1. MEMORANDUM
.
DRAFT UNTIL APPROVED BY SENATE
MINUTES OF MEETING OF SENATE OF SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
HELD MONDAY, DECEMBER 4, 1972, 3172 ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, 7:30 P.M.
OPEN SESSION
Present: ?
Strand, K.
?
Chairman
Aronoff, S.
Baird, D. A.
Beirne, B. P.
Birch, D. R.
Bradley, R. D.
Brown, R. C.
Copes, P.
Cote, P. T.
Dawson, A. J.
Doherty, P. M.
Emmott, A. H.
Jamieson, D. H.
Kissner, R. F.
Lardner, R. W.
Lincoln, N. J.
MacPherson, A. M.
Munro, J. M.
Nair, K. K.
O'Connell,
M. S.
Reid, W. D.
Rieckhoff, K. E.
Robinson, N.
Seager, J. W.
Weinberg, H.
Wheatley, J.
Williams, W. E.
Wilson, B. C.
Evans, H. M. ?
Secretary
Norsworthy, R.
?
Recording Secretary
Absn: ?
Caple, K. P.
Eliot Hurst, M. E.
Gilbert, K. L.
Hollibaugh, A. L.
Salter, J. H.
Sutherland, G. A.
Swangard, E. M.
Wagner, P. L.
I -
\
In attendance:
?
Crawford, C. B.
Nugridge, I.
Newman,
G. M.
- 2 -
?
S.M. 4/12/72
.
?
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The agenda was approved as circulated.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the Open Session of November 6, 1972 were approved
as distributed.
3.
BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES
There was no business arising from the minutes.
4. REPORT OF CHAIRMAN
1. Paper S.72-130 - Departmental Review
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by K. Nair,
"That Senate approve, as set forth in Paper
S.72--130, procedures for internal and external
review of departments."
B. Wilson noted that the Faculty of Science had adopted the
proposed procedures for the current external review of its depart-
ments, and it seemed appropriate that some kind of uniform procedures
be set up through which the University may derive information regard-
ing the merits and performance of academic programs. K. Rieckhoff
expressed concern with the editing nature and possible differences of
required reports to be provided to Senate and the Board of Governors
and that the academic welfare of the area under investigation could
be affected by matters which nominally could appear to be a Board
responsibility. B. Wilson responded that it would likely be more
appropriate to amend the regulations after there has been an oppor-
tunity to review the reports that will emanate from the Faculty of
Science.
Amendment was moved by R. Kissner, seconded by P. Doherty, to
include students in the consultation necessary to produce reports of
reviewers, but the amendment was withdrawn when it was agreed to table
the motion until such time as the Academic Vice-President prepared an
addition to the motion defining "Department." The motion was then tabled
until later in the meeting, at which time the following changes were
proposed in Paper S.72-130, and accepted:
I. Internal review -
2. Except in the case of newdepartments for which separate
procedures have been established, each departmental chair-
man - in consultation with faculty, staff, and students -
. ?
shall be required to produce a biennial report on the
department's activities which shall cover, at least, the
following points -
S.M. 4/12/72
5. After receiving reports, the Vice-President, Academic,
shall provide a detailed report to Senate and the Board
of Governors and take such action as, in consultation
with the Dean and Department Chairman, he feels to be
appropriate.
is
.
II. External review -
4. Reviewers will be provided with a statement including
a.
the calendar entry for the department
b.
the curricula vitae of all faculty
c.
a document, prepared by the departmental chairman -
in consultation with faculty, staff and students -
reviewing items 1.2a, b, and d, above
d.
other information felt to be appropriate by the
department, the Dean or the Vice-President, Academic.
5. External reviewers shall visit the department for a
specified period together, but shall prepare individual
reports on academic performance of the department. The
Dean and internal reviewers shall also submit separate
reports.
6. On receiving these reports, the Vice-President, Academic
shall submit them, with his comments and recommendations,
to the President. After consultation with the Vice-
President, Academic, the Dean and the Department Chairman,
the President shall provide a detailed report to Senate
and the Board of Governors, and take such action as he
feels to be appropriate.
Question was called on the paper as adjusted, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
5. REPORTS OF COMMI
TT EES
1. Senate Nominating Committee
Paper S.72-131 - Elections to Senate and Related Committees
The Chairman stated that no additional nominations to those
contained in Paper S.72-131 had been submitted by Senators by the
deadline for such nominations, and it was moved by R. Brown,
seconded by A. Dawson,
"That the individuals nominated to the Senate
Library Committee and the Senate Appeals Board
(SAB) be declared elected by acclamation."
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
.
??
- 4 -
?
