.
S
DRAFT UNTIL APPROVED BY SENATE
MINUTES OF MEETING OF SENATE OF SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
HELD MONDAY, MARCH 5, 1973,
3172 ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, 7:30
P.M.
OPEN SESSION
Present: ?
Strand,
K. ?
Chairman
Aronoff, S.
Baird, D. A.
Banister, E. W.
Beirne, B. P.
Birch, D. R.
Bradley, R. D.
Brown, R. C.
Copes, P.
Cot, P.
T.
Doherty, P. M.
Eastwood, C. R.
Eliot Hurst, M. E.
Emmott, A. H.
Hollibaugh, A. L.
Jamieson, D. H.
Kissner, R. F.
MacPherson,
A.
Munro, J. M.
Nair, K. K.
O'Connell, M. S.
Okuda, K.
Rieckhoff,
K. E.
Seager,
J. W.
Sullivan, D. H.
Swangard, E. M.
Weinberg, H.
Williams, W. E.
Wilson, B. G.
•
?
Evans,
H. M.
?
Secretary
Norsworthy, R.
?
Recording Secretary
Absent: Caple,
K. P.
Dawson, A. J.
Ellis,
J. F.
Gilbert, K. L.
• ?
Lardner, R. W.
Reid, V. D.
Salter, J. H.
Sutherland, G. A.
Wheatléy, J.
In attendance:
?
Bartlett, B. E. (To speak to Paper
S.73-35)
D. L.
Clarke
?
To speak to Paper S.73-34)
A. M. Unrau
?
(
. ?
- 2 -
?
S.M. 5/3/73
As requested by the Chairman, the Secretary of Senate announced
theresults of recent elections to Senate, wherein G. R. Eastwood was
elected by acclamation on February 15, 1973 to replace N. Robinson,
resigned, for balance term of office to May 31, 1974, and E. W.
Banister was elected March 2
9
1973 under provisions of Section 23(c)
of the Universities Act on establishment of the Faculty of Interdis-
ciplinary Studies, for term of office from date of election to May
31, 1976.
It was moved and seconded that C. Eastwood and E. Banister be
seated on Senate.
MOTION CARRIED
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The agenda was approved as distributed.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the Open Session of February 5, 1973 were approved
as circulated.
.
?
3. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES
There was no business arising from the minutes.
4. REPORT OF CHAIRMAN
There was no report from the Chairman.
5.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
1. Senate Committee on Scholarships, Awards and Bursaries
Paper S.73-34 - Report
The Chairman noted that when the Senate Committee on Scholarships,
Awards and Bursaries was revised in April 1972, its terms of reference
included an annual report to Senate on the procedures and criteria
developed to implement charges and the actions undertaken.
Dr. A. N. Unrau, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Scholarships,
Awards and Bursaries, and the Financial Aid Officer, Mr. D. L. Clarke,
were then introduced to Senate as resource persons to respond to
questions.
A.
Ennnott enquired if there were representations being made to the
Department of Education to return to the former differentiated government
.
?
scholarships rewarding for excellence rather than blanket award with no
differential for excellence; and what efforts were being made to recover
funds in connection with emergency loans delinquent for more than eight
S
-
3 -
?
S.M. 5/3/73
months. A. Unrau replied that the Department gave the impression
that the major change in the administration policy of Provincial
Government Scholarships permitted easier handling of the program,
and it would seem that only a very strong representation could change
the procedure. With respect to loan recovery, Dr. Unrau was of the
opinion that tracing delinquents would prove more costly than writing
off the small loans involved.
P. Doherty expressed concern regarding the lack of an appeal
mechanism on decision on an award and felt that a separate committee
should be established for this purpose. The Chairman of Senate noted
that under the terms of reference of the Committee it would be improper
for It to establish another body and this left it no choice but to
reconsider its decisions when requested. He added that if the Senator
wished to press for an appeal mechanism to be established by Senate a
paper could be submitted by him to the Secretary of Senate for consi-
deration by the Senate Agenda Committee.
H. Weinberg asked questions relating to Athletic and Recreational
Awards. In response to his enquiry he was informed by A. Unrau that
Simon Fraser University was the only Canadian university known to him
which distributes Athletic Awards, as such. H. Weinberg enquired
whether the matter of Athletic and Recreational Awards had been
. ?
previously discussed at Senate. The Chairman of Senate noted that the
Board of Governors originally had also the power to act as Senate and
that during the early period of operations approval had been given to
Athletic Awards. Later those actions of the Board were transferred
over to the new Senate and ratified by it. K. Rieckhoff also indicated
that at a later date when the Athletic Awards Committee was being sub-
sumed under the current Scholarship Committee, the matter of Athletic
and University Awards had again come under general discussion and the
principle continued. H. Weinberg Indicated that he believed the
matter of these awards should again come under consideration by Senate
and enquired as to the appropriate mechanism for bringing this about.
