S ?

DRAFT UNTIL APPROVED BY SENATE 

MINUTES OF MEETING OF SENATE OF SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY HELD 

?

MONDAY, JANUARY 14, 1974, 3172 ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, 7:30 P.M. 

OPEN SESSION 

Present: ? 

Strand, K. 

?

Chairman 

Aronoff, S. 

Baird, D. A. 

Beirne, B. P. 

Birch, D. R. 

Brown, R. C. 

Burkle, E. 

Copes, P. 

Cot, P. T. 

Daein, J. P. 

D'Auria, J. N. 

Dawson, A. J. 

DeVoretz, D. J. 

Doherty, P. M. 

Eastwood, G. R. 

Eliot Hurst, M. E. 

Ellis, J. F. 

• ? 

Hollibaugh, A. L. 

Jamieson, D. H. 

Kissner, R. F. 

Kitchen, J. M. 

Munro, J. M. 

Nair, K. K. 

Rheumer, G. A. 

Rieckhoff, K. E. 

Sadleir, R.M.F.S. 

Seager, J. W. 

Smith, W.A.S. 

Sterling, T. D. 

Swangard, E. M. 

Wheatley, J. 

Wilson, B. C. 

Evans, H. M. 

?

Secretary 

Nagel, H. D. 

Norsworthy, R. 

?

Recording Secretary 

Absent: 

?

Banister, E. W. 

Caple, K. P. 

Enunott, A. H. 

MacPherson, A. 

Reid, W. D. 

Salter, J. H. 

Sutherland, C. A. 

In attendance: 

?

Meakin, D. 

Mugridge, I. 

Okuda, K. 

0 ?

2 -

? S.M. 14/1/74 

SEATING OF SENATOR 

The Secretary announced the result of a recent election by and 

from the Faculty of Arts wherein G. A. Rheumer, having received the 

majority of votes, had been elected to replace P. L. Wagner on Senate 

for balance term of office to May 31, 1974. 

It was moved, seconded, and carried that Dr. Rheumer be seated 

on Senate. 

1.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA 

The agenda was approved as circulated. 

2.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES 

J. D'Auria pointed out a typographical error on page 32 of the 

minutes of December 3, 1973 in respect of Paper S.73-151 wherein the 

prerequisite change 

,

for CHEM 351-3 should be from CHEM 252-3, 261-3 

to CHEM 252-3. With that correction, the minutes of the Open Session 

of December 3, 1973 were declared approved as distributed. 

3.

BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES 

40 ?

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 Graduate Studies Committee 

1. Paper S.74-1 - Graduate Studies - Course Numbers for Special 

Arrangements 

Moved by J. Wheatley, seconded by K. Rieckhoff, 

"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.74-1, 

the following two new course proposals: 

Special Arrangements 898 - Master's Thesis 

Special Arrangements 899 - Doctoral Thesis 

These courses will not be listed in the calendar 

and are for the exclusive use of students working 

under Special Arrangements between two or more 

departments." 

3 -

?

S.M. 14/1/74 

An amendment was then moved by J. Wheatley, seconded by K. 

Rieckhoff, 

"That the last five words of the motion be 

deleted." 

•

?

J. Wheatley stated that S. Aronoff had drawn attention to the 

fact that special arrangements involved programs and, as there was 

no objection, the Chairman declared the words withdrawn. The last 

sentence of the motion then read: 

"These courses will not be listed in the 

calendar and are for the exclusive use of 

students working under Special Arrangements." 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

2. Paper S.74-2 - Graduate Studies - Archaeology Changes 

Moved by J. Wheatley, seconded by K. Rleckhoff, 

"That Senate approve, as set forth In S.74-2, 

the following changes: 

a) That the Archaeology graduate program be 

disconnected from the Department of Political 

Science, Sociology and Anthropology. 

b)That the paragraph, 'The following graduate 

courses are offered. These courses may be 

taken by students from other departments as 

electives and may be used to satisfy depart- 

mental requirements in the PSA degree program' 

be deleted from the Calendar. 

c)

That the paragraph, 'Students who wish to write 

the graduate thesis (898 or 899) in Archaeology 

may do so with the concurrence of both the PSA 

Department and the Department of Archaeology 

unit in which case the supervising committee 

will be partly comprised of Archaeologists' be 

deleted from the Calendar. 

d) That the following courses be instituted: 

ARC. 898 - M.A. Thesis 

•

?