S.M. 4/12/72
The elections were as follows:
Senate Library Committee
One Senator at large to temporarily replace P. L. Wagner for the
period from January 1, 1973 to April 30, 1973.
Elected
by acclamation:
A. M.
MacPHERSON
Senate Appeals Board (SAB)
One Faculty Senator to temporarily replace P. L. Wagner as the
Regular member for the period from December 14, 1972 to April 30,
1973.
Elected by acclamation: J. M. MUNRO
One Faculty Senator to replace M. S. O'Connell, who has resigned,
as the
Alternate
member. Appointment will be from date of election
for no specified term of office.
Elected by acclamation: H. WEINBERG
• ?
2. Senate Library Committee
Paper S.72-132 - Changes to Library Loan Policy
?
Moved by D. Baird, seconded by K. Rieckhoff,
"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.72-132,
changes to the Library Loan Policy, as follows:
From: 6. Categories of Loan
For the purposes of penalties, there are three
categories of loan:
i)
General Collections, Interlibrary Loans
and Special Loans
ii) Reserve Loans
iii)
Audio Visual Equipment
If a person is suspended. . .levied separately with
respect to the three categories.
To: ?
6. Categories of Loan
For the purposes of penalties, there are two
categories of Loan:
i General Collections, Interlibrary Loans,
Reserve and Special Loans
• ?
ii) Audio Visual Equipment
If a person is suspended... levied separately with
respect to the two categories.
AND
5 - ?
S.M. 4/12/72
From: 7: ii) Semester End (concerns General Collection only
General Collection materials become due ......
to: ?
7: Ii) Semester End
General and Reserve Collection materials become
due ......
D. Baird explained that the proposed changes
arrangements to combine the General Loans with the
would permit better control of penalties. It was
proposed amendment to the policy, penalties incur
General Collections would prohibit utilization of
and vice versa.
were. housekeeping
Reserve Loans and
noted that with the
red with regard to
Reserve Collections,
There was considerable debate on the merits of the proposal,
until it was
Moved by J. Munro, seconded by K. Rieckhoff,
"That the previous question now be put."
Question was called, and a vote taken.
is ?
QUESTION
ON PREVIOUS
QUESTION CARRIED
Question was called on the main motion, and a vote taken.
MAIN MOTION CARRIED
3. Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies
1. Paper S.72-133 - Faculty of Arts General Requirements for Minors
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by N. Lincoln,
"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.72-133,
the general Faculty requirement of the Faculty
of Arts for a Minor taken in a department in
that Faculty, as follows:
To fulfil the Faculty of Arts requirement for a
Minor in Arts, a student must complete the lower
division requirements specified by the department
in which the minor is pursued, and at least 15
hours taken during the upper levels in courses
numbered 300 and above as specified by the Minor
department."
0 ?
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
. ?
- 6 -
?
S.M. 4/12/72
2. Paper S.72-134 - Faculty of Arts Departmental Requirements
for Minors
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by N. Lincoln,
"That Senate approve the minor programs for
the departments of the Faculty of Arts, as
set forth in S.72-134, as follows:
DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY
Lower Division Courses
Archaeology 272, 273.
To be taken in the Upper Levels
At least 15 credits in Archaeology at
the 300 and 400 level.
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS AND COMMERCE
COMMERCE
Lower Division Courses
Commerce 203 and Commerce 223.
To be taken in the Upper Levels
At least 18 credits of work in upper division
commerce, of which three courses must be in
three of the four areas of commerce specified
in the requirements for a commerce major in
the Calendar.
ECONOMICS
Lower Division Courses
Prerequisites for Economics 302 and Economics 304.
To be taken in the Upper Levels
Economics 302 and 304 and at least 9 other
credits of work in upper division economics courses.
NOTE: There is no joint Economics/Commerce minor.
is
.- 7 -
?
S.M. 4/12/72
?
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY
Lower Division Courses
In the existing Geography undergraduate
curriculum, Geography 101-3, Geography
211-3, Geography 221-3, Geography 241-3,
plus any one of Geography 151-3 or
Geography 161-3 or Geography 162-3.
NOTE: If proposed changes in courses are
approved adjustments to the above will
be recommended.
To be taken in the Upper Levels
15 semester hours of credit in Geography
courses numbered 300 and above.
DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY
Lower Division Courses
History 100 and History 199 are recommended,
. ?
in addition to lower division preparatory
courses in area of interest.
To be taken in the Upper Levels
At least 15 hours of 400 division work in
History.
DEPARTMENT OF MODERN LANGUAGES
LINGUISTICS
Lower Division Courses
Linguistics 130-3, 220-3, 221-3.
To be taken in the Upper Levels
At least 15 hours at 400 division (only
one of Linguistics 426-5 and 429-5 may
count towards this total).
