-4
.
DRAFT UNTIL APPROVED BY SENATE
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE SENATE OF SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY HELD
?
ON MONDAY, JULY 10, 1989 KLAUS RIECKHOFF HALL, 4:30 P.M.
?
OPEN SESSION
Present: ?
Saywell, W.G., Chair
S
Alderson, ?
E.
(representing ?
R.Brown)
Addison, G.
Barrow, R.
Blackman, R.
Blaney,
?
J.
Calvert, T.
Cercone, N.
Clayman, B.
Cleveland, W.
Dahl, H.
D'Auria, ?
J.
Dickinson,
?
J.
Dill, L.
Djwa, S.
Dobb, T.
Freedman, ?
A.
Giffen, K.
Gray, P.
Green, C.
Hendrickson,
T.
Hoechsmann,
M.
Hoegg, J.L.
Jones, C.
Kazepides, A.
Munro, D.
Nyvik, S.
Palmer, E.
Palmer, L.
Pinfield, ?
L.
Rae, B.
Rieckhoff, ?
K.
Rudrum, A.
Salter, ?
L.
Saunders, ?
R.
Swartz, N.
Wade, S.
Weldon, L.
Wotherspooñ,
A.
Heath, W.R., Secretary
Grant, B., Recording Secretary
Absent: Bedford, B.
Carlson, R.
Covell, M.
Falcon, K.
George, D.
Gill, J.
Goodman, D.
Ivany, G.
Mauser, G.
Nielsen, V.
Partridge, J.
Reilly, N.
Shannon, D.
Shapiro, S.
Strate, G.
Tjosvold, D.
Tuinman, J.
Verdun-Jones, S.
Warsh, M.
Winne, P.
In attendance:
Boland, L.
0
S.M. 10/07/89
Page 2
1.
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
The Chair requested that a matter of urgency concerning modifications to the
membership of the Search Committee - Vice-President, Academic be added as
an agenda item under Other Business.
Moved by K. Rieckhoff, seconded by A. Wotherspoon
"that Paper S.89-29 - Search Committee
Membership - Vice-President, Academic be added
as an agenda item under Other Business"
Question was called, and a vote taken.
?
MOTION CARRIED
It was also noted that Item two of the Agenda should read approval of the
Minutes of the Open Session of June
5,
1989 rather than July 10, 1989,
following which the Agenda as amended was approved.
2.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE OPEN SESSION OF JUNE
5.
1989
The Minutes were approved as distributed.
3.
BUSINESS
i) ?
Admission
ARISING
Targets
FROM THE MINUTES
?
.
L. Palmer noted that clarification of Minutes from the previous two
sessions of Senate with regard to enrolment increases and projections
for future years relevant to the access policy was still outstanding. The
Chair informed Senate that the Minutes were in fact accurate in terms
of describing the actual discussion that took place; however, there had
been a lack of understanding on both
sides about
the issue at that time.
He explained that the only commitment the University has made in
terms of enrolment growth relevant to the access policy is to increase
by an additional 600 FTEs in the current year with appropriate funding
to be received. No commitment beyond the current year has been
made.
Concern was expressed that if 600 additional FTEs were accepted and
those students continued at the University for four years, an
equilibrium problem will develop if the University continues admitting
at the same level. The Chair advised that at each admission point a
decision will be made as to an appropriate figure which will allow the
University to sustain its population at whatever number is agreed to
and receive funding in return.
?
It was noted that any increase i
students will have a corresponding budgetary increase which results in
a continuous commitment of money for a continuous commitment of
students. It was also pointed out that not all of the additional FTEs will
S.M. 10/07/89
Page 3
. be Burnaby campus students, and further, that the 600 additional
students admitted this Fall will not all be full-time first year students
since the target figure takes into consideration DISC, Harbour Centre and
the course offerings in Abbotsford and Surrey. The Chair reiterated
that the total, global undergraduate population will be increased by 600
FTEs this year but what happens in subsequent years is dependent
upon what the University itself wishes to do and what can be negotiated
with Government.
