DRAFr UNTIL APPROVED BY SENATE 

MINUTES OF MEETING OF SENATE OF SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY 

HELD MONDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1969, FACULTY LOUNGE, 7:30 P.M. 

OPEN SESSION 

PRESENT: ? 

Strand, K. T. 

?

Chairman 

Baird, D. A. 

Burstein, K. R. 

Campbell, N. J. 

Carlson, R. L. 

Cole, R. E. 

Funt, B. L. 

Kenward, J. K. 

Kirchner, G. 

Korbin, D. G. 

Lachlan, A. H. 

MacKinnon, A. R. 

Munro, J. M. 

Rogow, R. 

Srivastava, L. M. 

Stratton, S. T. 

Sullivan, D. H. 

Turnbull, A. L. 

. ?

Walkley, J. 

Wassermann, Mrs. S. 

Webster, J. N. 

Evans, H. M. 

Barboza, Miss J. 

Norsworthy, Mrs. R. 

ABSENT: ? 

Caple, K. P. 

Claridge, R. W. 

Collins, M. 

Drache, Mrs. S. 

Freiman, Mrs. L. 

Hamilton. W. M. 

Hean, A.F.C. 

Hutchinson, J. F. 

Lebowitz, N. A. 

McDougall, A. H. 

McLean, C. H. 

Perry, C. N. 

Sayre, J. 

Tuck, D. C. 

Vidaver, W. E. 

Secretary 

Recording Secretary 

Recording Secretary 

Professors J. P. Hertzog, N. J. Lincoln, C. N. Newman and 

S ?

J. H. Tietz, from various Departments in the Faculty of Arts, were 

in attendance briefly to answer questions in connection with Paper 

S.298. Professor J.A.P. Day was in attendance for discussion of 

Paper S.293 and Paper S . 305b. 

S

- 2 - 

?

S.M. 8/12/69 

1.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA 

The Chairman outlined the motions on the floor at the time 

Senate adjourned its meeting of December 1, 1969. He then stated 

that chairmen of various Departments of the Faculty of Arts were 

waiting to testify in support of their programs. 

Moved by D. Sullivan, seconded by J. Walkley, 

"that Item 4 b) ii) and Item 5 a) and b) on 

the agenda be postponed until 

.

Item 6 (Reports 

of Faculties) can be discussed." 

Question was called and . a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

2.

REPORTS OF FACULTIES 

Curriculum Changes: Undergraduate Courses 

a) .  

Faculty of Arts - Paper S.298 

•

? Moved by D. Sullivan, seconded by R. Carlson, 

that the Archaeology Studies new course 

proposals 101-3 and 436-3, outlined in 

Paper S.298, be adopted." 

N. Campbell enquired of the Chair as to the disposition of 

Paper S.272 on Priorities of New Courses, and was advised that the 

Academic Planner was revising the proposal and that it will be 

coming back to Senate in due course. 

D. Sullivan stated that if Senate approves the new courses 

additional teaching assistants will be required, or that if faculty 

or assistants can not be hired, current courses would have to be 

dropped to accommodate the new courses. It was stated that if the 

Departments wished to present new courses and can do so with the 

resources allocated to them, they should be permitted to proceed 

without Senate debating the issue. 

It was moved by D. Korbin, and seconded by J. Kenward that "the 

course, Archaeology 101-3, be sent back to the Curriculum Committee 

to get correct information," but the motion was withdrawn when he 

was assured by U. Sullivan that the statement on the course proposal 

in connection with additional teaching assistant requirements would 

be deleted from the paper, as alternatives had been identified. The 

• ? 

Chairman noted that either additional assistants would be required, 

or there would be a substitution of courses. 

. ?

3 -

?

S.M. 8/12/69 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

Moved by D. Sullivan, seconded by C. Kirchner, 

"that Economics and Commerce new course proposals, 

Economics 101-3, Commerce 371-3 and Economics 390-3, 

outlined in Paper S.298, be adopted by Senate." 

In reply to questions by D. Korbin, Professor Hertzog stated 

that Commerce 371 is a study of organization and theories using 

multi-disciplinary perspectives and research. He stated that it 

is impossible to identify a specific discipline with regard to 

organization theory. He outlined the high qualifications of the 

professors available to teach the course, each being a specialist 

in his own field. 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

Moved by D. Sullivan, seconded by R. Rogow, 

"that the English Department courses 202-4, 203-4, 

212-3, 467-2, 419-3, 469-2, 420-3 and 470-2, out- 

lined in Paper S.298, be adopted." 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

Moved by D. Sullivan, seconded by R. Cole, 

"that History 403-5, outlined in Paper S.298, 

be adopted." 

