MAUM 

SENATE 

To ? . 

AMENDMENT TO 6.1, 12.1 and 13.4 OF 

JON WHEATLEY 

DEAN OF GRADUATE STUDIES 

SEPTEM ? 

BER 15 

,

1971

NOTION: ? 

"That the words 'full-time' be struck from 

Sections 6.1, 12.1 and 13.4 of the General 

Regulations for 

Graduate 

Studies." 

Po ? 

........................... SENATE 

?

JON WHEATLE 

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

DEAN OF GRADUATE STUDIES 

TO

.

13.... 

THE GENERAL 

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

?

REGULATIONS 

........................ SEPTEMBER 15 .1971 

In the regulations as presently written we have the 

following three provisions: 

6.1 To satisfy the academic residence requirements 

for a graduate degree at this University the 

student must be recognized by the Supervisory 

Committee to be actively pursuing an approved 

full-time program of studies in the number of 

semesters specified for the degree. 

12.1 Residence. The Master's Degree requires that 

a student be registered in an approved program 

and undertaking full-time study at this Univer- 

sity as a Regular Student for a minimum of 

three semesters. 

13.4 Residence. The Ph.D. Degree requires that a 

student be registered in an approved program 

and undertaking full-time study at this 

University as a Regular Student for a minimum 

of five semesters following completion of the 

Master's Degree. At least eight semesters are 

required for those students who are oermitted 

to proceed from the Bachelor's First Class 

Honors Degree level without completing the 

Master's Degree. 

MOTION: "That the words 'full-time' be struck from 6.1, 12.1 and 13.4". 

This motion passed the Executive Committee of the Senate 

Graduate Studies Committee on August 30, 1971 and the Senate Graduate 

Studies Committee on September 13, 1971. 

RATIONALE 

On any ordinary use of the phrase 'full-time' we have many 

graduate students at Simon Fraser who are pursuing a worthwhile course 

of study and who are not full-time. 

'

If we wish to keep these students, 

and we surely do, then we have three possible courses of action: we can 

so define 'full-time' that, though appearances are to the contrary, the 

students concerned are technically full time; or we can properly define 

full-' and part-time' and re-write the regulations to allow for both types 

of student; or we can eliminate the requirement that all graduate 

students shall be full-time. The first alternative is a poor one: having 

a definition of 'full-time' which is patently not a normal sense of 'full- 

time' 

?

is

the sort of attempt 

at wool-pulling which we should surely avoid. 

The second alternative looks 

attractive but is not. 

Every definition of 

full- or part-time students 

I have managed to frame 

has been clearly bad, 

or eliminated TAs from full-time status, or had other undesirable con- 

sequences. Alternatively, if we eliminate-the notion of full- (or part-) 

time students we emphasize what we surely do care about, which is that a 

student is "actively pursuing an approved program". This, therefore, is 

the course suggested. 