Subject: Ellis Implementation 

Committee Report 

November 21, 1969. 

To: Senate 

?

From: L.M. Srivastava 

Acting Vice-President, Academic 

I.

a. Since the last report to Senate, we have finalized the 

list of transferrable courses from B.C. Grade XIII and 

B.C. public regional colleges. 

?

The list is based on 

1968-69 and 1969-70 Calendars of these institutions. 

Publication of this list can be undertaken immediately 

after we receive the Faculty of Arts and Educations' 

assessment of general elective credits permissible toward 

their degrees. 

b. The Registrar's Office has further accumulated lists of 

courses from these institutions that have now been 

discontinued or changed but which have equivalence to 

those contained in the list for publication. 

?

This data 

has been collected for implementation of retroactivity. 

II.

a. We are recommending constitutions and procedures for Senate 

Undergraduate Admissions Board and Senate Undergraduate 

Appeals Board proposed in the Ellis Report and already 

accepted by Senate. 

?

These recommendations are consistent 

with Ellis Report, EXCEPT FOR ONE IMPORTANT POINT. 

Section 23, p.20 of Ellis Report specifies that among 

other things the Admissions Board will: 

To inform students of appeal procedures including 

their right to appeal directly to the Senate 

Undergraduate Appeals Board those cases in which 

a ruling of the Admissions Board is challenged. 

Our experience in the last year has shown that the Admissions 

Board and Appeals Board must not be set up as parallel bodies, 

or as one over-ruling the other. 

-2-

Instead, the Admissions Board must be charged to ensure 

that Senate policies are followed and to interpret those 

policies for the Registrar's Office if the latter is unable to 

decide a case. 

Appeals should go to the Appeals Board only if Registrar's 

Office has made a mistake in interpretation or implementation 

of policies. 

b. For these reasons we propose: 

1.

Deletion of section 2 

.

3 p.20 of Ellis Report. 

2.

Adoption of the proposed Constitution and procedure for 

the new Senate Undergraduate Admission Board and Senate 

Undergraduate Appeals Board as outlined in Senate paperO. 

III. 

The accompanying report by Director of Admissions makes it clear 

•

?

that the present Appeals Board has had great difficulties in 

meeting. ? 

Appealing students have appeared repeatedly for these 

meetings and then have been told that the meeting is cancelled 

for lack of quorum. 

?

For this reason meetings of the proposed 

Appeals Board should be strictly scheduled. 

IV.

a. If Senate approves the establishment of Senate Undergraduate 

Admissions Board I would further recommend that the Implementation 

Committee hitherto charged with implementation of Ellis Report 

be dissolved and its functions taken over by the new Admissions 

Board. 

b. I would like to acknowledge the support I have received from 

the Registrar's Office especially Denys Meakin, and Harry 

Evans, and Senators Robert Brown, John Sayre, Steve Stratton, 

and John Webster, in making it possible to implement the 

Ellis Report. 

I would also like to thank the various departments and faculties 

. ?

of this University for being so co-operative in giving us the 

information we wanted. 

?

:pb ? 

L.M. Srivastava 

To

........................ DR. L. M. SRIVASTAVA 

?

From ? 

DR. D. MEAKIN 

ACTING ACADEMIC VICE-PRESIDENT 

?

DIRECTOR OF ADMISSIONS 

............. .ADMISSIONS.. AND .S.TANDINGS,..APPEALS 

?

.21st. November......1969 .............................. .............. 

COMMITTEE OF SENATE 

Since my letter dated November 7th, 1969, two further meetings 

of the Appeals Committee have been scheduled. Neither of these 

meetings was able to raise a quorum. The first of the two 

proceeded for a period without a quorum, but adjourned when one 

member left. The second meeting did not even start. Some 

appellants have now come up to campus three times to be told 

each time that their case could not be considered. 

The details of these meetings are appended. 

.

End. 

DM: b c 

cc: Mr. H.M. Evans, Registrar 

is

SUMMARY OF MEETINGS OF ADMISSIONS AND STANDINGS? 

APPEALS COMMITTEE OF SENATE 

FALL SEMESTER, 1969 ? 

(Continued) 

NOVEMBER 7 

?

Meeting held without a quorum. Was forced to 

adjourn after 90 minutes when one member left. 

ABSENT: J. Kenward, J. Misera, J. Walkley 

NOVEMBER 20 

?

Meeting cancelled due to lack of quorum. Only 

two members showed up. 

ABSENT: M. Cohen, J. Kenward, J. Misera, J. Walkley 

DM: b 

To ...................... .........DR. L. M. SRIVASTAVA 

?

.From ? 

DR. D. ? 

AKIN ? 

?

ACTING 

.ACADEMIC V.SIDEN 

?

..

?

. DI ? 

CTO ? 

FADS.S.I.Q.NS................................. 

ADMISSIONS AND STANDINGS APPEALS 

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

.......COMMITTEE-OF-SENATE...................................Date................. ..Nov 

?

ther, ? 

19.69............................................ 

I feel I should bring to your attention certain matters concerning 

the Admissions and Standings Appeals Committee of Senate. 

The voting members of this Committee are two faculty members and 

two sutdents. There is also one faculty and one student alternate 

who vote when the regular members are not present. The quorum 

requires two faculty and two students. Meetings are generally only 

called when a sufficient number of appeals are on hand. 

Of the six meetings called this semester, a quorum has been present 

throughout only one meeting. Three meetings have had to be cancelled 

due to lack of a quorum. Two meetings have been held without a 

quorum. I have appended a summary of the meetings. 

Appellants have the right to appear personally, or be represented 

at these meetings. On two occasions, appellants have arrived at 

the meeting only to be told that the meeting had to be cancelled. 

need not stress that this causes considerable ill-feeling toward the 

University, and particularly toward the Registrar's Office, since all 

contacts are through the latter. I see no solution at present -- 

it is part of the general malaise suffered by Committees at this 

University. The idea of three fixed meeting dates per semester, 

proposed by John Sayre should help matters considerably. The member- 

ship and quorum requirements of the new Appeal Board should also be 

considered carefully. 

?

..• 

End. 

DM b c 

SUMMARY OF MEETINGS OF ADMISSIONS AND STANDINGS? 

APPEALS COMMITTEE OF SENATE? 

FALL SEMESTER, 1969 

Sept. 2nd 

?

Meeting held without a quorum. 

Absent: J. Walkley, A. Turnbull, 

J. Misera 

Sept. 9th 

?

Quorum present. 

Absent: R. Brown, J. Misera 

Oct. 2nd 

?

Meeting cancelled in advance as 

•

?

Secretary was informed that insufficient 

members would be present 

Oct. 9th 

?

Quorum present from 9:30 - 10:30. 

R. Carlson left at this point, but 

meeting continued without a quorum. 

Absent: J. Walkley 

Oct. 16th 

?

Meeting cancelled - only one member? 

showed up. 

Absent: A. Turnbull, R. Carlson, J. Misera, 

J. Kenward, M. Cohen 

Nov. 6th 

?

Meeting cancelled - only two members showed 

up.

Absent: J. Walkley, M. Cohen, J. Misera, 

J. Kenward 