D. Sullivan mentioned that the course is the only one which 

offers study of periods before 1715, and that it is an extension of 

the present boundaries providing a marginal area where there has 

been interest shown. 

Question was called, and a votetaken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

Moved by D. Sullivan, seconded by C. Kirchner, 

.-

4 -

?

S.M. 8/12/69 

"that French 

152-4, 

230-3, 411-4, 412-4, 

430-3, 431-3 and 448-4, outlined in Paper 

S.298, be adopted." 

D. Baird reminded Professor Lincoln that the library resources 

in the University in the area of French-Canadian Literature were not 

extensive, and that undergraduate students do not have borrowing 

privileges at U.B.C. Professor Lincoln stated that students would 

be expected to purchase their books. 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

- Moved by D. Sullivan, seconded by M. Campbell, 

"that Russian 449-3, outlined in Paper S.298, 

be adopted." 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

• ? Moved by D. Sullivan, seconded by R. Carlson, 

Scandinavian 120-4, outlined in Paper 

S. 298, be adopted." 

D. Kirchner mentioned that Modern Elementary Scandinavian sug- 

gested that a new language was proposed, to which Professor Lincoln 

stated that the intention was that any one of the Scandinavian 

languages would be taught. However, he agreed that the word "Languages" 

should be added after "Scandinavian" in the course title. 

Question was called on the amended motion "that Scandinavian 120-4, 

titled 'Elementary Modern Scandinavian Languages,' outlined in Paper 

S.298, be adopted," and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

Moved by D. Sullivan, seconded by C. Kirchner, 

"that Spanish 110-3 and 111-3, outlined in 

Paper S.298, be adopted." 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

0 ?

5 -

?

S.M. 8/12/69 

Moved by D. Sullivan, seconded by G. Kirchner, 

"that the Philosophy courses, comprised of 

Philosophy 209-3, 208-3, 438-3, 488-2, 439-3 

and 489-2, outlined in Paper S.298, be adopted." 

Professor TIetz explained that it was the intention to offer 

the History of Philosophy courses 438 and 439 in January, 1970, 

with others not to be offered until at least the Summer Semester. 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

L. Srivastava stated that in view of what transpired while 

approving the Faculty of Arts course changes he would recommend 

that in consideration of new courses by Senate, other than those 

on new programs, there should be no implied commitment that 

additional faculty or teaching assistant support would be available 

to the department proposing the new courses. He stated also that 

if Senate accepted this recommendation much of the arguing that goes 

on at Senate would be avoided. He pointed out that although Senate 

should be aware of the hiring of faculty and teaching assistant 

.

?

support, the hiring of these people is not a matter for Senate to 

decide. The Chairman stated that this recommendation would be noted. 

b) Faculty of Education - Paper S.299 - Pass/Withdrawal Proposal 

Moved by A. MacKinnon, seconded by S. Wassermann, 

"that approval      

the two category 

grading system fo 

?

, 402 and 405, as 

presented in Paper S.299." 

A very extended debate was undertaken. It was suggested that one 

segment of the University should not proceed with a grading system which 

differs with that of the University as a whole. It was pointed out by 

S. Wassermann that the proposal represents 18 months of detailed consider- 

ation by the students and faculty in the Professional Development Program, 

and A. MacKinnon, agreeing that study was needed bore apy consideration 

be given for other areas, noted the proposal was 

?

402 and 405 

only. 

Amendment moved by J. Kenward, seconded by D. Korbin, 

"that Section 1, paragraph (e) and (i) of the Imple- 

mentation Procedures for Pass/Withdraw read 'The 

student would be assured of the right to appeal to 

S ?

the Department i4e.ad anu to (elected) students; the 

Dean of the Faculty; and the Senate 

?

in that order - 

if he so chooses.'" 

. ?

- 6 - 

?

S.M. 8/12/69 

J. Kenward felt that as there is to be an appeal mechanism, 

students should be involved in it. However, S. Wassermann stated 

that the students who had originated the proposal were opposed to 

other than experienced professionals judging competency. A motion 

was made by L. Funt, seconded by D. Sullivan, "that the discussion 

be postponed until a paper is brought to Senate regarding the 

present status of appeal procedure," but this was withdrawn. 