FRENCH
Lower Division Courses
. ?
French 151 (or 100 plus 101), 201, one
of 230 or 240.
- 8 -
?
S.M. 4/12/72
To be taken in the Upper Levels
At least 15 units of upper division
courses in French including 301, 302
and 360. Linguistics 426 will be
accepted in partial fulfilment of the
upper division requirements.
GERMAN
Lower Division Courses
German 100, 101, 201, 202.
To be taken in the Upper Levels
German 300 OR 301 OR 302 and at least
12 hours of 400 division courses in
German.
RUSSIAN
Lower Division Courses
Russian 100, 101, 105, 201, 202.
To be taken in the Upper Levels
a)
Language Concentration - Russian 301,
401, 402, 403
OR
b)
Literature Concentration - Russian
301, 302, 450, 451, 452, 453. MINOR
STUDENTS ARE ALSO ENCOURAGED TO TAKE
RUSSIAN 140 - RUSSIAN CIVILIZATION.
SPANISH
Lower Division Courses
Spanish 102, 103, 201.
To be taken in the Upper Levels
Spanish 300, 301 and at least 9 hours of other
upper division Spanish courses (but no more
than one course of 340, 341 series).
0
.
?
- 9 - ?
S.M. 4/12/72 ?
DEPARTMENT OF
PHILOSOPHY
Students completing a minor in Philosophy
must take the following courses:
Philosophy 100, Philosophy 203,
Philosophy 210, either Philosophy 120
or Philosophy 421, and either Philosophy
340 or Philosophy 344. At least 15 hours
of upper division philosophy must be taken
in the upper levels.
DEPARTMENT OF
PSYCHOLOGY
Students wishing to minor in Psychology
I must obtain credit for Psychology 101,
201 and at least 18 other credit hours
in Psychology. Of the 18, at least 15
must be courses numbered 300 and above
taken in the upper levels. It is recom-
mended that Psychology 401 be included
in these 15 credits."
GENERAL NOTE: Students are advised to take the
• ?
appropriate lower division cdurses
in the lower levels.
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by N. Lincoln,
"That the approved minor programs become
effective commencing with the Spring
semester 73-1."
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
It was noted that some changes to course numbering are under
consideration. In those instances where there are changes in course
numbers, etc., affecting minors between January 1973 and the new
edition
of the calendar effective September 1973, the principles
indicated, above shall apply.
3. Paper S.72-135 - Department of English Changes in Requirements
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by N. Lincoln,
"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.72-135,
changes in requirements in the Department of
English, as follows:
- 10 -
?
S.M. 4/12/72
1. Majors in English
Normally a Simon Fraser University English
Major shall obtain credit or standing in
five lower division English courses as
follows:
(a)
Any two of English 101, 102 and 103;
(b)
Both of English 202 and 203 (or 111
or 201 in place of either);
(c)
Any one of English 101, 102, 103, 212,
and 225 - or transfer credit for some
English course which has no direct
equivalent at Simon Fraser University.
Composition courses of a purely remedial
nature are not accepted for credit and
therefore do not satisfy this category.
A student with 15 transfer credits in English
will be deemed to have met the department's
prerequisites for a major in English provided
some of those credits represent studies in
both category (a) and category (b) above.
Students deficient by not more than 3 credits
. ?
in the department's prerequisites by reason
of Inadequate transfer credits or for other
reasons may be accepted as English Majors but
must make up the deficiency. Such make-up
shall normally be attempted at the first op-
portunity, but the department may permit its.
deferment to avoid time-table conflicts or
for other good cause. Students deficient in
more than 3 credits in the department's pre-
requisites will not be accepted as English
Majors until the entire deficiency has been
made up.
2. Decrease the present credit values of English
202 and English 203 each from 4 credits to 3."
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
4. Paper S.72-136 - New Undergraduate Course Proposals In English
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by N. Lincoln,
"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.72-136,
new undergraduate course proposals in English,
as follows:
0 ?
-
11 -
?
S.M. 4/12/72
New Course and Title
?
Discontinue effective
August 31, 1973
English 424-3 - Canadian Literature A (English 416-3
English 474-2 - Canadian Literature A (
Seminar ?
(English 466-2
English 425-3 - Canadian Literature B
?
As above
English 475-2 - Canadian Literature B
Seminar ?
As above
English 426-3 - Commonwealth Literature
?
-
English 476-2 - Commonwealth Literature
?
-
Seminar
J. Munro questioned the statement on the course proposal forms
which
stated there were no budgetary implications even though the
course offerings were tripled, and I. Mugridge explained that, inasmuch
as there were sufficient available faculty and teaching assistants
Would not be utilized, the statement was quite accurate. R. Brown
added
that he had ascertained that it was not the intention of the
Department to offer each course every semester, but more Canadian
Literature
would be offered over two semesters than had been previously
possible. G. Newman joined the meeting and stated that the
intention
was to
offer two Canadian courses of intensive study and one Commonwealth
•
?
