ta4

S.262 

To. ENATE 

?

From H. N. EVANS 

SECRETARY OF SENATE AND REGISTRAR 

Subject SUBNISS ION OF CALENDAR MATERIALS 

1970-71 

Date ...... ? 

S ?

26,

Following previous practice Senate is requested to approve the 

folloing motions concerning calendar submissions:- 

Notion (1) ? 

That November 3, 1969 be the last date for submission 

by Departments to the Registrar of all copy of materials 

for both the Undergraduate and the Graduate Calendars 

for 1970-71. 

Motion (2) ? 

That December 8, 1969 he established as the date for 

the Special Meeting of Senate to approve calendar items 

for 1970-71. 

NoLe: (i) ? 

Senate has established that the calendar is provided 

for the period September-August, with provision for 

addenda where essential. To be of prime use, calendars must 

W ?

be available for distribution well in advance of the close 

of the normal school year in June. Regrettably, it was not 

possible to achieve this for 1969-70. 

Unfortunately, because of a number of changes, the 

calendar issued for 1.969-70 was well out-of-date before 

publication was completed, and this problem was sig- 

nificantly increased through changes undertaken in July 

and August. 

Such steps as have been possible have been undertaken to 

try to ensure that essential data has been provided to 

students to reduce the possibility of errors in advising, 

and in course selection, but not all factors have been 

covered. The possibility of error remains large. Hope- 

fully the University can work to reduce these possibilities. 

(ii) ? 

It may be recalled that at the meeting of December 9, 1968, 

concerned with "Calendar Changes," it was identified that:- 

(a)

many courses were coming before Senate for first 

approval, without reasonable documentation; 

(b)

a number of submissions were being made which represented 

major changes in the philosophy or direction of a department:, 

without reasonable &ocumentation. 

-2-

Senate understandably reacted by not passing a number 

of major submissions and required further review and 

documentation. This, however, led to production of 

calendars which were significantly out-of-date when 

printed. It is hoped that a number of these problems 

can be. avoided, through earlier request for course 

approval - with reasonable documentation; or through 

earlier submission of requests for consideration of 

directional or similar changes for a department. 

In the final analysis, the approval by Senate of 

calendar items should become relatively routine, and 

the substantive discussions on review of philosophy 

or direction should have been earlier resolved. It 

is recognized that this may not be achieved immediately, 

but it must be rapidly approached if major difficulties, 

both for students and for the University as a community, 

are to be overcome. 

(iii) ? 

Many demands for a system ofpre-registration understandably 

are received from departments, whilst at the same time the 

department is not prepared to, or is unable to, commit itself 

in terms of offerings for a given semester, because of desire 

for flexibility, or non-identification of staff available or 

other reasons. These factors mitigate against, or nullify, 

any reasonable possibility of adequate pre-registration. The 

situation evident for the Fall semester 69-3 emphasizes the 

necessity of some form of pre-registration. A minimum 

requirement is clear indication of the offerings to be provided 

in a given semester, with decision made well in advance 

of the 

semester. There is also requirement that the basics of the 

time-table be identified to permit adequate pre-registration, 

- unless decision is made to undertake to build offerings (and 

time-table) around requests for courses. There are advantages 

and drawbacks to each system. At present, neither of these 

conditions are operational across the University as a whole. 

Current policies of Senate make it possible for a course or 

program to be approved by Senate one month in advance of the 

semester for which it is to be introduced. This time seems 

too short from the standpoint of planning of the department, 

the students, and the University. 

Motion (3) ? 

That other than in 

'

the most exceptional circumstances, for 

which Senate would suspend its normal rules, the offering of 

courses in a given semester would be restricted to those 

courses ali'eady approved by Senate appearing within the 

calendar for the semester concerned. 

0MM.EVaflS.......................................................... 

• ? 

.

Undergraduate Calendars 

The, following 

is

the production schedule for the 1970/71 editions 

• ? 

of

the Graduate and 

Undergraduate Calendars which I would ask you 

to have approved at 

the September 8 meeting of Senate so that I 

: m

ay circulate this 

to the various departments. 

Noveber 3, 1969 

?

-

Last date for all copy of both calendars to be 

submitted to the Registrar. 

Decenber 8, 1969 

?

-

Copy submitted to special meeting of Senate. 

December 15, 1969 - 

Copy submitted to printers. 

• ? 

. ?

January 12, 1970 

?

-

First galley proofs received from printers. 

January 30, 1970 

?

-

First galley proofs returned to printers. 

February 9, 1970 

?

-

Page proofs received from printers. 

•

?

February 20, 

'

1970 - 

Page proofs returned to printers. 

March 20, 1970 

?

-

Delivery of first shipment. 

HDN/ws ? 

, ?

•                                                  '. ? 

. ?

From 

.

Harve 

y

..D.. ... Nagel ...................... .......................... 

Publications... Officer................................. 

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

.......... ..August 

?

15

.

. ... 1969 ................................ .............. 