Moved by L. Srivastava, seconded by D. Sullivan, 

"that this matter be referred back to the 

Faculty of Education for further clarification, to 

be brought forward at the next meeting of Senate." 

D. Sullivan spoke at length in support of referral. He emphasized 

that the effect of the proposal would have wide implications in grading 

and appeal mechanisms throughout the University and that a number of 

items contained in the paper should be clarified by the Faculty of 

Education. S. Wassermann was opposed and L. Srivastava spoke on antici- 

pated difficulties. 

A. MacKinnon explained that the paper had been extensively examined 

in the Department of Professional Foundations and in the Faculty as a 

• ? 

whole. It was added that the basic principle of the Professional Founda- 

tions program is to give students a maximum chance of success, with an 

opportunity to withdraw without penalty for failure. 

Amendment moved by J. Munro, seconded by M. Campbell, 

"that the motion be amended to add the words 

'and also to the Examination and Grading 

Practices Committee' after the word 'Education,. '" 

Question was called on the Munro/Campbell amendment to the Srivastava/ 

Sullivan referral motion, and a vote was taken. 

AMENDMENT TO REFERRAL 

MOTION FAILED 

6 in favor 

10 opposed 

Question was called on the motion to refer to the Faculty of 

Education, and a vote taken. 

MOTION TO REFER 

FAILED 

Question was called on the Kenward/Korbin amendment to paragraphs 

(e) and (1), of Section 1 of the Implementation Procedures for Pass! 

Withdraw, and a vote taken. 

AMENDMENT TO MAIN 

MOTION FAILED 

.- 7 - 

?

S.M. 8/12/69 

Numerous questions were answered by S. Wassermann and A. MacKinnon 

in connection with the proposal wtiich 

j.9

applicable to portions of the 

Professional Development Program, 

'tfl,

?

402 and 405, only. 

An amendment was suggested by D. Korbin, seconded by J. Kenward, 

"that paragraph (b) of Section 2 of the Implementation Procedures for 

Pass/Withdraw be amended to read 'The names would be submitted to a 

Scholarship Committee, consisting of 3 faculty members from the depart- 

ments and one student elected by students in the Education Department, 

who would make the decisions regarding the scholarship awards,"' but the 

Chairman indicated that he would expect the mover and seconder to respond 

to questions raised in the earlier debate, and, if then appropriate, 

would ask for the amendment. 

D. Sullivan, noting that the paper defined the proposal as a 

grading system, and that S. Wassermann had indicatedit was not, enquired 

which was correct. S. Wassermann confirmed it was a grading system but 

that it was hoped that solution could be found to removal of the stigma 

of failure in a professional programme with significant emphasis on 

grading. Considerable debate followed. 

D. Korbin expressed the opinion that the institution of a Pass/With- 

drawal system presents a series of innovations in terms of scholarships 

and that it would be valuable for students and faculty to have a student 

sitting on the Committee. 

Amendment was moved by D. Korbin, seconded by J. Walkley, 

"that Item 2 (b) be amended to add 'one student 

elected by students from the Department of 

Professional Foundations."' 

It was then moved by K. Burstein, seconded by J. Kenward, 

"that the matter be referred to the Faculty of 

Education and the Senate Committee on Examination 

and Grading Practices." 

Question was called on referral, and a vote taken. 

MOTION TO REFER 

FAILED 

Question was called on the amendment to add one student to the 

Scholarship Committee, and a vote taken. 

AMENDMENT FAILED 

8 in favor 

S

9 opposed 

- 8 -       

S.M. 

8/12/69 

Amendment moved by L. Srivastava, 

seconded by R. Carlson, 

"that Item c. on page 1 - 'the student is 

requested to withdraw because there is doubt 

about his competence' - be deleted, and that 

appropriate editorial changes be male." 

Question was called on this amendment, and a vote taken. 

AMENDMENT FAILED 

9 in favor 

9 opposed 

An amendment was suggested by L. Srivastava, seconded by R. Cole, 

"that reference to Senate in the appeals procedures be deleted," and 

L. Srivastava stated that inasmuch as the judgment of a student takes 

place during the course of the student's field work over a period of 

seven weeks there is no possibility that an appeal would reach Senate 

in time for the appeal to be helpful. D. Korbin argued that the amend- 

ment was out of order as it contravenes the context of Section 63(e) 

of the Universities Act. The Chair ruled the amendment out of order 

but indicated he would seek legal clarification on this point, and that 

the amendment suggested would not be considered at this point. 