ARC. 899 - Ph.D. Thesis." 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

. ?

- 4 - 

?

S.M. 14/1/74 

3. Paper S.74- 

.

-3 - Graduate Studies - Department of Economics and 

Commerce Calendar Changes 

Moved by J. Wheatley, seconded by K. Rieckhoff, 

a) ? 

"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.74-3, 

that the following paragraph on Page 63 of the 

Graduate Calendar be deleted: 

'2. Written qualifying examinations in three 

fields, one field in economic theory 

covering both micro and macro aspects and 

two other fields or two fields in economic 

theory covering both micro and macro to an 

advanced level and one other field. The 

other fields will be selected from the 

following: monetary economics, quantitative 

methods, international economics, economic 

history, development economics, regional 

economics, resource economics and labor 

economics. Adequate preparation for the 

qualifying exam in economic theory will be 

successful completion of the Microeconomic 

Theory sequence (800-5 and 801-5) and of 

the Macroeconomic Theory sequence (805-5 

and 806-5). Students who have successfully 

completed work equivalent to 800 and 805 

may omit course work in those parts of the 

sequences. Students are encouraged to com- 

plete the above sequences early in order to 

have the appropriate prerequisites for other 

likely courses in their programs.' 

b) ? 

That Senate approve, as set forth in S.74-3, 

that the following paragraph be added to Page 63 

of the Graduate Calendar: 

'2. Written qualifying examination in three 

fields. These fields will consist either 

of separate micro and macro economic theory 

fields and one other field, or a combined 

micro and macro economic theory field and 

two other fields. These other fields may 

be selected from the following: monetary 

economics, quantitative methods, mathematical 

economics, international economics, public 

finance, economic history, development 

economics, regional economics, resource 

5 -

?

S.M. 14/1/74 

economics, and labour economics. Adequate 

course preparation for the qualifying exam 

in the combined micro and macro economic 

theory field will be successful completion 

of Economics 800-5 and Economics 805-5. 

The courses required for the microeconomic 

theory field are Economics 800-5 and 

Economics 801-5, and for the macroeconomic 

field Economics 805-5 and Economics 806-5. 

Students are encouraged to complete their 

theory courses early in order to have the 

appropriate prerequisites for other likely 

courses in their programs.' 

c)

That Senate approve, as set forth in S.74-3, 

that the following paragraph on Page 64 of the 

Graduate Calendar be deleted: 

'3. Qualification in a supporting subject. 

student must qualify in a supporting subject 

in addition to the 60 credit requirement under 

1 above. A student may select as a supporting 

. ?

subject a language other than English. To 

qualify a student must demonstrate a thorough 

reading knowledge in the language concerned, 

as well as familiarity with the economics liter- 

ature in that language. 

A student may select mathematics as a supporting 

subject. To qualify he must demonstrate compe- 

tence in aspects of mathematics (including 

differential and integral calculus and linear 

algebra) adequate to support the most advanced 

course work in quantitative methods. 

With the approval of the Department, a student 

may select as a supporting subject a social 

science other than economics. To qualify in 

such an area he must demonstrate, by examination, 

a basic knowledge in the discipline concerned at 

the level of an honors graduate.' 

d)

That Senate approve, as set forth in S.74-3, 

that the following paragraph be added to Page 64 

of the Graduate Calendar: 

'3. Qualification in a supporting subject. 

. ?

In addition to the 60 credit requirement under 1 

above a student may be required to qualify in a 

.

.

- 6 - 

?

S.M. 14/1/74 

supporting subject. The supporting subject may, 

for example, be a language other than English, 

Mathematics, Computer Science, or a Social Science 

other than economics, depending upon the require- 

ments of the student's proposed thesis. The 

student's Supervisory Committee, in consultation 

with the student, shall make a recommendation on 

the requirements, if any, for qualification in a 

supporting subject for final approval by the 

Graduate Program Committee." 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

4.

