From..
B. L. FUNT
DEAR OF SCIENCE
Date.. . MARCH 11, 1.971
SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
?
5e71-'o
MEMORANDUM
MOTION:
1.
"That the new course proposal for Chemistry as
El
?
outlined in Paper S.71-60 be approved."
2.
"That the new course in Chemistry as outlined in
Paper S.71-60 be designated 501-4."
If approved, the following motion will be made:
3.
"That Senate suspend its rules with regard to the
two semester time lag requirement for the offering
of courses in order that Chemistry 501-4 may be
first offered in the Summer Session, 1971."
0
1
"'1
7
C,
NEW
COURSE PROPOSALS: CONTJWED EDUCATION - CHEM 601-4.
0 ?
S.Ii\1ON 1"RASEit UNIVE1.SiTY
•
? : ? • ? V. ?
MtMOflANDL'M ? . ?
V
(_ ...
...... Dean.
?
From. T.N.
Bell, .Acting Chairman.
?
- .....................................................
...
?
Department....Of...ChemistrY ...........................
V
Subject .... ...
..
.
New.. Course... Proposal . ................. ............
-...
?
Dale
......
.
9th.. February
,....1971..
......................................
• :. ?
I submit a new course proposal to be Implemented during
the Suri'er session 1971, as a contribution from the Department
?
V?
of Chemistry to the Continuing Education program. This
proposal was approved at the Chemistry Department meeting held
• ?
on
Friday, February 5th, 1971.
In view of the short lead time, aspecial waiver will be
required from Senate in order to get that bodie approval.
?
V?
Thus, I request that you deal with this proposal at the Faculty
• ?
V ?
level
as soon as possible. I enclose a memorandum from
•
Dr.
McClaren which is. self explanatory with regard to the approval
V... sequence.
?
. ?
•. ?
V ?
• ?
V ?
V
?
V.
Dr. !4cClaren's comment about the course number is now
?
V V
V
• ?
irrelevant; I have
since spoken to the Registrar about the
• •. . :
?
contents
and Intent with regard to this course, and as I
?
V
understand it a 600 type number
is in
order. ?
V ?
V ?
V V
We are
at1e,by adjusting various faculty members' research
?
V
V
... .
:
V
?
semester sequences, to mount this course using our present
?
V
resources. I believe this
is in
keeping with the University
?
V
1 philosophy of making the best use of our resources in those
?
V .. ?
• areas of student demand. Thus, we will not be requiring
additional stipend in order to mount this course, and unless
the enrollment
Is high, we intend to utilize the equipment and
?
V
resources available In the Department. We will require the
?
V
•
V V
-services of
a teaching assistant for this course, and will
V ?
V
utilize one
of those allotted to the Department.
?
.
?
.
V ?
.
On a
general point of philosophy, the Undergraduate Studies
V
• Committee and myself all agree that addit
i
onal payment to members
of
faculty involved in Continuing Education is not in the best
V
interests of this De
p
artment. Clearly we would extend this point
• .
of vier in
the wider University context.
?
V V
• ?
V
•
In
the Interests of economy, we feel that a lower limit
?
.
?
enrollment of 6 should be set for this course.
?
. ?
V
V ?
V
V ?
Should you require any further Information, please let me know.
V.
V
TNB:mlh ?
VV V
•V V V VV
?
T.N. Bell
?
V
?
VV V
?
V ?
(
V ?
• ?
V
?
.•
:••• .
FACULTY' OF SCIENCE
NEW COURSE ?
OPOSA
G
I
CALErnDARINFOR1TION
Department:
Chemistry ?
Course Number:
?
601 Title:
Fundamental
concepts
and classroom demonstrations in High Schoo].
Chemistry;
Selected
Modern Topics in Chemistry.
Credit Hours:
?
Vector Description:
?
-l-
e-requisite(s):
Intended primarily for candidates with school teaching credentials.
II
'
ENR0LfENT AND SCHEDULING
Estimated Enrolment:
Semester Offered (e.g. Yearly, every Spring;. twice yearly, Fall and
Spring):
When course will first be offered: 1971-2 (Summer intersession)
III JUSTIFICATION
A.
What is the detailed description of the course including differenti-
ation from lower level courses, from similar courses in the same
...• -. . -... department and from courses in other departments in the University?
Outline: This course will review the fundamental concepts of chemistrJ
and ?
tcTarly -hose basic to niTh scnooi. cne1scry
?
tiodern
LOD1CS
nuclear act raciocnC1St1Y vill alo he Dresezed The associated -
• ?