Literature course, and that students would have their choice of two of
the three proposals outlined. D. Baird commented that a check of the
library
resources indicated sufficient material was available to handle
the courses.
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
5. Paper S.72-137 - Department of English Changes in Requirements
for Honors
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by N. Lincoln,
"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.72-137,
changes in requirements for Honors in English."
P. Doherty enquired as to the amount of student input in the proposal
for changes, and C. Newman responded that to the best of his knowledge
there was very strong student support for the concept that Canadian
Literature be
included amongst courses available for the degree.
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
.
?
6. Paper S.72-138 - Department of History Changes in Vectors
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by N. Lincoln,
"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.72-138,
.
?
that the vectors for all current upper division
- 12 -
?
S.M. 4/12/72
courses in History - with the exception of
History 489-5, 495-5, 496-3, 497-3, 498-5,
499-18, be changed from 2-3-0 to 0-3-2."
K. Rieckhoff noted that the vector system should reflect accurate
information in connection with the work load involved, but the proposal
of the History Department did not appear to improve the existing situa-
tion. D. Birch agreed that meaningless vectors should be removed.
Amendment was moved by D. Birch, seconded by W. Williams,
"That the vectors for all upper division
courses in History be deleted for these
courses."
In reply to a question from S. Aronoff, the Vice-President, Academic
confirmed that even though an instructor did not supply the additional
material
represented by the final vector number, the five credit hours
would still apply.
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by K. Rieckhoff,
"That the question be referred back to the
. ?
Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies
since it is part of the charge given to that
Committee several months ago."
Question was called on the motion to refer, and a vote taken.
MOTION TO REFER CARRIED
7. Paper S.72-139 - New Undergraduate Course Proposals, 1fL -
Linguistics 130, Russian 140
Moved
by B. Wilson, seconded by N. Lincoln,
"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.72-139,
new undergraduate course proposals of the
Department of Modern Languages, as follows:
New Course and Title
?
Discontinue
?
Linguistics 130-3 - Practical
?
Linguistics 420-1
?
Phonetics ?
when 130-3 commenced.
Russian 140-3 - Russian Civilization
P. Doherty enquired as to the reason for the discontinuation of
Linguistics 420-1, and N. Lincoln replied that it was felt by students
that a one credit course was an inequity.
. ?
- 13 -
?
S.M. 4/12/72
K. Rieckhoff expressed concern regarding available faculty to
instruct in Russian History, Language, Literature, Drama and Film,
Music and Science, and N. Lincoln explained that the intent of the
course proposal was to provide a basic background to Russian
Literature
and that similar courses already exist for French and
German. He added that the budget implications imply that certain
courses will be offered less frequently, probably every 4th or 5th
semester.
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by N. Lincoln,
"That Senate waive the normal two-semester
time lag requirement to permit the immediate
offering of Linguistics 130-3 for the Spring
Semester 73-1 in January 1973."
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
8. Paper S.72-140 - New Undergraduate Course Proposals, DML
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by N. Lincoln,
"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.72-140
new undergraduate course proposals in the
Department of Modern Languages, as follows:
New Course and Title
?
Discontinue effective
August 31, 1973
French 206-3 - Intermediate French III
?
French 152-4
French 360-3 - Intermediate French
Literature ?
French 241-3
Latin 100-3 - Latin I
?
-
Russian 450-3 - Russian Literature from
?
Russian 440-5,
its beginning through the 441-5, 442-5
Eighteenth Century
Russian 451-3 - Russian Literature of the
first half of the Nineteenth
Century
?
As above
Russian 452-3 - Russian Literature of the
second half of the Nine-
teenth Century ?
As above
Russian 453-3 - Russian Literature of the
Twentieth Century
?
As above
Russian 454-3 - Seminar on Individual
Russian Writers
?
As above
- 14 -
?
S.M. 4/12/72
New Course and Title (continued)
?
Discontinue effective
August 31, 1973
Russian 455-3 - Studies in Twentieth
Century Writers
?
As above
Literature 440-3 - Monographic Studies I
?
-
Literature 441-3 - Monographic Studies II
?
-
tv
A. Dawson asked for information on the need for the courses, and
N. Lincoln supplied information to the effect that it is necessary to
provide basic courses for students entering from high schools and that
the number of required lower level courses had been reduced. Courses
in the 4th semester have been placed into the 5th semester and language
courses arebeig taught in the 5th semester. There had been a petition
from 31 students for the proposed Latin courses and the English Depart-
ment has been asked to provide seminars for that language in order that
the course may be mounted on an experimental basis. The Russian courses
are divided differently in order to provide four 3 hour courses dealing
with various centuries and two additional courses dealing with Russian
writers. Monographic Studies is proposed at the request of the English
Department for their majors. It is also hoped that a joint honors pro-
gram in European Literature will be available.