Paper S.74-4 - Graduate Studies - Department of Modern Languages 

Calendar Changes 

Moved by J. Wheatley, seconded by K. Rieckhoff, 

"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.74-4, 

that LING 700-5 be graded on a Satisfactory/. 

Unsatisfactory (S/U) basis." 

J. Wheatley commented that, if the motion passed, LING 700-5 

would be the first course subjected to S/U grading. 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

5.

Paper S.74-5 - Graduate Studies - PSA Calendar Changes 

Moved by J. Wheatley, seconded by K. Rieckhoff, 

"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.74-5, 

the following change in degree requirements for 

the PSA Department: 

Delete: 

?

'A graduate student's main concentration will be 

on a thesis and not on formal course work. For 

the M.A. degree, minimum requirements are four 

one semester courses and a thesis. For the Ph.D. 

degree, requirements are one course and a thesis, 

excluding seminars. This course may extend beyond 

one semester's duration and is designed particularly 

to equip the candidate for his research and thesis.' 

Add: ? 

'A graduate student's concentration will be both on 

a thesis and formal course work. For the M.A. degree, 

minimum requirements are five one semester courses 

- 7 - 

?

S.M. 14/1/74 

and a thesis. The requirements for the Ph.D. 

degree for students with a Master's degree 

are three courses and a thesis." 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

2. Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies 

1.

Paper S.74-6 - Faculty of Arts_ 

-

Department of Economics and 

Commerce - COMM 337-3 - Change in Prerequisite 

Moved by S. Smith, seconded by K. Rieckhoff, 

"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.74-6, 

for Commerce 337-3 - Data Processing in 

Business, a change in prerequisite 

From: 

?

MATH 106-3 or CMPT 100-3 or 102-2 

To:

?

Any accredited computing science course 

including MATH 106-3." 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

2.

Paper S.74-7 - Faculty of Arts - Department of 

Psychology -

Change in Requirements and New Course Proposal - 

Psychology

499-10 - Honors Thesis 

Moved by S. Smith, seconded by K. Rieckhoff, 

Motion 1: "That Senate approve, as set forth in S.74-7, 

the new course proposal for Psychology 499-10 

- Honors Thesis." 

Motion 2: 

?

"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.74-7, 

change in requirements for Honors in Psychology 

From: 

?

'.... To qualify for the Honors degree in 

Psychology the student must have completed 50 

credits in upper division Psychology or approved 

related courses during the last four levels.' 

To: ? 

'.... To qualify for the Honors degree in 

Psychology the student must have completed 50 

•

?

credits in upper division Psychology or approved 

related courses during the upper levels. No 

more than eight of these credit hours may be 

directed studies courses in Psychology." 

- 8 - 

?

S.M. 14/1/74 

Motion 3: 

?

"That Senate approve, as set forth in S.74-7, 

the addition of a section in Directed Studies 

as follows: 'Students taking the Majors or 

Honors In Psychology may count no more than 8 

credit hours of Directed Studies towards the 

required number of upper division Psychology 

credits.'" 

(Note: If Senate does not approve Psychology 499-10, for the above 

substitute the following: 

"Students majoring in Psychology may count no 

more than 8 credit hours of Directed Studies 

towards upper division required credits in 

Psychology. Students taking Honors in Psychology 

may count no more than 11 credit hours of Directed 

Studies towards upper division required credits in 

Psychology.") 

In response to a question from R. Kissner, I. Mugridge responded 

that his instructions were to provide the substance of the Senate 

Committee on Undergraduate Studies debate on this subject, but not the 

actual vote. S. Smith added that the concerns of Senate had been 

spoken to in the Department and he considered that the communication 

process on referral had been appropriate. 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

(In the motion as approved, the "Note" above was not included.) 

3. Library Penalties Appeal Committee 

1. Paper S.74-8 - Changes in Procedures - Library Penalties 

Moved by J. P. Daem, seconded by A. Hollibaugh, 

"That Senate approve changes in the procedures of 

the Library Penalties Appeal Committee as follows: 

Delete: ? 