The Chairman of Senate indicated that the matter of appropriate
procedures for dealing with such an annual report were really coming
under review for the first time but he felt that a Senator could
prepare a paper Indicating the desire of having discussion and review
of such awards. He noted that any final definitive action would involve
both Senate and the Board of Governors as they had been initiated and
approved by both bodies.
Questions continued on the appropriate method of discussing the
report and of bringing review before Senate. The Chairman of Senate
suggested that notice of motion could be an appropriate way with the
understanding that the giving of notice of motion during the evening's
meeting would not lead to discussion of that motion this evening but
that It was indication of intent to have notice of motion placed on
. ?
the agenda for the next meeting, with appropriate papers to be generated
and submitted for the Senate Agenda Committee and for distribution to
Senators well in advance of the meeting date in the usual fashion.
. ?
- 4 -
?
S.M. 5/3/73
There was lengthy discussion on the procedures followed in
determining recipients for Athletic, Recreation and University
Awards and a number of questions were raised regarding the distri-
bution of awards as shown in the report. A. Unrau had indicated
that the awards called for a fine grade point average of not less
than 2.2 and that excellence in performance in athletics or
recreational activity or cultural activity or contribution to the
University were required. His committee sought recommendations
and information from persons knowledgeable in the particular area
of activity in making determination as to whether or not an award
should be considered. His committee had questioned and would con-
tinue to question the nature of distribution of awards in attempt
to obtain equitable distribution.
J. Munro enquired concerning the "statement of intent" and the
degree of restriction, if any, placed upon the University, with
explanation provided by A. Unrau. K. Rieckhoff believed it appro-
priate for the committee to seek information from persons knowledge-
able in the field of the particular activity under consideration and
likened this to recommendations being made by an academic department
for a specific award to be given in the academic area of that depart-
ment. D. Sullivan expressed some concern on what he believed to be
too much pre-screening in areas such as Athletics, potentially
. ?
preventing reasonable freedom of decision by the final committee.
A. Unrau did not consider that this presented a significant problem.
Further questions were raised by H. Weinberg on the statement of
intent and additional clarification was given by A. Unrau. He noted
that the statement of intent was not a binding contract and that if
the student's average dropped below requirements, then he would not
qualify for further award. He also explained that in terms of the
awards they were on a semester-to-semester basis requiring resub-
mission and reconsideration in each semester.
A. Emmott suggested that the philosophy of Athletic Awards should
be discussed by Senate. P. Doherty gave notice of motion "That Senate
discuss the overall philosophy of Athletic Awards at its next meeting
with the purpose of forwarding a recommendation to the Board of
Governors on the continuance or discontinuance of Athletic Awards."
The Chairman noted that the motion would have to come forward in the
regular manner.
D. Sullivan pressed for distribution by the Chairman of a study
completed by the Administrative Vice-President relating to University
Athletics and Recreation in order that Senate might be aware of its
content and because of its contribution to the debate. R. Kissner
enquired concerning the amounts of money available for the various
types of awards and A. Unrau indicated that if there were more appli-
cants for University Awards that the committee would request additional
funds if necessary to accommodate them. He noted that the number of
applications for such awards was limited.
- 5 -
?
S.M. 5/3/73
There was lengthy discussion on the nature of breakdown of monies
received for Athletic Awards and monies disbursed for those purposes
as shown on the charts on Pages IX, XI and XII.
In response to question from P. Copes concerning Athletic Awards
and whether or not these are given at other Canadian universities,
A. Unrau indicated that he was not aware of any institution which gave
assistance under that name but that, indeed, there were various
procedures used at other institutions to support persons in athletics
and other activities.
It was moved by P. Doherty, seconded by K. Rieckhoff, "That awards,
scholarships, prizes, medals, and other such academic distinctions
gained by students be recorded on their academic records", but the
Chairman indicated he was not prepared to immediately accept the motion
as there were technical problems involved. If given as notice of motion
and then later brought forward in the regular manner this would give
appropriate opportunity for comments, study and report to aid in the
debate at Senate. P. Doherty indicated that he was prepared to have it
treated as a notice of motion.
In response to question from K. Okuda concerning the possibility
of grouping students for Government Scholarship Awards by ranking under
• ?
majors rather than across the University as a whole, A. Unrau indicated
that these matters continue under study with hopes that suitable improve-
ments can be made from time to time.
A. Emmott gave notice of motion, "That the whole subject of
scholarships, awards and bursaries be examined by Senate." The Chairman
reminded the speaker that further actions would be necessary and that
there were deadlines to be met in making submissions.
Discussion continued with a number of procedural points being
raised.
Moved by W. Williams, seconded by K. Rieckhoff,
"That discussion of Paper S.73-34 be postponed until
the next meeting."