R. Brown stated that if it was the intention to offer Latin on an
is
?
as
basis it was not appropriate to include it in the calendar
as a permanent entry, to which N. Lincoln responded that a minimum en-
rolment would be specified and if there was insufficient interest the
course could be deleted from the calendar.
Amendment was moved by R. Brown, seconded by J. Wheatley,
"That Latin 100-3 be reviewed by the Senate
Committee on Undergraduate Studies before it
is offered a second time."
R. Brown stated that the amendment would offset proliferation of
courses in the calendar. A. MacPherson said there was no element of
experiment in Latin and that it was as modern as some other languages.
B. Wilson commented that it would be preferable for the Senate Committee
on Undergraduate Studies to direct their attention towards courses that
have never been taught or not taught in the last three years rather than
Latin.
Question was called on the amendment, and a vote taken.
AMENDMENT FAILED
K. Rieckhoff expressed concern regarding the apparent ambition of
the proposal, but N. Lincoln stated he had been assured that the integrity
of the program was reasonable, and that, in addition to courses shown as
being deleted, there are courses which are being deleted and not replaced
0 ?
-
15 -
?
S.M. 4/12/72
resulting in a fairly even net balance.
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by N. Lincoln,
"That Senate waive the normal two semester
time lag requirement to permit the offering
of Literature 440-3 in the Summer semester
73-2."
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
9. Paper S.72-141 - changes in Requirements and Courses in
rI1L
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by N. Lincoln,
"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.72-141,
changes to requirements and courses in the
•
?
Department of Modern Languages, including:
1.
Reduction of prerequisites for lower level
requirements for Major, Honors, and Minor
programs, and changes in courses required
for these (French, page 140, German, page
146, Russian, page 150, Spanish, pages 153-
154).
2.
Reversion from 4 hour to 3 hour credit
courses in the introductory 100 language
courses in French, German and Russian. The
reversion reintroduces courses earlier ap-
proved by Senate which were discontinued,
when the 4 hour' proposals were approved.
Changes are as follows:
Course Number and
?
Title
?
Changed Number
Credit
?
and Credit
French
102-4
Introductory
French I
French
100-3
French
103-4
Introductory
French II
French
101-3
German
102-4
Introductory
German I
German
100-3
German
103-4
Introductory
German II
German
101-3
Russian
102-3
Introductory
Russian I
Russian
100-3
Russian
103-4
Introductory
Russian II
Russian
101-3
3.
Changes in course descriptions, in vectors, and in
prerequisites."
9
?
-
16 -
?
S.M. 4/12/72
In reply to a question from P. Doherty, N. Lincoln explained
that the 4 hour credit system had created problems as the courses
built an overload and the change to 3 credits in the lower levels
is commensurate with the work required.
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
(Secretary's Note: Papers S.72-139, 72-140, 72-141 include the
following actions:-
Discontinuation of French 102-4, 103-4, 152-4, 241-3;
German 102-4, 103-4, 120-4, 151-4, 250-3;
Russian 102-3, 103-4, 440-5, 441-5, 442-5;
Spanish 202-3;
Hindi 201-3;
Linguistics 420-1.
Vectors are changed for a number of courses including:
French 100-3 to be 0-3-3
French 101-3 to be 0-3-0
.
?
German 100-3 to be 1-3-1
German 101-3 to be 1-3-1
Russian 100-3 to be 1-3-0
Russian 101-3 to be 1-3-0.
When technical capabilities are developed changes in titles are to
be made for:
French 240-3 to Modern French Literature
Russian 240-3 to Masterpieces of Russian Literature I
Russian 241-3 to Masterpieces of Russian Literature II
Linguistics 421-1 to Phonetics
Literature 140-3 to A Survey of General Literature I
Literature 141-3 to A Sur'ey of General Literature II.)
10. Paper 5.72-142 - Changes in Courses and Titles, Department of
Philosophy
Moved
by B. Wilson, seconded by K. Rleckhoff,
"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.72-142,
changes to courses and titles in the Department
of Philosophy - excluding the addition of Phil
001-3 which is under review by SC1JS."
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
(It was noted that implementation awaits completion of current tech-
nical developments for changing titles without change in course
numbering.)
- 17 -
?
S.M.4/12/72
11. Paper S.72-143 - New Undergraduate Course Proposal,
Psychology 321-3
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by K. Rieckhoff,
"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.72-143,
the new undergraduate course proposal of the
Department of Psychology, Psychology 321-3 -
Intelligence and Creativity."