'Penalties imposed will not be suspended while an 

appeal is waiting to be heard by the Committee, 

but fines which have been paid and which are sub- 

sequently deemed unfair by the Committee will be 

refunded.' 

Add: ? 

'Penalties imposed will be suspended while an 

appeal is waiting to be heard by the Committee, 

is

?

subsequently 

fines which have been paid and which are 

subsequently deemed unfair by the Committee will 

be refunded." 

9 - ? 

S. M. 14/1/74 

D. Baird believed that the motion should not have been presented 

to Senate without prior submission to the Senate Library Committee, 

and noted that under the terms of reference of the Committee it was a 

standing committee reporting to the Senate Library Committee. The 

Chairman considered the question, noting that it was an unusual situa- 

tion in that it was a Senate Committee which was called upon to report 

to the Senate Library Committee but that it had only one term of 

reference for which it makes a final decision. He considered the 

terms of reference awkward but that the motion was in order. 

J. P. Daem was of the opinion that the conditions currently in 

effect while awaiting decisions on appeals were discriminatory as they 

assumed unproven guilt. K. Rieckhoff objected to the change proposed 

in the current policy as he believed that this could lead to abuses 

and a significant increase in unsupported appeal requests. The mover 

of the motion noted that for the procedures to be applied the appeal 

must be in writing. 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

4. Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board 

. ?

1. Paper S.74-9 - Transfer Credit for Work at the British Columbia 

Institute of Technology 

Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by D. Birch, 

"That Senate authorize, as set forth in S.74-9, 

the Director of Admissions to grant transfer 

credit for work completed at the British Columbia 

Institute of Technology." 

J. Munro raised questions concerning the desirability of awarding 

transfer credit as is done for the colleges and sought clarification. 

The Chairman asked the Director of Admissions to describe the process 

for transfer credit, and D. Meakin responded the standard process 

would be that he would collect detailed course descriptions and the 

most 1 

closely allied department would examine the content and determine 

what content would fit within the general guidelines of being of a 

University level. Recommendations in terms of transfer credit would 

be considered by the Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board. 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

Moved by J. P. Daem, seconded by A. Hollibaugh, 

"That this new policy be retroactive for any 

students since the institution of BCIT." 

- 10 - 

?

S.M. 14/1/74 

K. Rieckhoff spoke against the motion stating that there had been 

too many changes in the past offerings and a blanket change was inap- 

propriate. S. Aronoff pointed out that credit would be granted only if 

it is applicable. 

Moved by R. Kissner, seconded by K. Rieckhoff, 

"That the motion be referred to the Senate 

Undergraduate Admissions Board for its con- 

sideration." 

T. Sterling was of the opinion that the University should extend 

itself to accommodate the few students who might be eligible for transfer 

credit on a retroactive basis. K. Rieckhoff countered that there was no 

data to substantiate the claim and if there were only a few students no 

harm would be caused by delay. S. Aronoff directed attention to the 

rationale which indicated the motion was an enabling process to permit 

the Committee to evaluate courses as presented. K. Rieckhoff then stated 

the motion on retroactivity was out of order, but the Chairman ruled that 

the rationale statement could apply equally as well in the present as in 

the past and that the motion was in order. D. Meakin explained that the 

intent was that transfer credit would be given to students who are admitted 

to the University in the Fall 1974 and thereafter and retroactivity could 

• ? 

apply for work taken prior to passage of the paper. 

Question was called on the motion to refer, and a vote taken. 

MOTION TO REFER CARRIED 

15 in favor 

11 opposed 

5. Academic Planning Committee 

1. Paper S.74-10 - Report on the Senate Referral Motion of July 9, 

19.73 

Concerning Department of Political Science, Sociology and Anthropology 

Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by K. Rieckhoff, 

"That Senate approve, and recommend approval to the 

Board of Governors, the following recommendations 

of the Academic Planning Committee, as set forth in 

S.74-lO: 

1. 1

The existing Political Science, Sociology and 

Anthropology Department be divided into separate 

departments of Political Science, and Sociology/ 

Anthropology, and that this action be effective 

upon acceptance by the Board of Governors; 

2.

