SiMON FRASER UNIVERSiTY
c 'i-35

SiMON FRASER UNIVERSiTY

00.

....................... ALL MEMBERS OF SENATE

. From

. I.. B... KISEY

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

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

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

........

. .

DIRECTOR. .OF ... SECRETARIAT ... .SERVI.CES........

Subject ................

YEPSXE

ER.

.......

......

.......

..ate...ARC1I..2.6.,..19.7.l

....

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

Attached for your information are several papers revised

and approved by Senate at its meeting of March 1, 1971. These

papers include:

Paper 3i - Regulations Governing the Conduct of

Examinations for Undergraduates at S.F.U.

Paper S.424 - Division of General Studies

Paper S.71-35 - Senate Undergraduate Studies Committee

SiMON FRASER

UNIVERSITY

Senate Paper 3i

(As revised by Senate

March 7, 1966 and

March 1, 1971)

To........................

SENATE

From

D. P. ROBERTSON

REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE CONDUCT

Subject ...............

OF. ... EXAMINATIONS-FOR

..UNDERGRADUATES ..

Date ...... .....

..FEBRUARY .22.,

.1.966....................................................

AT S.F.U.

EXAMINATION PERIOD

There shall be an examination period at the end of each

semester; the length of the period to be determined by necessity.

An examiner may with the concurrence of his Department

Head hold an examination at a time and place more convenient to the

students and himself rather than make use of the central examination

facilities. In this case the Registrar should he notified in writing.

EXAMINATION TIMETABLE

Examinations normally shall be of 1, 2 or 3 hours duration.

Normally no candidate shall be required to sit more than 2

examinations in one day.

At least six weeks before the examination period a draft

time-table shall be prepared, circulated and posted by the Registrar's

Office. Known conflicts shall be resolved and a second draft posted.

After two weeks the final timetable shall be issued.

SETTING OF EXAMINATION PAPER

Examination paper for all formal e

prepared in the department office on 10 x 15

masters (green back) for printing on 8½ x 11

papers are to be proof-read by the examiner,

Registrar's Office not later than seven days

FIRST examination in the examination period.

TYPES OF EXAMINATION PAPERS

aminations shall be

A.B. Dick #2-3021B

paper. The examination

and delivered to the

before the date of the

Each examination paper shall be one of three types which

shall be clearly indicated on both the question paper and the examina-

tion timetable.

The types are as follows:

Type (R) - Regular examination paper for which the following

aids are permitted in addition to pencils: drawing

aids without cases, slide rules without cases.

(Type R question papers will be printed on coloured

paper for easy recognition by the invigilators.)

•

Type (S) - Special-aid examination paper for which the

candidate may bring into the examination room

those additional aids specified by the examiner

and recorded on the top of the question paper

(e.g. look-up tables, handbooks, etc.).

Type (0) - "Open-Book" examination paper for which any and

all aids are permitted.

5. INVIGILATION

The Department Head shall assign individual faculty members,

teaching assistants or associates to invigilate at specified examina-

tions as requested by the Registrar's Office.

The selection of invigilators shall be entirely at the dis-

cretion of the Department Chairman, The Registrar will notify each

invigilator of his assignment in sufficient time before the examination.

The Presiding Officer chosen by the Registrar from the roster

of invigilators shall be of faculty rank.

The Presiding Officer in co-operation with the Registrar or

his appointee shall be in charge of the examination hail.

Any contravention of a ruling given by the Presiding Officer

shall be considered a violation of the examination regulations and

treated accordingly.

If, during an examination, a candidate is found giving assist-

ance to or receiving assistance from another candidate, communicating with

another candidate, copying, or having in the examination room unauthorized

aids, the Presiding Officer should be immediatel

notified.

If the Presiding Officer is convinced that a violation has

occurred, he shall collect all evidence and answer books, shall provide

the candidate with new answer books to continue writing, and shall advise

the Registrar of the incident without delay.

As soon as possible after the examination has been written the

Presiding Officer and any invigilators who observed the infraction shall

meet with the Registrar to prepare a report for Faculty Council. The

candidate or candidates involved will be requested to wait on the Regis-

trar who shall inform them if the case is being presented to Faculty

Council or is being dropped. Faculty Council, when necessary, shall be

convened within 48 hours to determine the action to be taken and the

penalties, if any, to be imposed. Meanwhile the candidate or candidates

involved may continue writing examinations.