C. Crawford explained that this proposal was similar in intent
and purpose to other courses in the Department and conformed with
other offerings.
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
12. Paper S.72-144 - Grouping of Courses for use in Faculty of
Arts Degree Requirements
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by N. Lincoln,
• ?
"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.72-144,
changes in the grouping of courses for use in
fulfilling degree requirements in the Faculty
of Arts, as follows:
1.
The separation of former Group D courses into
Group D and Group E, with Group D to refer to
Faculty of Education courses and Group E to
refer to Division of General Studies courses.
2.
The use of certain Group E courses, as deter-
mined for each semester by the Arts Curriculum
Committee, for use in lieu of the Faculty of
Arts compulsory Group A and/or Group B require-
ments to a maximum of six semester hours."
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
13. Paper S.72-145 - Africa/Middle East Studies - Changes in
Requirements for Entry to Upper Division Courses
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by R. Brown,
"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.72-145,
is ?
divisionin requirements for entry to upper
division courses ÂME 401-5, 402-5, as follows:
Change
from: ?
They are open to all students with 60 hours or
more or with the consent of the Coordinator/
Director of the Program.
To: They are
more, or
with the
and subji
Director
S.M. 4/12/72
60 hours or
n of 45 hours
concerned
Coordinator/
- 18 -
open to all students with
to students with a minimui
consent of the instructor
act to the approval of the
of the Program."
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
14. Paper S.72-146 - New Undergraduate Course Proposals -
Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by K. Rleckhoff,
"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.72-146,
new undergraduate course proposals in Mathematics,
as follows:
New Course and Title
Mathematics 291-2 - Selected Topics
Mathematics 292-3 - Selected Topics
• with each of the courses to be counted not
more than once toward completion of degree
requirements."
Question was called, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
4. ACADEMIC PLANNING COMMITTEE
1.
Paper S.72-152 - Interim Report of Academic Planning Committee
- PSA
It was noted that this paper had been provided in response to
directions of Senate at the last meeting, and it was submitted for
information.
2.
Paper S.72-147 - Institute of Public Policy Analysis
Moved by R. Bradley, seconded by K. Rieckhoff,
"That Senate accept the proposal for an
Institute of Public Policy Analysis, as
set forth in S.72-147."
R. Bradley, Chairman of the Academic Planning Committee, gave
background information on the processes which led to submission of
. ?
- 19 ?
S.M. 4/12/72
this recommendation. He indicated that representatives of the
University in the early Spring had attended a meeting of a provincial
advisory
council considering education and criminology to discuss the
need for a program in criminology, and how and where such a program
might be instituted. The Academic Planning Committee, when giving
consideration to
this matter, came to the conclusion that this topic
was but one in a much broader area of public policy. There was belief
that a number of questions concerning public policy were not receiving
the scholarly attention warranted. These would include items such as
federal-provincial
relations, certain aspects of foreign policy, N.A.T.O.,
social policy questions, transport, conservation. There was a feeling
that there was a need for research apart from constraints placed by
government agencies and similar bodies, and that an Institute within
the aura of a university would provide a suitable mechanism. Nothing
within the current proposal was an attempt to preempt the possibility
of subsequent teaching of a program in any one of the specific areas
which might come under Institute study. The Academic Planning Committee
had been particularly conscious of the need of the proposed Institute to
operate unfettered by any kind of outside control. On this basis he
proposed an amendment to the paper which had been distributed.
Amendment moved by R. Bradley, seconded by K. Rieckhoff,
"Delete the last six lines of page 1 and
. ?
first line and one-half of page 2, and
substitute 'Third, the Institute, in pur-
suing the objectives outlined, will remain
independent of government at all levels.
It will be funded partly by Simon Fraser
University but principally by independent
foundations. Only rarely, if ever, will
the Institute accept direct government
funding. It may do so only with the con-
currence of both the Academic Vice-President
and the Academic Planning Committee, with
subsequent report to Senate. Thus the
Institute will be enabled to pursue its work
unfettered by any kind of outside control."'
Amendment to the amendment was moved by P. Doherty, seconded by
R. Kissner,
"To delete the words, 'Only rarely, if ever
will the Institute accept direct government
funding. It may do so only with the concur-
rence of both the Academic Vice-President
and the Academic Planning Committee, with
subsequent report to Senate."
.
?
?
Discussion was undertaken on the amendment to the amendment and
its intent. The Chairman identified that the original paper would
- 20 -
?