An amendment was moved by D. Sullivan, seconded by J. Kenward, 

"that the wording of the Procedures, in all 

substantive sections pertaining to withdrawal, 

be amended to read that the initiating of the 

request to withdraw be placed on the professorial 

faculty and the Dean of the Faculty in consulta- 

tion with the Associates." 

S. Wassermann explained that Associates in Education and the 

Associates of the Centres assess the ability of students in classrooms, 

that the members of faculty are not that close to the direct assess- 

ment, and decisions are made only after careful and thoughtful 

consideration between the Associates and faculty. 

Question was called on the motion to amend substantive sections, 

and a vote taken. 

AMENDMENT FAILED 

8 in favor 

9 opposed 

is

.- 9 - 

?

S.M. 8/12/69 

Amendment was moved by J. Munro, seconded by K. Burstein, 

"that Items (e) and (1) of Section 1 on the 

last page of Implementation Procedures for 

Pass/Withdraw be deleted, with editorial 

changes." 

J. Munro explained that he had proposed the amendment because Section 

63(e) of the Universities Act specifies that there is automatic appeal 

from decisions. 

Question was called to delete Items (e) and (i) of Section 1, 

last page, of Paper S.299, and a vote taken. 

AMENDMENT FAILED 

Question was called to adopt Paper S.299 as distributed, and a 

vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

3.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES 

a) Paper S.297 - Senate Committee on the Interdisciplinary Program 

in Kinesiology - Curriculum Changes 

Moved by L. Funt, seconded by A. MacKinnon 

"that Kinesiology 100-3, as outlined in Paper 

S.297, be adopted." 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

4.

REPORT OF FACULTIES 

Graduate Courses - Faculty of Science 

a) Paper S.300 - Biological Sciences 832, 833 

Moved by L. Funt, seconded by G. Kirchner 

"that Biological Sciences 832-3 and 833-3, 

outlined in Paper S.300, be adopted." 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

-. 10 - 

?

S.M. 8/12/69 

0 ?

b) Paper S.301- Mathematics 808-4 

Moved by L. Funt, seconded by A. Lachlan, 

"that Mathematics 808-4 as outlined in Paper 

S.301 be adopted." 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

Moved by L. Funt, seconded by A. Lachlan, 

"that Mathematics 808-4 be permitted to be 

offered in the Spring 1970 Semester." 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

5. REPORT OF CHAIRMAN 

Piper S.305b - A Proposal for the Establishment of the Senate 

Undergraduate Admissions Board and the Senate Appeals Board. 

The Chairman outlined the progress which had been made up to the 

point of adjournment of the Senate meeting of December 1, 1969, wherein 

the main motion on the floor, moved by L. Srivastava, seconded by D. 

Sullivan, was 

"that Senate approve the section of Paper S.305b 

pertaining to the establishment of a Senate under- 

graduate Admissions Board, considering only the 

procedures and operation, deferring membership at 

the moment." 

He said there was then an amendment proposed by D. Korbin and seconded 

by J. Kenward, 

"that the sentence 'Decisions by the SUAB shall 

be final' be deleted from the first paragraph on 

p.

2 of Paper S.305b." 

D. Korbin spoke at length in defence of his amendment to the 

paper, and L. Srivastava outlined reasons for the structure of the 

paper as presented. L. Srivastava served notice of an amendment to 

add to the first paragraph under Procedure on 

p.

2, the substance 

of which would be, "Before taking these cases to SUAB the Registrar's 

Office will inform the student that his case is being taken to SUAB 

and the student should provide all relevant information as well as 

extenuating circumstances, if any, and that the SUAB decision will 

be final." 

- 11 - 

?

S.M. 8/12/69 

After considerable debate, the question was called on the Korbin/ 

Kenward amendment, and a vote taken. 

AINDMENT FAILED 

Amendment was moved by L. Srivastava, seconded by K. Burstein, 

"that the first paragraph under Procedure on 

p.

2 be amended by adding 'Before taking these 

cases to SUAB, the Registrar's Office will 

inform the student that his or her case is being 

taken to SUAB, that he or she should provide all 

relevant information as well as extenuating 

circumstances, if any, and that the SUAB decisions 

on his or her case shall be final.". 

Argument on the procedure continued, and L. Srivastava explained 

that the Registrar's Office executes policy, but an error in policy 

can be appealed to the Appeals Board, and where there is no policy the 

matter must go to the Admissions Board for adjudication and a final 

decision. It was then moved by D. Korbin, seconded by J. Kenward, 

"that the amendment be amended to read 'and that decisions on policy 

by SUAB shall be final." R. Rogow stated that inasmuch as L. 