-3-

PHYSICAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR EXAMINATIONS

The Registrar's Office shall arrange accommodation for examina-

tions and provide sufficient question papers and answer booklets at the

examination location.

The invigilators shall present themselves at least 30 minutes

before the appointed hour to assist in the distribution of material.

ENTRANCES AND EXITS

Once entering the examination hall the candidate must remain

for the first one-half hour. There shall be no extension of time for a

candidate who arrives late. A candidate who arrives more than one-half

hour late for an examination will be refused permission to sit the

examination regardless of the reason for his lateness.

At five minutes before the conclusion of the time set for the

examination the Presiding Officer shall announce the time remaining.

No student shall leave his seat after this time until all papers have

been collected.

At the conclusion of the examination, candidates shall cease

writing. All examination booklets, used or not, shall be collected by

the invigilators.

ANSWER BOOKLETS

Each examination book must be endorsed by the candidate before

any answers.are written therein.

The Registrar's Office shall be responsible for the security

of the completed examination booklets. The completed booklets may be

picked up by the examiner or his appointee at the examination hall at

the end of the exam, or at the office of the Registrar.

COURSE GRADES

Course Grades shall be reported to the Registrar's Office

through the Head of the Department concerned within 96 hours after the

examination is written. Wherever possible the examination time-table

will be drawn up in such a way as to put the lighter marking loads at

the end of the examination period.

10.

RELEASE OF GRADES

Course grades may be released by instructors at the end of the

semester. Such course grades must be designated as provisional and the

right of any student to privacy with regard to publication of course

grades must be respected.

424

DIVISION OF GENERAL STUDIES

(As revised and approved by

Senate, November 9, 1970

and March 1, 1971)*

RECOMMENDATION: That a Division of General Studies be established

with

responsibility for administering such multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary

and experimental courses and programs as Senate and the Board of Governors

may from time to time place

within

the jurisdiction of the Division of

General Studies.

REASONS FOR THISR ECOMMENDATION:

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

The Academic Planning Committee has before it for consideration

a number of specific proposals for

new courses and programs. The list

comprises:

the Arts Program

the Computing Science Program

the Bio-Chemistry Program

the Canadian Studies Program

the African/Middle East Studies Program

the Master of Arts (Education) Program

the Latin American Studies Program

•

After approval by Senate of some or all of these proposals, it will then

fall to the Academic Planning Committee to recommend an order of priority

for the programs so approved.

Before making any such specific recommendations, however, the

Academic Planning Committee has had to deliberate about some quite general

questions of policy: questions about its criteria for assessment, questions

about the current practicability of implementing any of the proposed pro-

grams, and about the most desirable wa

s of doing so. Among the factors

relevant to these deliberations were the following:

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS:

(a)

It is clear that if present estimates of the 1971/72 budget

are correct (or even nearly so), then only a limited amount of money will

be available for us to mount new programs in the near future. It becomes

a matter of paramount importance, then, to determine how, if at all, the

expected budgetary resources can be stretched to accommodate as many as

possible of the programs whose implementation is recommended.

(b)

One

fairly obvious way of effecting the necessary cost-savings

is to ensure that administrative costs are kept to a minimum. Now as it

happens, each of the programs submitted to Senate for approval has origin-

ated from quite different sources and - in the absence of any suggestions

to the contrary - has proposed its own independent administrative organisa-

tion. Consequently if implemented as they stand, these programs proposals

would involve considerable duplication of administrative personnel and

facilities. Accommodating all new programs within a single organisational

structure would solve at least this problem.

For detailed revisions of March 1, 1971 see Paper S.71-32

i --^'

-2-

(c)

It would also provide a viable solution to another set of

problems whichwould otherwise arise: those of establishing proper lines

of communication and responsibility between persons responsible for new

programs and the central University administration, of establishing uniform-

ity of procedures within the new programs, and of ensuring some degree of

rational and coherent overall planning for the programs to be implemented.

(d)

Placing inter- and multi-disciplinary programs under University-

wide control would also do much to hasten the initiation and development of

inter- and multi- disciplinary and experimental programs which reflect the

diversity of student and faculty interest.

