will not be considered. The Registr.r's
Office may, however, seek policy clarification to enaIle
it to deal with particular cases.
3.
Membership.
Membership of the Committee was laid down in Senate paperS.
381; and, with one exception, has remained the same since that time.
S. 381 provided that the Senate appointees to the Academic Board
should be members of the Committee, one serving as the prime memb r
and one as his alternate. The Board was, however, abolished in t e
Spring, 1975; and Committee membership was therefore reduced by
the removal of Senate appointees to the Board. In addition, at its
meeting of 6th March, 1975, ?
the Board agreed to invite the
Director of the Academic Advice Centre to participate in its meetings
as a non-voting member.
S. 381 provides that the Chairman of the Committee shall be
the Academic Vice-President or his designate. Initially, the Vic-
• ?
President, Academic chaired the Committee; but, following the
establishment of an Academic Advice Centre and the appointment of
Dr. Peter Belton as Director, the latter took over the Chairmanship
of the Board. Dr. Belton continued as Chairman until after his
resignation as Director of the Academic Advice Centre; and, since
the beginning of the Fall semester, 1974, the Committee has been
chaired by the Assistant Vice-President, Academic, Dr. I. Mugridg.
4.
Actions taken under the Terms of Reference.
The first meeting of the Senate Undergraduate Admissions
Board was held on 7th October, 1970 and, since that time, the Board
has met on 36 occasions and dealt with over sixty formal papers aiid
proposals, of which the majority have dealt with admission and
admission related questions, particularly transfer credit, as wel
as a number of other problems. Almost forty of these papers and
proposals have been forwarded to Senate for its consideration, while
the remainder have either been defeated or treated as information to
the Board, the Senate Appeal's Board or the Director of Admission.
The other major activity of the Committee has been to meet
at the end of each semester to review the transcripts of those students
enrolled during the semester in question. Thus, the Board has ma4ie
decisions concerning academic warning, academic probation and reqiired
to withdraw and permanent withdrawal status. At a recent meeting
however, the Board agreed to delegate this responsibility, which*as
. not specifically required by its terms of reference, to the Director
of Admissions and the Director of the Academic Advice Centre. Ths
action, which will take effect from the current semester, was takn
because the Board felt that the two officials designated would have
a much more intimate and continuous knowledge of the kind of student
problems involved in this review ,because the speed with which the
I.
?
. .
review had to be prepared and undertaken meant that it was a very
cursory and largely meaningless exercise, and because the Board
felt that the system being proposed would ensure greater uniformil
and fairness of decision in the situations being dealt with. It
was also indicated that, if any appeals arose, the two officials
could more easily change their decisions in the light of extenuat
circumstances and that, in any case, the normal appeals procedure
involving the Senate Appeals Board would still be followed.
I. Mugridge
ams
S
VA
ng
att.
0
Ics
As revised and ap rcvJ
by Senate it its
?
ting
S
A
PROPOSAL FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE
?
of July 6, 1970.
SENATE UNDERGRADUATE ADMISSIONS BOARD AND
THE SENATE APPEALS BOARD
ATTACHMEN
by
#1
Dr. Robert C. Brown
His
.
to
ry of the Problem
At the March meeting of Senate, Paper S.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 instructions of Senate in mind, lengthy interviews
were conducted with Admissions personnel, members of the present Ad
Hoc committees, Senators and administrators. These discussions
indicated the need for a complete re-thinking of the problem. Thus,
since Senate did 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
S ?
debate on this matter are referred to Papers
S.305,
S.293, S.308 and
S.329, plus the thinutes of the meetings 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
adnissions, standing and credit procedures of the University; and the
second, the Senate Appeals Board (SAB) , was charged with hearing
s udent 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 SUAB 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 decision of the Appeals Committee was final
and binding.
While there is merit in some of the aspects of this Ad
fl.ç
system (students were provided with an appeals mechanism allowing
S ?
then personal representation, and some Senators did become familiar
With the complex problems of admissions, transfer and standings
policy) there were also several negative results. They are too
-2-
numerous to list them all here, but perhaps the most serious were the
lack of confidence which developed between the committees that
resulted from the frequent reversal of SUAB decisions by the Appcals
Committee; the general lack of confidence among admissions personnel.
in the consistency of the committees; and the general malaise generate
within the hegi s trar
'S
Office in having Senate Committees doing their
jobs for than.' 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 student
with rights of appeal, and
which,
at the same time, will allow the
Registrar's Office to perform 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 SA13, 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 demonstrated that there was, it was that Senate had not
provided sufficient guidance in the form of University policy so that
• ?
the admissions personnel ould adequately screen applicants, particularly
student transfers. Thus what is required is a body, like SUAE. which can.
generate new policy and review existing policy; not committees whiich
review hundreds of individual cases. That is the job of the admiss.ons
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 whe i 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 Motions
It is moved that Senate accept time 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 (SUAB). It
should be clearly understood that the decision to apply a policy of
Senate (interpreted if necessary by the Senate Undergraduate Adniissic
Board (SUAB)) 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 not involve questioning the advisability of the policies of
0
S
-3-
Senate. ?
inn s does riot: mean that: the rules of Senate are immutable
hutsi !a)i y points out that there is a difference between policy
to farm ?
of specif.ic caseS. Where policy reform is
doumed necessary ;
it shall be conducted b
y
Senate acting eii:her on
its own in:i tiativE or upon a recommendation from the SliM
(2)
?