Srivastava's amendment was an addition of a sentence, and D. Korbin's 

. ?

proposal was a change in a sentence, it would be necessary to dispose 

of the first motion. Thereupon D. Korbin withdrew his motion. 

Question was called on the amendment to the motion, and a vote 

taken. 

AMENDMENT CARRIED 

10 in favor? 

4 opposed 

D. Korbin repeated his motion, which was seconded by J. Kenward, 

but the Chair ruled it out of order on grounds of redundancy inasmuch 

as the Admissions Board would be a subcommittee of Senate. The ruling 

was challenged by D. Korbin, seconded by J. Kenward. A vote was taken 

and the ruling of the chair was sustained, with 8 in favor of the ruling 

and 2 opposed. 

Question was called on the main motion dealing with approval of 

Paper S.305b pertaining to establishment of the Senate Undergraduate 

Admissions Board, considering only procedures and operation, and a 

vote taken. 

MOTION ON PROCEDURES 

CARRIED 

.- 12 - 

?

S.M. 8/12/69 

The Chairman then requested permission of the assembly for Dr. 

Meakin to substitute for Professor Day in presenting a summary of the 

discussion by the Senate Committee on Undergraduate Admissions and 

Standings in connection with Paper S.305b and Paper S.293. 

D. Meakin stated that the present Senate Committee endorsed 

Paper S.305b with three exceptions: 

1.

Membership of the Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board. 

2.

Membership of the Senate Appeals Board. 

3.

Majority required for a decision of the Appeals Board. 

The Senate Committee recommended the adoption of a composition 

of membership similar to that of the present Committee, with six 

faculty members, with each Faculty to elect two members, each member 

to serve a two year term (staggered) and the Academic Vice-President 

replacing the Registrar (or his designate) as Chairman. 

With reference to the Appeals Committee, the recommendation was 

that there be a Committee of five voting members, to include one 

faculty member from each Faculty and two students, and an alternate 

for each member. 

Decisions of the Appeals Board, it was suggested, could not be 

final unless three members of the Committee agreed on a decision. 

Moved by L. Srivastava, seconded by S. Wassermann, 

"that membership of the Senate Undergraduate 

Admissions Board be as outlined in Paper S.305b, 

page 2, as presented by J. Sayre." 

Amendment was moved by D. Korbin, seconded by J. Kenward, 

"that the Academic Vice-President, Dean of Student 

Affairs, Director of Admissions and the Registrar 

all be made non-voting members." 

D. Korbin stated that his motion was consistent with a motion 

passed by the Simon Fraser Students Council and also consistent with 

the general philosophy of the paper. He stated that policy should be 

the responsibility of faculty and students and the function of the 

executive is to administer that policy. Debate continued at length. 

Amendment to the amendment was moved by J. Munro, seconded by 

A. Turnbull, 

"that the Academic Vice-President be deleted 

from the motion outlining the non-voting members." 

r

- 13 - 

?

S.M. 8/12/69 

K.

Burstein argued 

,

that the last motion was contradictory to 

the amendment, but the Chairman ruled that it was in order. R. Carlson 

challenged the ruling and was seconded by K. Burstein. The ruling of 

the Chair was upheld by a majority vote. 

A. Turnbull stated that it was necessary to form a committee with 

an odd number and that the Academic Vice-President, as Chairman, is the 

logical person to vote. 

Question was called to delete the Academic Vice-President from the 

list of non-voting members, and a vote taken. 

AMENDMENT TO THE 

AMENDMENT CARRIED 

Amendment to the amendment was moved by R. Rogow, seconded by 

K. Burstein, 

"that the Dean of Student Affairs be deleted 

from the list of non-voters." 

R. Rogow stated that the main reason for granting the Acting Vice- 

President a vote is that his is an academic appointment and he is a 

regular member of faculty. As the Dean of Student Affairs holds the 

.

?

same appointments, it is an unwise precedent to deny faculty members 

voting privileges. 

Question was called on the amendment to the amendment to delete 

the Dean of Student Affairs from the list of non-voting members, and a 

vote taken. 

AMENDMENT TO THE 

AMENDMENT CARRIED 

8 in favor 

7 opposed 

Amendment to the amendment moved by L. Srivastava, seconded by 

K. Burstein, 

"that the Director of Admissions be deleted from 

the list of non-voters." 