(e) Finally, within a unified administrative framework of the kind

proposed it is easier to envisage procedures being established for the re-

cruitment of faculty in some of those non-standard categories which the new

programs call for: faculty to be employed on a part-time basis only, and,

in certain cases, faculty appointed on a contract basis. (The last-mentioned

category is plainly called for in the case of experimental courses which - if

they are found not to be viable after a certain time - may need to be phased

out in order to free University resources for other new programs and experi-

mental courses.)

For the above reasons the Academic Planning Committee recommends

the establishment of:

A DIVISION OF GENERAL STUDIES

as provided for hereunder.

1..

DEAN OF THE DIVISION

The Division should have as its head a Dean with responsibility to

the Academic Vice-President and responsibility for the administration of all

inter- and multi-disciplinary programs and experimental courses and programs.

GENERAL STUDIES FACULTY

Normally, faculty participating in General Studies program would

fall under one or other of the following headings:

(a)

Faculty holding appointments within existing departments and

who, with departmental approval, are seconded to teach in either a full-time

or a part-time capacity within the General Studies Division.

(b)

Newly appointed faculty who may be recruited to positions of

the following kinds:

(i) To an existing department with appropriate

arrangements for secondment to the General

Studies Division as in (a). Here normal

appointments procedures would be followed

except that both the department concerned

and faculty associated with the General

Studies program concerned would meet jointly

to approve of the candidate's appointment.

-3-

(ii)

To a non-departmental position describable as

a 'University professorship within the General

Studies Division.

Such positions might carry

all the prerequisites and responsibilities of

ordinary faculty except for right to tenure.

By way of compensation such faculty might be

paid a somewhat higher salary.

(iii)

To a contract position for a restricted period

of time, e.g. one or two years. Such positions

could be filled either on a full-time or on a

part-time basis, and would be particularly

appropriate for persons from outside the

University who have special expertise in the

relevant program area.

3. OPERATIONAL DETAILS

(a) For each Inter- and Multi-Disciplinary Program:

(i)

The Dean of the Division of General Studies shall

report as a dean of faculty to the Vice-President

Academic.

(ii)

The teaching faculty of such a program shall be

•

identified by the Dean of the Division of General

Studies in consultation with the Coordinator/Director.

(iii)

Such faculty shall annually elect from among themselves

a steering committee.

(iv)

The steering committee with the Dean of Division of

General Studies shall constitute an Appointments

Committee for purpose of selection and recommendation

for appointment of a Coordinator/Director. The

Coordinator/Director shall report to the Dean of the

Division of General Studies.

(v)

The responsibilities of the Coordinator/Director, in

consultation with the steering committee and other

program faculty, shall in general include recommenda-

tions for appointments, budgets and the submission of

names of candidates who have completed the requirements

of the program. The Coordinator/Director shall discuss

the faculty requirements of his program with the relevant

departments. More specifically:

Recommendations for contract positions solely within the

Division shall be forwarded by the Coordinator/Director

to the Dean of the Division of General Studies.

An annual budget reflecting the administrative and teach-

ing needs of the program shall be prepared by the Coordinator!

Director in consultation with the steering committee and/or

program faculty, and submitted directly to the Dean of the

Division of General Studies.

The Coordinator/Director will report to the Dean of the

Division regarding fulfillment of the requirements of the

program by students.

(vi)

The steering committee plus two or more students shall

constitute a curriculum committee for each program.

Students shall be appointed to each curriculum committee

with the approval of the Dean of the Division on the

recommendation of the Simon Fraser Student Society.

(vii)

Comments on the performance of faculty members participating

in programs in the Division shall be conveyed by the Dean

of the Division to a p

propriate Departmental Chairmen for

inclusion in the overall evaluations of faculty by Depart-

mental Tenure Committees.

Comments on the performance of individuals on contract

within the Division shall be conveyed by the Coordinators/

Directors of the program to the Dean of the Division.

(viii)

Not later than three years after date of inception, each

new program will be reviewed by the Academic Planning

Committee and a recommendation made to Senate either to

continue or discontinue the program. If it is to be

discontinued, the welfare of students involved shall be

taken into account in phasing out the program.

'i-35

SiMON

FRASER UNIVERSITY

'ft

(As revised and approved by

CMOflN1JM

Senate March 1, 1971)

o ....................... Members ... of .... Senate ......................................................

.From ............. Academic..P.lanning ... Committee ........................

Sub

ect .............. Senate ... Undergraduate . Studies ......................

.Date ..... ........ February ... 5 ...... 197.1.