.. . Tboratory course will deal with the tenica and Pedagogic pactS
clas3roO aeo
n stiatiOPS ?
EDe1irw'nts will be aeelOeCi ro
?
se
!he literature with
p articular emr!asis
on overhead rojector techniqu
There is
no similar course within t.he University.
• ?
B. What is the range of topics that may be dealt with in the Course?
k ?
See III
A.
C
• ?
- ?
Page 2.
q
C.
How does this course fit the coals of the department?
(•
?
The
proVision of
this course
fits
the goals of the departmcnt in
• three ways: (i) it interacts with the interests of the Division of'
Continuing Education; (a)
it extends the offering of chemistry to a
public other than the conventional student;
(3)
it is of particular
• ?
significance to high school teachers.
D.
How does this course affect degree requirements?
No effect.
• ?
•.
?
Note:
This course will not be available for credit to students
egistered fora B. Sc. degree in Chemistry.
• -
?
Explanation: This course has been planned specifically for school
achers; it contains review material, and some advanced topics, which
• '•
?
?
already exist in the courses of the core programmes of honours and
majors candidates for the B. Sc. degree. Hence, for reasons of
• duplication of
course work and credit, is not appropriate for credit
toward.such degree. This constraint, however, does not preclude the
application of credit for this course toward some other degree or
diploma.
?
•
E.
What are the calendar changes necessary to reflect the addition of
this coursed'
Add this course.
• F. What course, if any, is being dropped from the calendar if this
course is approved?.
None.
0.
That is the nature of student demand for this course?
Student damand as determined by questionnaire conducted by the
division of Continuing Education.
?
•• •
?
:•
H.• Other reasons for introducing the course.
IV ?
BUDGETARY AND SPACE FACTORS
?
•
?
•
?
•
?
• ••
?
'•
?
•
?
•
A. Which faculty will be available to teach
this
course?
-N
.
- ?
- ?
• ?
.
Dr. B.
D. Pate
?
•
?
- ?
. - ?
•.• ?
•
?
•
To:
SENATE
?
From: Fl. M. EVAN'S
REGISTRAR
Subject: New Course Proposal - Chemistry
?
Date: April 26, 1971
and Numbering of Courses
1.
The Faculty of Science, following recommendation by the Department
of Chemistry and Faculty Undergraduate Studies Committee recommends
to Senate the approval of a new course currently identified as
Chemistry 601-4 to be first offered for the Summer Session 1971.
2.
The course is of particular significance to high school teachers of
Chemistry who normally are expected to have graduated with a major
in Chemistry. The course provides opportunity for bringing teachers
up to date.
It is intended that it may be utilized in some cases by teachers to
upgrade their qualifications for salary purposes in the Province.
• ?
3. As it assumes that normally the enrollee will have a major background
in Chemistry the Department has stipulated that it will not be
available for credit to students registered toward a B.Sc. degree in
•
?
Chemistry and have recommended numbering of the course beyond the 400
Bachelor's series of numbers.
It has been recommended by the Faculty Undergraduate Studies Committee
and is not a "graduate" course as a part of "Graduate Studies" although
normally intended for those who have graduated in Chemistry.
4.
Similar types of courses can be offered at the University of British
Columbia for graduate credit in the Faculty of Education, but not
normally for graduate credit in the Department of the discipline,
e.g. "Education 565-3 Special Course in Subject Matter Field - Courses
in various subject matter fields designed. to bring teachers up to date
in new advances and recent findings in each field. See also Physics
430 (Recent Developments in Physics)".
5.
At Simon Fraser
.
University in some earlier instances, and at present
in the M.B.A. programme, "Graduate Studies" courses have been numbered
in
the 600 series.
To date the 500 series has not been utilized for either "undergraduate"
or for "graduate studies" purposes.
6. It is recommended that the 500 series be utilized for courses of the
type proposed in the current submission Chemistry 601-4, and that this
course be numbered Chemistry 51-4.
(\'
SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
?
c •
MEMORANDUM
* ?
Attached is a copy of the communication received
from T.N.Bell, Acting Chairman, Department of
Chemistry, requesting that the proposal for
Chemistry 601(501) be withdrawn from consideration
at Senate. In telephone conversation with Dean Funt
today he has indicated concurrence with the request.
When the item comes forward on the Agenda this
evening you may wish to indicate withdrawal.