S.M. 4/12/72
permit direct government funding in special circumstances but required
the approval of the Academic Vice-President. The amendment would
permit direct government funding only rarely and would require approval
of the Academic Vice-President and the Academic Planning Committee with
subsequent report to Senate. The amendment to the amendment would deny
direct government funding.
K. Rieckhoff spoke in opposition to the amendment to the amendment
on the grounds that it was not necessary to prohibit all government
funding but that appropriate control mechanisms were required to ensure
lack of interference. P. Doherty spoke in favor of his motion
indicating
strong
opposition to the principle of government contract research -
referring to difficulties which had arisen in the United States. J.
Wheatley spoke in opposition to the amendment to the amendment and des-
cribed the four methods of direct government funding through N.R.C.
grants, development grants, research agreement funding and contract
research funding - indicating his reservation against contract research
funding.
R. Bradley indicated that he had omitted in his amendment a crucial
sentence, "It will not undertake contract research," and requested that
this be added. There was no opposition to the request.
is
Moved by H. Weinberg, seconded by A. Emmott,
"That the proposal be considered informally
for a period of 15 minutes."
Question was called on the motion to consider the proposal infor-
mally, and a vote taken.
MOTION CARRIED
P. Copes indicated his concern with the acceptance of colored money
and believed that only rarely should money be accepted from government
for such operations. He also wished to be able to ensure that money
accepted from foundations would not involve vested interests. A. Fanmott
was of the opinion that so long as there was not interference, funds
could be accepted from various bodies but that controls were necessary.
D. Jamieson believed that with the controls through the Academic Vice-
President and the Academic Planning Committee interference could be
prevented. J. Munro enquired whether there had been consultation with
faculty who have an interest in the area and with other outside experts.
R. Kissner wished to know the extent to which Senate would have control,
believing
that a great amount of authority was being given to the
Academic Vice-President. A. Dawson wished to know the procedures which
would be followed in selecting the Assistant Director and the Director,
and the relationship they would have to the Resources Officer. K. Strand
indicated the original motion was incomplete and that there should be
. added to it, "and recommend to the Board of Governors that it be estab-
lished." As there was no objection, this was done. He noted that some
of the questions being raised would fall under the consideration of the
Board.
- 21 -
?
S.M. 4/12/72
H. Weinberg wished to have more clearly established the relationship
to the teaching staff, and enquired whether there would be joint appoint-
ments. He also wished to know how programs might fit into the research
goals and overall teaching programs.
B. Wilson suggested that the Director of such an Institute in the
administrative area would have a role akin to a Dean of a Faculty. The
role would not be the same in relation to curriculum development. The
overall policy of the Institute would fall within the scope of the
document presented. If there was concern about the specific kind of
research that would be undertaken, then it would be necessary to identify
more reference points.
R. Bradley indicated that insofar as consultation with other persons
was concerned, the deliberations primarily had been within the confines
of the Academic Planning Committee, but he believed individual members
had discussed aspects with a number of their colleagues. There had not
been deliberate attempt to invite further consultation within the community.
Insofar as consultation with bodies outside the University was concerned,
a good deal of advice had been taken from such bodies.
Moved by J. Munro, seconded by H. Weinberg,
"That informal discussion continue for a
further 10 minutes."
MOTION CARRIED
10 in favor
9 opposed
B. Wilson expressed the view that the continuing Institute staff
might have joint appointments in departments, but that the reverse would
not pertain if curriculum programs were developed. This would fall under
the normal procedures, and faculty members in such programs would not
have joint appointments to the Institute.
H. Weinberg enquired as to whether there would be an academic program
which Is part of the Institute, and how it would fit Into the structure of
the University. R. Brown responded that there was no intention to have an
on-going academic program in direct conjunction with the Institute. This
would not preclude the arising of programs outside of the Institute's work.
He believed it important that there be a small continuing staff of the
Institute to prevent the University from being locked into on-going pro-
cesses, thereby cutting its flexibility. The Chairman noted that if in
conjunction with a particular theme it was felt desirable to have particular
courses, these would come to Senate through the Division of General Studies
and offered on a one-time basis in the usual fashion.
J. Seager referred to the continuing and visiting categories in the
• ?
organization of the Institute, noting that three persons would be appointed
on the assumption that grants would be obtained. R. Brown suggested that
In the interest of the University this might call for joint appointments
so that if the Institute were not fully successful the individuals would
be absorbed into the faculty.
- 22 -
?
S.M. 4/12/72
K. Rieckhoff expressed some concern on the specific aspect relating
to one year study on a topic. R. Bradley responded that the Academic
Planning Committee had deliberated on this point at considerable length
with the principle that there should be some limit to the prolongation of
the deliberations on a particular area of study. This would not prevent
further on-going study by individuals who may have been associated with
the Institute, for example, as visitors, who might continue further work
on their own but not as a part of the Institute's projects.