The separate departments bring forward statements 

of objectives, final program proposals, and de- 

tailed curricula for proposed implementation by 

September 1, 1974." 

S.M. 14'l/74 

B. Wilson recapitulated events which led to this presentation 

following July 1973 when the matter was referred back to the Academic 

Planning Committee. He advised that a sub-committee had been estab- 

lished by the APC to evaluate the proposal. The sub-committee met 

with faculty and students and written submissions had been invited 

from all undergraduate and graduate students majoring in the disciplines 

represented in the Department, from all members of the Faculty of Arts, 

and several outside reviewers. Recommendations were formulated. B. 

Wilson emphasized that the curricula contained in the report were draft 

curricula and did not define or limit territories and were not for 

approval at this time. 

J. P. Daem was of the opinion that the document did not answer 

the charges of July 9, 1973 in the motion to refer. Thus this sub- 

mission continued to involve an administrative rather than academic 

separation, and therefore the question now being considered is the 

same as in July 1973. He gave notice of motion, if the motion on the 

floor were to be defeated, that the matter be referred to the Faculty 

of Interdisciplinary Studies in order that the PSA Department and its 

curricula could be planned to form a comprehensive interdisciplinary 

social science program within that particular Faculty. 

S. Smith responded that the charges contained in the July referral 

motion had received careful consideration and the recommendations of 

. ?

the Academic Planning Committee represent a consensus that the separation 

of the department is the most viable solution. K. Rieckhoff added that 

the complexity of the problem necessitated first steps toward a complete 

solution. D. DeVoretz said it was unrealistic to attempt to assess 

extensive concrete proposals within the time permitted and that detailed 

analysis should take place in the first instance in the Faculty of Arts. 

J. Ellis noted that the Committee had been asked to consider a number 

of items and that he did not believe that a fully exhaustive examination 

had been called for in the original motion. P. Copes felt the time was 

strategic for development of social sciences with current faculty members 

who are desirous of rebuilding the disciplines In which they are competent. 

E. Burkle considered that bias had been introduced into the report 

by the lack of complete documentation. T. Sterling, speaking in favor 

of the motion, considered that a strong desire exists at the University 

for the development of a sound interdisciplinary program which has not 

developed with the operation of PSA. He believed that it would be to the 

advantage of the University if concentration were now to be placed on the 

development of such an interdisciplinary program. 

Commenting on the statement that bias had been Introduced into the 

report, S. Smith considered that for practical reasons it would be im- 

possible to include all documentation and to summarize all discussions 

that took place. He was satisfied that balanced documentation had been 

provided. 

.

??

- 12 - ? 

S.M. 14/1/74 

Moved by R. Kissner, seconded by A. Hollibaugh, 

"That consideration of the motion on the floor 

be postponed until the third item on the motion 

sheet of S.74-10 is taken under discussion." 

Question was called on the motion to postpone, and a vote taken. 

MOTION TO POSTPONE FAILED 

12 in favor 

15 opposed 

Speaking in opposition to the motion, R. Kissner stated that he 

considered the department's current situation was a result of indecision 

and that the discussion taking place regarding the proposed separation 

was not based on academic merits of splitting a department. He believed 

that separation would result in increased costs to the University, that 

the solution suggested was not based on sound academic merits, and was 

the easiest way out of a problem. He considered the option which should 

be taken would be to engage in development of the PSA Department as it 

currently exists. He gave notice of motion that, in the event the motion 

on the floor were defeated, Senate approve and recommend approval to the 

Board of Governors a comprehensive interdisciplinary social science program 

. organized with the PSA Department as a central core be developed for con- 

sideration by the Senate and the Board as follows: a) that a Director be 

sought who will be given the responsibility for development of a detailed 

program proposal for graduate and undergraduate programs; b) that a 

steering committee be struck by the Dean of Arts from within the University 

consisting of one faculty member and one student from each of Psychology, 

History, Economics and Commerce, Geography and Philosophy, and two faculty 

members and two students from the PSA Department to work with the program 

director in the development and implementation of such proposals. 