Enc: *
HME:jb
cc. Dr.B.L.Funt
0
SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
MMOR A
0. ?
.
B.L. Funt ?
. ?
.
From
?
T.N. Bell,. Acting Chairmrn........
Dean .of....Science ?
.
?
Department of Chemistry
?
Su6ect.....
Cheinistry..601 .or 501
.........Date.
?
5th. May,
?
1.971. ..................................
I note from the Senate agenda that Chemistry 601 (501)
is being presented to Senate at its May meeting.
Because of the poor enrollment response, this course
has now been cancelled, and as this course
was
proposed as
a trial offering in the Continuing Education Program, it
would seem best to me at this stage, to withdraw this proposal
from the Senate agenda.
If the low enrollment was due to the nature of the
proposed offering, then any future offering would be different
from this course or contain sufficient modifications as to
require a new proposal.
I would be grateful therefore if you would take the action
I have suggested. ? .
/
TNB:mlh
?
T.N. Bell
cc: B.G. Wilson
V '
H. Evans
,
SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
MEMORANDUM
MEMBERS OF SENATE AND THOSE
.NORMALLY RECEIVING SENATE PAPERS-
Subject .....
............ .1DI.TI.QNALS1N.AT.EPAPER
I
From
....................'Ls'i
?
.
DIRECTOR OF SECRETARIAT SERVICES
Date ....
?
...
.MAY
• 282 1.9.7.1
Attached is Senate Paper S.71-71 distributed at the
Senate meeting of May 10, 1971 for information only. There was
no discussion on the paper.
The paper is being distributed at this time for your
records.
.
is
3.7I7/
To:
?
The Academic Planning
?
From: K. Strand
Committee ?
President
Subject: Charge concerning the
?
Date: ?
April 28, 1971
referral, by Senate, of
Paper S. 71-51, Reorganization
of Educational Foundations Centre
and approval of courses.
Senate, at its meeting of April 5th, 1971,
1
passed the
following motion:
"That the four motions contained in paper S. 71-51
be referred to the Academic Planning Committee
for comment.
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide to the
Academic Planning Committee a more specific and detailed charge.
is
?
BACKGROUND
The charge, which appears at the end of this memorandum,
derives from the fact that Senate did not include a specific charge in
its referral of the four motions contained in S. 71 -51. 2
An event has occurred since the Senate action of April 5,
1971 --namely, the fact that the Faculty of Education failed to ratify
the Search Committee's nomination for a Dean of the Faculty of Education.
There has been some discussion as to whether it is proper
to decide first on the organization of the Faculty and then search for
a Dean of Education, or alternatively, whether it is proper to find a
Dean of Education and then decide upon the structure of the Faculty.
It is my view that either of these two mechanisms is proper and that I
see
no great overriding principle which favors one to the detriment of
the other. The point, however, is that the Faculty of Education by its
1.
The minutes of the Senate meeting of April 5th, 1971 accompany this
charge. If desired, a transcription of the relevant portion of the
Senate meeting can be provided to the Academic Planning Committee.
2.
Perhaps in all cases the Chairman of Senate, as part of his general
responsibilities to Senate as Chairman of Senate, should draft a
charge to a Committee on the basis of the debate that occurs in Senate.
failure to ratify the nomination of the Search Committee, has created
a situation where pursuit of the second alternative is not immediately
available.
CHARGE TO THE ACADEMIC PLANNING COMMITTEE
1. The Academic Planning Committee is charged to bring
forward to me, for referral to Senate, a recommendation as to the role
of Fine Arts courses within the University. This recommendation
should contain a specific recommendation as to whether there should
be Fine Arts courses within the University, and if so, the following
specific recommendations should be brought forward:
(i)
what the curriculum should be;
(ii) whether this curriculum should consist of credit
or non-credit courses, or both;
(iii) whether any or all of the staff who teach these courses
should have faculty status;
(iv) where this curriculum should be taught within the
University; and
(v) whether this program should be subject to review
at some specified interval and, if so, what that
interval should be.
In preparation of this recommendation the Academic Planning
Committee is charged with consulting, through the Academic Vice-
President, with the Advisory Council on The Arts.
2. The Academic Planning Committee is charged to bring
forward to me, for referral to Senate, a recommendation as to the
administrative placement of the Kinesiol.ogy program/Physical Develop-
ment Studies within the University. This recommendation should
specify whether this program should be subject to review at some
specified interval and, if so, what that interval should be.