Informal discussion was terminated and discussion resumed on the
amendment to the amendment.
R. Brown spoke against the motion, believing that the amendment
provided necessary flexibility. P. Doherty again expressed his serious
concern about government contract funding, and was supported by R.
Kissner.
The Chairman noted that N.R.C. and similar grants would be
indirect government funds rather than direct government funding as they
go through a filter screen process.
Vote was undertaken.
AMENDMENT TO THE
AMENDMENT FAILED
is
2 in favor
Discussion was undertaken on the amendment.
J. Munro asked for clarification on the terms "contract research"
and "research agreement," to which J. Wheatley responded, indicating
that contract research presents very tight constraints, while research
agreements do not have the same degree of constraint. He emphasized
that universities in Canada were now reluctant to consider
contract
research.
B. Wilson indicated that in view of the discussion and a number
of points raised, he believed it necessary that there be report to
Senate and to the Board of Governors.
Substitute amendment was made by B. Wilson, seconded by J. Seager,
"To substitute for the amendment the following:
'Third, the Institute, in pursuing the objec-
tives outlined, will remain independent of
government or other agencies. It will be funded
partly by Simon Fraser University but principally
from external sources. Acceptance of external
funding will require unequivocal demonstration
that the Institute may pursue its work unfettered
by any kind of outside control. Both the Academic
S ?
Vice-President and the Academic Planning Committee
must approve such acceptance, with subsequent
report to Senate and the Board of Governors."'
- 23 -
?
S.M. 4/12/72
40
??
As there was no objection to the substitution, vote was under-
taken on the substituted amendment.
AMENDMENT CARRIED
1 opposed
Amendment was moved by R. Kissner, seconded by P. Doherty,
"That Senate accept in principle the proposal
for an Institute of Public Policy Analysis
and recommend to the Board of Governors its
acceptance in principle, and refer Paper
S.72-147 to the Academic Planning Committee
for clarification and elaboration and pre-
sentation at the next meeting of Senate."
R. Kissner believed that the document was still not as clear as
it should be and that there had been much rewriting in the course of
the discussion. R. Brown believed that there should be referral only
if there were clear specific questions presented to the Academic
Planning Committee. As a member of that Committee he would not know
how to respond to the motion as made. K. Rieckhoff spoke in opposition
on the basis that the changes which had been made were small. He was
supported by J. Seager. B. Wilson indicated that he considered the
• ?
role of the Academic Vice-President one of not merely making sure funds
are untainted, but that of a watch dog to ensure appropriate balance
within the University. P. Copes and H. Weinberg spoke in opposition to
the amendment.
Vote was undertaken on the amendment.
AMENDMENT FAILED
3 in favor
A. Dawson indicated that he was in favor of the amended proposal
but was concerned about the control of Senate, and wished to know what
controls Senate would have. K. Strand identified that both Senate and
the Board would have certain shared responsibilities in this area. It
was identified that the proposal would be subject to the same kind of
analysis that other new proposals are subjected to and evaluated each
year during the first periods of operation with report to the appropriate
bodies. In response to a question from D. Jamieson, the Chairman indi-
cated that any course to be taught for credit that might arise would have
to go through the usual approval process of Senate.
Vote was undertaken on the main motion as amended.
MAIN MOTION AS
AMENDED CARRIED
0
?
2 opposed
. ?
- 24 -
?
S.M. 4/12/72
P. Doherty requested that his vote in opposition be recorded
in the minutes.
6.
REPORTS OF FACULTIES AND DIVISIONS
There were no reports of Faculties or Divisions.
7.
OTHER BUSINESS
1.
Notice of Motion
There were no notices of motion.
2.
Date of Next Meeting
It was noted that the next meeting of Senate is scheduled for
January 8, 1973, at 7:30 p.m.
3.
Other Items
There were no other items.
4. Confidential Matters
The meeting recessed briefly at 11:19 p.m. prior to moving into
Closed Session.
H. M. Evans
Secretary
.
/7
H. M./Evans
end.
SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
MEMORANDUM
ALL MEMBERS OF SENATE
.
From ?
H. M.
EVANS
SECRETARY OF SENATE AND REGISTRAR
Subject
?
DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW -.SUBSTITUTE ?
Date
?
NOVEMBER 28, 1972
PAPER
Materials recently distributed for the Senate meeting
of Decthiiber 4, 1972 include Paper S.72-130, Departmental Review.
The enclosed memorandum from the Vice-President,
Academic is self- explanatory.
Would you please replace the earlier Paper S.72-130,
Departmental Review with the enclosed Paper S.72-130 (Substitute
Paper), Departmental Review.
The earlier paper can be destroyed.

Back to top