S. Aronoff considered the solution was to develop strong programs 

for political science and sociology/anthropology and the separation of 

the PSA Department was an avenue to accomplish this. He noted that no 

development can go to the limit of a discipline because of limited re- 

sources available to all universities. 

Moved by R. Kissner, seconded by A. Hollibaugh, 

"That Senate suspend its rules and record a 

roll call vote." 

It was noted that the motion was not debatable and requires a two- 

thirds vote to carry. 

Question was called on the motion to suspend the rules, and a vote 

• ? taken. 

MOTION FAILED 

12 in favor 

16 opposed 

S

- 13 - 

? 14/1/74 

Question was called on the main motion, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

23 in favor 

?

8 opposed 

The following Senators requested that their votes be recorded in 

the minutes: 

In opposition: E. Burkle, J. P. Daem, M. Eliot Hurst, 

A. Hollibaugh, R. Kissner. 

In favor: ? 

J. D'Auria, K. Rieckhoff, S. Smith, 

E. Swangard, T. Sterling. 

Moved by B. Wilson, seconded by J. Wheatley, 

"That immediate planning be undertaken to 

investigate the establishment of a genuinely 

interdisciplinary program broadly based in 

the social sciences." 

•

?

?

In response to a suggestion from J. Munro that an amendment was 

required to provide an operational context, as the vehicle for investi- 

gation was not the Board of Governors, 

An amendment was moved by B. Wilson, seconded by J. D'Auria, 

"That Senate approve that immediate planning be 

undertaken to investigate the establishment of 

a genuinely interdisciplinary program broadly 

based in the social sciences and refer the ques- 

tion to the Academic Planning Committee for 

action." 

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

AMENDMENT CARRIED 

Amendment was moved by J. P. Daem, seconded by R. Kissner, 

"That Senate approve that immediate planning be 

undertaken to establish a genuinely interdisciplinary 

program broadly based in the social sciences and the 

question be referred to the Academic Planning Com- 

mittee for immediate action." 

J. P. Daem suggested that this amendment would accelerate the 

. ? process to establish a program. A. Dawson objected on the grounds 

that he considered any interdisciplinary program should be thoroughly 

investigated before considering Implementation. 

S

- 14 - 

?

S.M. 14/1/74 

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

AMENDMENT CARRIED 

15 in favor 

14 opposed 

Amendment was moved by R. Kissner, seconded by A. Hollibaugh, 

"That the following be added to the motion, 

'Further, a) a steering committee be struck 

by the Academic Planning Committee consisting 

of one faculty member and one student from 

each of Psychology, History, Economics and 

Commerce, Geography, Philosophy, Political 

Science, Sociology/Anthropology and such other 

members as the Academic Planning Committee may 

determine necessary to work cooperatively with 

the Academic Planning Committee in developing 

interdisciplinary proposals, and b) that a 

progress report be delivered to Senate at its 

meeting in September 1974.'" 

It was questioned whether this amendment was in order. The Chairman 

S ?

ruled that the amendment was in order, and the ruling was challenged. 

Question was called on the challenge. The ruling of the chair was sus- 

tained by a vote of 15 to 7. 

R. Kissner considered the establishment of a late for a report 

to Senate would ensure some progress would be made and the committee 

suggested would provide greater participation. R. Sadleir spoke in 

opposition to the committee as he did not consider it Senate's responsi- 

bility to tell the Academic Planning Committee its job, although he 

agreed with the establishment of a date. 

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

J. D'Auria, 

"That the words of the amendment be deleted 

with the exception of the following: 'Further, 

that a progress report be delivered to Senate 

at its meeting in September 1974."' 

J. Munro said the size of the suggested committee was unworkable 

and the establishment of a steering committee of this type would tend 

to preclude the participation of members of already constituted com- 

mittees in the Faculty of Arts. 

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

•

? taken. 

?

AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT 

CARRIED 

24 in favor 

?

6 opposed 

15 -       

S.M. 