L.

Srivastava said that the Director of Admissions ismostdeeply 

involved in admissions procedures and should have a vote, but J. Munro 

argued that the Director of Admissions and the Registrar could 

effectively play their roles without a vote. 

- 14 - 

?

S.M. 8/12/69 

Question was called on the amendment to the amendment on permitting 

the Director of Admissions to vote, and a vote taken. 

AMENDMENT TO THE 

AMENDMENT FAILED 

8 in favor 

8 opposed 

Question was called on the amended motion to admit the membership 

of the Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board as outlined in Paper S.305b, 

and a vote taken. 

MOTION FAILED 

6 in favor 

7 opposed 

As the membership proposed in Paper S.305b had been defeated, it 

was moved by D. Sullivan, seconded by J. Kenward, 

"that the Committee consist of the Academic Vice- 

President, Director of Admissions (non-voting) , 3 

faculty members, 3 students and 1 Senator (non- 

40 ?

voting)." 

D. Sullivan contended that two members from the Registrar's Office 

were not necessary on the Committee, but that a Senator would provide 

liaison and information flow. 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION FAILED 

3 in favor 

10 opposed 

Moved by R. Carlson, seconded by S. Wassermann, 

"that the membership of the Senate Undergraduate 

Admissions Board be as that contained in Paper 

S.293." 

Amendment was moved by J. Kenward, seconded by D. Korbin, 

"that five students, elected from the student 

body, be included on this Committee." 

- 15 - 

?

S.M. 8/12/69 

Debate ensued on the necessity for students on such a Committee 

and desirability of granting the Director of Admissions voting 

privileges. D. Sullivan suggsted that a 15-man Committee would be 

unwieldy. S. Stratton, seconded by D. Sullivan, moved that Senate 

move into a Committee of the Whole, but withdrew the motion when the 

Chairman assured him that this would not be helpful in bringing the 

matter to a conclusion. 

Moved by L. Funt, seconded by A. MacKinnon, 

"that the previous question be put." 

MOTION ON PREVIOUS 

QUESTION CARRIED 

12 in favor 

5 opposed 

Question was called on the amendment to add 5 students to the 

composition of membership contained in S.293, and a vote taken. 

AMENDMENT CARRIED 

9 in favor 

. ?

5 opposed 

Amendment was moved by D. Sullivan, seconded by J. Webster, 

"that three faculty and two students be 

deleted from the membership." 

Question was called on this amendment, and a vote taken. 

AMENDMENT CARRIED 

10. in favor ? 

1 opposed 

Amendment was moved by D. Korbin, seconded by J. Kenward, 

"that the Dean of Student Affairs be 

deleted from the membership." 

Question was called on this amendment, and a vote taken. 

AMENDMENT CARRIED 

7 in favor 

6 opposed 

- 16 - 

?

S.M. 8/12/69 

Moved by D. Sullivan, seconded by K. Burstein, 

"that the previous question now be put." 

MOTION ON PREVIOUS QUESTION 

CARRIED 

9 in favor 

4 opposed 

Question was called on the amended main motion substituting for 

the composition contained in Paper S.293 a membership consisting of 

the Academic Vice-President (non-voting except in case of a tie); 3 

faculty members, 3 students, Director of Admissions (non-voting) and 

the Registrar or his designate (non-voting), and a vote taken. 

AMENDED MOTION CARRIED 

11 in favor 

5 opposed 

Moved by K. Burstein, seconded by R. Carlson, 

"that the Open Session of Senate adjourn." 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION FAILED 

4 in favor 

10 opposed 

The Chairman stated that he would ask Senators to vote on 

acceptance or rejection of the membership of the Senate Undergraduate 

Admissions Board as comprised of the Academic Vice-President (non- 

voting except in the case of a tie); 3 faculty members; 3 students; 

Director of Admissions (non-voting); and the Registrar or his 

designate (non-voting). 

Question was called to accept this membership, and a vote taken. 

MEMBERSHIP ACCEPTED 

(Note: The final question related to the numbers and types of 

members, but not to the other items of Paper S.293 on 

membership.) 

Moved by L. Funt, seconded by C. Kirchner, 

"that the Open Session of Senate adjourn." 

- 17 - 

?

S.M. 8/12/69 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED

12 in favor 

6.

ADJOURNMENT

The Open Session of Senate adjourned at 1:15 a.m. 

H. M. Evans 

Secretary 

*