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

Committee

RECOMMENDATION

That Senate establish a Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies

(standing) with the following membership, terms of office and terms

of reference:

Membership

Vice-President Academic or his designate

Two faculty from each Faculty Undergraduate Curriculum Committee

elected by the members of those Committees

Two student Senators

One student from each Faculty Undergraduate Curriculum Committee

which has students, elected by the members of these Committees

•

Dean of Arts or his designate

Dean of Education or his designate

Dean of Science or his designate

Dean of the Division of General Studies or his designate

Registrar - ex-officio Secretary (non-voting)

Librarian

Academic Planner (non-voting)

One person appointed by the President

The chairman of the Committee will be designated by the Vice-President

Academic.

A quorum will consist of the chairman of the Committee and one repre-

sentative from each of the Faculty Undergraduate Curriculum Committees.

Terms of Office

The representatives from the Faculty curriculum committees and the

.2..

student senators will normally serve a two-year term and will be

eligible for reappointment. In the first instance, it is recommended

that the Faculty Curriculum Committees elect one of their members

for a one-year term and the other for a two-year term; Senate in

electing the student senators to the Committee should also name

one to serve a one-year term and the other to serve a two-year

term. Such an arrangement will ensure continuity and overlapping

membership.

PURPOSE

A. To consider and make recommendations to Senate on all existing and

proposed courses taking into consideration:

(1)

the University's academic standards

(2)

the need for coordination of all undergraduate academic

activities within the University

B. To review the results of current evaluation processes and bring

significant discrepancies to the attention of Senate, the Faculties

and the departments concerned.

C. To recommend to Senate grading and examination practices appropriate

to the University's educational process to ensure:

(1)

reasonably consistent and equitable evaluation practices within

and across courses

(2)

the continued maintenance of high academic standards

BACKGROUND

The nature of the degree and program offerings at Simon Fraser University

has, until recently, reflected primarily a departmental orientation.

In planning the undergraduate curriculum at the University, it has

been possible to vest responsibility for curriculum recommendations in

the hands of departments and in faculty curriculum committees with

responsibility for final approval of new program and/or course offerings

vested with Senate.

.3..

Recently, however, several inter and multi-departmental courses and

programs have emerged as well as a Division of General Studies

charged with offering experimental courses and programs. Furthermore,

Senate has now approved the establishment of a Bachelor of General

Studies, defined minor and double minor degrees and will soon be

examining double major degrees and other proposed curricular changes.

To many, it is becoming readily apparent that with the expansion of

the program and degree options available to students, the resulting

inter-relationship among programs will require a much greater degree

of coordination and integration in the various facets of the under-

graduate curriculum than hitherto. In both the program and degree

areas, there is a need to ensure that course offerings, pre-requisites

and co-requisites reflect the programs that have been established,

that unnecessary duplication is avoided, that inter-relationships

among programs are identified, and that standards once set are

maintained.

Furthermore, there is a need to ensure that the implementation of

these new degree and programs does not result in an unnecessary

proliferation of different degree requirements at this University.

Finally, inextricably linked to the whole undergraduate curriculum

is the issue of grading and examination practices. At the present

time, there exists a Senate Committee on Grading and Examination

Practices. Because we find it difficult to separate the curriculum

issues from the grading and examination practicesissues, we are

recommending that responsibilities in both of these areas he integrated

into one committee

In so doing, we recognize that we are imposing

a heavy responsibility on one committee

However, we believe with

the effective utilization of staff assistance, the actual work of the

committee members can be considerably lessened. The Committee should

also point out its concern about the proliferation of committees at

this University and hopes, by this mechanism, to set a favorable example.

• .4..

ORGANIZATION

This proposal is intended to provide at the undergraduate level a

curriculum review structure which is similar to that at the graduate

level. The existing curriculum committees in each of the three

faculties would be retained and, thus, recommendations would emerge

from departments, be reviewed at the faculty level and then carried

to the Senate Undergraduate Studies Committee for review from a

University perspective. The recommendations of the Committee would,

in turn, be forwarded to Senate for its consideration.

The work of the Senate Undergraduate Studies Committee would be

expected to complement that of the Academic Planning Committee.

While the latter would maintain responsibility for reviewing and/or

developing new program proposals for submission to Senate and for

•

recommending academic priorities, the Undergraduate Studies Committee

would review and recommend to Senate on those curriculum matters

affecting all programs implemented at the University.

;jj

F!;