14/1/74 

Question was called on the amendment, 

and a vote 

taken. 

AMENDMENT CARRIED 

The Secretary read the main motion as amended: 

"That Senate approve that immediate planning 

be undertaken to establish a genuinely inter- 

disciplinary program broadly based in the 

social sciences, and the question be referred 

to the Academic Planning Committee for immediate 

action. Further, that a progress repOrt be 

delivered to Senate at its meeting in September 

1974." 

In reply to a question by J. Ellis, the Chairman stated that a 

commitment to the establishment of a program would be an approval in 

principle by Senate and the Board of Governors. There is a commit- 

ment by Senate to an early investigation of this question but it 

would not be a commitment until such time as there is a recommendation 

and that recommendation is acted on positively by Senate and trans- 

mitted to the Board of Governors. 

• ? 

Question was called on the main motion as amended, and a vote taken. 

MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED 

CARRIED 

6. Senate Committee on Working Paper on University Governance in 

British Columbia 

1. Paper S.74-11 - Report to Senate 

The Chairman requested that K. Okuda, a member of the Committee on 

University Governance, report on the present status of the Committee. 

K. Okuda advised that the Committee has been instructed to proceed with 

its program and that a public hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, January 

16, 1974 with Walter Young as Acting Chairman. He added that the 

Committee is not precluding further meetings at any of the universities 

even if material is not presented on the dates established for any of the 

hearings. 

In reply to a question by J. P. Daem as to how Senate was to discuss 

the paper, the Chairman responded that the recommendation of the Senate 

Committee on Agenda and Rules was for debate and discussion on the alter- 

natives prior to indicating preferences in rank order. The intention was 

to collate the preferences for presentation to the Committee to indicate 

the general views of Senate. 

Moved by D. 

Jamieson, 

seconded by J. P. Daem, 

"That a Special 

Meeting of Senate be called on 

Monday, 

January 

21, 1974 to consider the question." 

. ?

-16 - 

?

S.M. 14/1/74 

J. P. Daem indicated that he did not consider that a preferential 

vote method was appropriate and that he was opposed to considering the 

matter in that way. He wished to know, if the Special Meeting were 

approved, whether items could be distributed in advance, and the 

Chairman responded in the affirmative. B. Wilson expressed opposition 

and felt that Senate must make substantive judgment. In discussion it 

was noted that there were two obvious alternatives, namely that of a 

single position on each issue or various degrees of positions on all 

issues. A third alternative would be to have established at this stage 

various degrees of positions on issues to be followed by a later meeting 

to attempt to develop the appropriate single position on the issue. 

J. D'Auria suggested it might be appropriate to invite the members of 

the Provincial Committee to come and sit in and discuss the topic at 

and with Senate. 

In response to enquiry from S. Aronoff, the Chairman indicated that 

additional items could be added and items could be deleted in terms of 

the items as already presented through the Committee report. 

A straw vote was taken which indicated 23 members were in favor 

of calling a Special Meeting. 

S. Aronoff suggested that procedure be developed for speaking and 

discussion, and the Chairman said he would hold hearings on how the 

. question would be dealt with, and interested Senators were at liberty 

to make appointments with him for this purpose. He indicatedthat if 

Senators have views which they wish to express that they could be put 

together and given to the Secretary for distribution. 

Question was called, and a vote taken. 

MOTION CARRIED 

7. OTHER BUSINESS 

1.

Notice of Motion 

1. Paper S.74-12 - Recommended Rules of Senate (Senate Committee on 

Agenda and Rules) 

The Chairman commented that a notice of motion pertaining to Rules 

of Senate is advertised one month in advance of discussion. 

2.

Date of Next Meeting 

It was noted that the next regular meeting of Senate is scheduled 

for Monday, February 4, 1974, at 7:30 p.m. 

3.

Other Items 

0 ?

There were no other items. 

- ?

- 17 - ? 

S.M. 14/1/74 

4. Confidential Matters 

The meeting recessed briefly at 11:00 p.m., prior to moving into 

Closed Session. 

H. M. Evans 

Secretary 