SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY ?
S.
4-6-6-
MEMORANDUM
SENATE ?
R. McANINCH
To.................................... ....
....... ... ...... ....... .... ..... ....... .... ...... ....... ...... ............. .............
.From ..................... ?
.
?
....
?
.........................................................................................
STUDENT SENATOR
Subject ........... ...PROPOSAL FOR THEESTABLISHMENT9,F
?
Date
............NOVEMBER.3
.
.
2.7.0
DEPARTMENT ACADEMIC GRIEVANCE
Moved "that Senate instruct each department in the University
to establish an Academic Grievance Committee, the composition,
purpose, and powers of which, would be as follows:
Composition of the Committee
Two students and two faculty from the department. The students
to be chosen by the students in the department and the faculty
by the departmental faculty.
Purpose of the Committee
To hear grievances from:
1)
Students in relation to the actions of a particular faculty
member.
2)
Students in relation to the actions of a particular T.A.
3)
T.A.'s in relation to the actions of a particular faculty
member.
The category 'students' refers to both undergraduate and graduate
students.
Nature of Grievances
The grievances must relate to the actions of a Professor or T.A.
which occur while that Professor or T.A. is conducting a particular
course and which relate to his or her conduct of that course
(including grading of the students in the course).
Powers of the Committee
The Committee is empowered to recommend remedial action if it deems
the grievance a legitimate one, action which would be binding on
the particular faculty member or T.A. involved."
The intent of this proposal is to provide a mechanism of
Is
?
grievance evaluation for students who believe that they have been
unjustly dealt with by a faculty member or T.A. At the present time
it must be conceded that students are essentially at the mercy of
faculty members as regards to what occurs in a given course situation.
-2-
For instance, what can a student do if he finds himself in one of the
following situations:
1)
Enrolled in a course which deviates dramatically and unsatis-
factorily in the student's assessment from the outline
presented at the beginning of the semester.
2)
Enrolled in a course, which in the student's assessment is
an entirely excessive and unreasonable work load.
3)
Enrolled in a course in which he feels the grade that he
has received is not one which justly reflects the quality
of his work.
A belief which underlies this proposal is that students in
relation to faculty should have what could be termed certain rights.
A faculty member should not, in effect, have unlimited power over a
student and automatically have the last say in a situation where there
is a disagreement between himself and a student. It does not follow
from the expertise which a faculty member possesses that this entitles
him to a position of omnipotence over the students who are studying
under him. There is no educational argument which can justify this.
It is hoped that faculty Senators will not view this proposal
as a personal affront or insult. It is not intended as an indictment
of the faculty of Simon Fraser, but rather as a means of improving the
current relationship which exists between the students and faculty of
this University. Faculty members voting for this proposal are not
engaging in an act of self-criticism but are declaring their respect
for the students of Simon Fraser by providing them with redress of
grievance procedures which one would expect to normally be accorded
a respected group of people.
:1