Question was called on the motion to postpone discussion and a vote
taken.
MOTION TO POSTPONE FAILED
13 in favor
13 opposed
Motion was proposed by D. Sullivan, "That the report of the Vice-
President Administration on athletics and recreation be distributed to
. Senators prior to the next meeting and placed on the agenda for the next
meeting of Senate." The Chairman noted that there could not be instruc-
tion but that there could be request, and motion was made as follows.
0 ?
-
6 -
?
S.M. 5/3/73
Moved by D. Sullivan, seconded by H. Weinberg,
"That Senate request that the report of the Vice-
President Administration on athletics and
recreation be distributed to Senators before the
next meeting and that it be placed on the agenda
of that meeting."
Amendment was moved by P. Doherty, seconded by R. Kissner,
"That the words 'in conjunction with this report'
be added to the motion."
Question was called on the amendment and a vote taken.
AMENDMENT FAILED
Question was called on the main motion and a vote taken.
MAIN MOTION CARRIED
R. Brown requested that Paper S.216 - Incorporation of Univer-
sity Awards and Athletic Awards into Jurisdiction of the Senate
.
?
Committee on Scholarships, Awards and Bursaries - dated March 11, 1969,
be distributed for the information of Senators.
2. Academic Planning Committee
Paper S.73-35 - Proposed Program for the Master of Arts in the
Teaching of French
Moved by R. Bradley, seconded by K. Rieckhoff,
"That Senate approve, as set forth in Paper S.73-35,
the Program for a Master of Arts. in the Teaching of
French."
R. Bradley explained that the program had been developed as a
result of an expressed desire on the part of professional teachers of
French throughout the province for an opportunity to upgrade personal
qualifications, and it was envisaged that the program eventually could
be expanded to include teachers of other languages. Dr. B. E. Bartlett
was then introduced to Senate and took his seat in readiness to respond
to queries on the program.
A. Rollibaugh asked for an explanation of the stipulation
"terminal degree" and B. Bartlett responded that it implied that the
holder of a Master of Arts in the Teaching of French could not assume
S ?
use of that degree for automatic enrolment in a Ph.D. program in the
same fashion as the M.A. degree in French Linguistics - although no
S
- 7 -
?
S.M. 5/3/73
admission is automatic. K. Okuda asked what input had been provided
by the Faculty of Education, and indicated some reservations on the
title as the M.A. degree is normally an academic degree and the
current proposal represents a professional degree to be gained
through Summer programs. D. Birch gave information to the effect
that the Faculty of Education and the Department of Modern Languages
had held cooperative discussions over an extended period resulting
in a number of modifications in the proposal and the major objections
had been addressed and met. He .added that the proposal had the
support of the Faculty of Education.
H. Weinberg questioned the use of the proposed title of the degree
and wished to know why it could not be an M.A. in French. B. Bartlett
responded, indicating that the current M.A. degree offered through DML
is an M.A. in French Linguistics, whereas the degree currently proposed
offers quite
.
a different type of training. D. Jamieson expressed con-
cern at the lack of a requirement for a thesis. B. Bartlett explained
that the proposal was similar to that for other M.A. programs in the
University calling for extended projects and also for a comprehensive
oral examination.
Moved by D. Birch, seconded by J. Seager,
"That the question be divided to consider:
1)
the proposed program, and
2)
the title of the degree."
R. Bradley commented that by separating the question undue focus
would be given to a trivial semantic issue.
Question was called on the motion to divide and a vote taken.
MOTION TO DIVIDE FAILED
B. Bartlett noted that the intention was to introduce a professional
degree as opposed to the academic degree for the purpose of providing
opportunity for higher qualifications, certification and salary, and
essentially the M.A. was justifiable in terms of the academic content of
the program.
J. Seager remarked that the proposal involved the establishment of
a new degree despite, Senate's previous arguments against proliferation.
There was discussion on whether or not it was a new degree and the nature
of the title including the method of listing the degree.
The Secretary responded that the full title of the degree, if
approved by Senate, would be Master of Arts in the Teaching of French,
.
?
and that the listings would be Master of Arts - Teaching of French and
M.A. - Teaching of French.
.
?
- 8-
?
S.M. 5/3/73
In response to further question on the terminal nature of the
degree it was identified that the holding of the degree would not
preclude an individual from being considered for a doctoral program
but that it was not the normal route through to the doctoral program
in the same sense as the M.A. in French Linguistics.
Question was called on the main motion and a vote taken.
MAIN MOTION CARRIED
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
Monday, April 2, 1973 at 7:30 p.m.
3.
Other Items
There were no other items.
4. Confidential Matters
The meeting recessed briefly at 9:45 p.m. prior to moving into
closed session.
H. M. Evans
Secretary