The
Senate
Undergraduate Admissions Board (SUM)
Pepose: To recomnierid 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.
Pro(
-
-edure: It is the general responsibility of the Registrar
to apprise the committee of areas in which policy
neods to 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; SUM will forward recommendations to
Secretary of Senate for inclusion on the agenda
of the next meeting of Senate.
OPERATING MODEL (SUAB and SM)
Registrar's Office:
?
Students apply to Registrar's Office
Processed under Senate Rules
Notification of Right to Appeal
- --
?
given where appropriate
SUM
1)
Develops new policy where
needed and reviews existing
policy - recommends to Senate
2)
Interprets existing policy
3)
Receives policy from Senate
SM
Hears appeals on propriety
of application of policy in
specific cases.
(Membership
OvOrJdp)
S ?
- ?
SHMTE
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 general direction to the Rag.Ls trar
in the intirprctatiOfl of the policy. In cases where
Senate requests a recommendation from the SUAB, they
will be handled as in a)
c)
Interpretation of existing policy: The Registrar
will inform SUAB 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:
Registrar
?
E}— ft7H
FS
F
t e
h. Receive Policy Decisions from Senate:
•
Senate
?
of
Secretary
Senate
?
JT
B
c. Interpretation of existing policy:
Registrar ?
H
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).
Three faculty members (one elected by each Faculty
from its Underraduatc Curricui urn Committee ,
Wi
Lb
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).
Ope:ation: ?
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 SUAB and
S AB.
(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 in his specific case (see (1) above)
Procedurc:
?
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.
Membership: ?
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).
..
S
.
?
-
6-
Operation: ?
A quorum is three voting members.
Meeting shall be closed and proceedings shall remain
CC
n f Id en t i al.
Regular meetings will occur three times a semester;
in the week prior to registration; after reg:isLi-ati on
but before the final date to change courses; and 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.
0
SENATE COTh1ITTEES
ATTACIMENT
2 June 1975
#I
11. SENATE UNDERGRADUATE ADMISSIONS BOARD (SUAB)
(standing)
(Reporting Category "B")
Members
Conditions ?
Term
Expiry Date
Name
Academic Vice-
Chairman - non-voting
President or a
except in case of a
designate of
tie
B.
C. Wilson
his choice
(I.
Mugride)
Senate Appointee
Appointees decide who
R.
D.
?
Bradey
to the Academic
shall serve as prime
Board
member and who as
B.
C. Wi1sn
alternate
Director of
Admissions
A.
C. McMil]an
Student Member
Elected by
?
1 year
Sep
30/75
N.
Staddon
Alternate
Student Council ?
1 year
Sep
30/75
Student Senator
Elected by
?
1 year
Sep
30/75
R.
Schiffer
*
Student Senator
Senate ?
1 year
Sep
30/75
D.
C. Wall1aum
*
.
Alternate
1 year
Sep
30/75
R.
A. ?
Iron
ide *
Faculty Member
Elected by
?
2 years
Sep
30/76
G.
A. ?
1eu
er
•(Arts)
Alternate
respective
?
2 years
Sep
30/76
T.
Oliver
Faculty Member
Faculty ?
2 years Sep
30/76
L. M ?
Proc
(Education
Alteimate
Undergraduate ?
2 years
Sep
30/76
A.
H.
?
Elliott
Faculty Member
Curriculum ?
2 years Sep
30/76
J. C. ?
Irwin
(Science)
Alternate
Committees ?
2 years Sep
30/76
D.
Ryehurn
Senator
Elected by
?
2 years
Sep
30/76
R. K. ?
Debo
**
Senate
Recording
Secretary
Non-voting
PURPOSE: ?
To recommend to and receive from the Senate
policy
decision
n
undergraduate
admissions, re-admissions,
standing
and
credit
transfer and, where necessary to provide
general direction
ii
the interpretation
of such policy.
Note: ?
Thi. ?
Committee,
established by Senate
at its meeting
of July ?
6,
1970,
replaces ?
the
former Senate Conunitte on Undergraduate.
Admissions
and
•
Standings.
* L1cted at June 2, 1975 meeting of Senate to replace
E. ?
Burkie,
1). ?
Jans
en
and ?
J. ?
I.
?
Driem.
** Elected at June 2,
1975 meeting .
of Senate to replace
C. ?
L. ?
Cook.