•
?
?
3. The Academic Planning Committee is charged to address
itself to the quantitative and qualitative needs of the Province in the
area of teachers' education. It is specifically charged to report to me
on its assessment of the quantitative needs for teachers within the
Province of British Columbia.
.
-3-
4. The Academic Planning Committee is charged to bring
forward to me, for referral to Senate, a recommendation as to-the
role, structure and organization within the University, of the Educational
Foundations Centre of the Faculty of Education.
The Academic Planning Committee should take as its first
premise that the present role of the Faculty of Education within the
University is to provide training for teachers. While this should be
the first premise, alternative and supporting premises should also
be evaluated. In the absence of alternative or supporting premises,
all proposals should be evaluated in terms of how they contribute to
that goal.
The Academic Planning Committee may consult externally
to the University, subject to the approval, including budgetary approval,
of the Academic Vice-President.
The Academic Planning Committee may consult with the
Joint Board on Teacher Education which may, under Section 74 of
the Universities Act,
make such recommendations to the Board of Governors,
the Senate and the President of each University, and
to the Minister of Education, as are within the legal
purview of each in respect of the following:
(a)
The curriculum of the Faculty of Education;
(b)
Appointments to the staff of the Faculty of
Education;
(c)
Facilities for the Faculty of Education;
and in respect to teacher-training, to the governing
body of any other institution of higher learning in the
Province.
I will send to the Joint Board a copy of this charge and
inquire whether it wishes to make comments or recommendations to
me on the points contained in this charge. If so, these will be forwarded
by me to the Academic Planning Committee for its consideration.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
1. The Academic Planning Committee may bring forward
other recommendations that follow from the recommendations called
for under the above charges.
.
2. ?
The Academic Planning Committee
is
charged to
consult widely within the University through such mechanisms as
hearings or submission of briefs.
3. ?
If, in the judgement of the Academic Planning Committee,
the nature of the charges permits or requires separate or earlier
consideration of specific recommendation, the Committee is not required
to bring forward all of the stated recommendations at the same time.
However,
?
the Academic
Plar:jning
Committee should remain
cognizant that, at its meeting of April 5, 1971, Senate
?
passed the
following motion:
"That Senate extend for three months, to the
July, 1971 meeting of Senate, the continued
de facto departmental recognition of B. S. F.,
S. P. F. and C.S., and continue to recognize
for this period the organization of the three
divisions into an Educational Foundations Centre
under the following constraints:
(i) ?
single undergraduate education committee
(ii) ?
single graduate education committee
(iii) ?
a single spokesman for relations external
to the Centre."
4.
If questions arise within the Academic Planning Committee
concerning specific aspects of these charges, Iwill, if necessary,
amend or interpret these charges.
5.
In order to provide additional background information,
the minutes of Senate meeting of March 16, 1970 and the relevant
Senate papers accompany this charge.
K. Strand
President
0
SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
OFFICE 01 THE
?
bURNABY 2, BRITISH COLUMBIA
VICE-PRESIDENT, ACADEMIC
?
!L'-1 ?
Telephone 291-3111 Area code 601
May 3, 1971
ALL MEMBERS OF FACULTY
As âresult of recent actions by Senate to refer certain
programs and structural reorganization within the Faculty of Education
to the Academic Planning Committee, the President has charged the
Academic Planning Committee to make four
,
reports, as set out in the
attached memorandum.
1rk summary, the Academic Planning Committee is charged
to make recommendations regarding the role of Fine Arts Courses
within the University, to bring forward a recommendation regarding
the administrative placement of the Kinesiology Program/Physical
Development Studies within the University, to report regarding the
quantitative and qualitative needs of the Province in the area of
teacher education and to bring forward a recommendation regarding
the role, structure and organization within the University, of the
Educational Foundations Centre of the Facilty of Education.
The Academic Planning Committee at its last meeting
considered these four charges and decided to ask for comments or
briefs from interested individuals within the University. In order
that there should be no undue delay in coming to grips with these
problems, I would therefore invite you to make recommendations,
through written papers, to the Academic Planner, Dr. John Chase,
as soon as possible and not later than May 21, 1971.
?
Briefs may
address one or more of the points raised In the President's memorandum
to the Academic Planning Committee.
?
It is hoped that there can be
a full exchange of views between the Academic Planning Committee,
Faculty, students, and appropriate members of the wider community.
B.G. Wilson
Chairman, Academic Planning Committee.
: ama
att.