In response to an inquiry about whether or not annual enrolment
targets come forward to Senate for approval, Senate was informed that
the Senate Committee on Academic Planning and the Senate Committee
on Enrolment Management Planning bring forward such
recommendations for Senate approval. It was suggested that Senate
should have the maximum possible consultation/discussion period prior
to SFU's next commitment to the Government in this regard. The Chair
suggested that the relevant committees discuss this matter as soon as
possible since pressure is being put on the Government to make early
decisions for the next year in order to allow a longer planning process to
the universities.
Cariboo College/Simon Fraser University
Referring to the discussion about the time frame involved in the
agreement between Cariboo College and Simon Fraser University, P.
Gray indicated that Senate, at the last meeting, had been informed that
the agreement would be in effect for a maximum period of five years.
However, the original Memorandum of Cooperation states the time
frame shall be for a minimum period of five years. The Chair provided
his interpretation of the agreement as being a five year agreement
which can be reviewed, but that it is only for five years in terms of the
existing memorandum. On behalf of the Faculty of Business
Administration, L. Pinfield expressed opinion that it was extremely
difficult to specify at the present time all the requirements and what
specific operational procedures might apply five years from now. He
indicated that a fundamental framework of agreement has been
established to provide an opportunity through which students can
benefit from a degree offered by this University. It was his
understanding that in five years time the Bachelor's program will
transfer to Cariboo College rather than be retained by this institution
and that the University, in the meantime, would play a facilitative role
in the first five years while the program is under development. He also
40
?
situationthat if students at some future point found themselves in a
situation where their needs were not being met, every effort would be
made to accommodate their particular concern within the resources
available at that particular time.
S.M. 19/07/89
Page 4
K. Rieckhoff indicated that the Senate and the Board of Governors ha
approved this item on the assumption that it was indeed for a fixed
term of five years and he found unacceptable the contradiction' of
information between the assurances given to Senate and Board and the
content of the original agreement.
At the request of Senate, the Chair indicated that these concerns would
be conveyed to the Board of Governors. In response to a suggestion that
this matter be reintroduced at a subsequent meeting when the Dean of
Business Administration was present, the Chair indicated that it would
be in order to conclude the discussion the next time Senate meets and S.
Shapiro is present. He reminded Senate that the three universities are
attempting to cooperate in what he considers a worthy objective,
namely, increasing access to higher education to people throughout the
regions. in which they live. Although this is an entirely new venture
and there are uncertainties as to what difficulties and how
opportunities will evolve, he assured Senate that it was not the intent to
leave a student in difficulty because the fine print of the program was
not in place at the outset and that every effort would be made to
accommodate such students.
iii) 1974 External Review - Department of English
K. Rieckhoff reported that he had perused the documents in Archives
and could find no guarantee of confidentiality given to the external
reviewers. He could see no reason why the documents could not be
made available to members of Senate. He also expressed concern that
although he, as a member of Senate, was allowed access to these
documents, another Senator was denied access by Archives.
E. Alderson
advised that he had forwarded copies of the documents to
the ?
President ?
for ?
his
perusal ?
and ?
decision
?
about
the
?
advisability ?
of
releasing all or part of
the material to Senate. ?
The
Chair stated he. had
not yet had
opportunity to review the material and,
as indicated at the
last meeting, planned to report back to Senate in the
Fall on this issue as
well. as the policy issue
regarding such reports.
4. REPORT OF THE CHAIR
i) ?
Summer School
in China
.
In
?
response
?
to ?
an
?
inquiry
?
concerning the ?
continuation ?
of ?
the
University's
Summer School in ?
China,
?
the
Chair advised that nothin
• ?
definitive ?
is
known yet but depending on
the ?
evolution ?
of events ?
in
China, it is possible that the
school could continue in another Mandarin
speaking environment. ?
He indicated ?
that
the Faculty ?
of Arts would
S.M. 10/07/89
Page
5
40 ?
review this matter during the Fall semester.
ii) ?
Resignation of Vice-President. Academic
Senate was informed that G. Ivany has accepted an appointment as
President of the University of Saskatchewan effective November 1,
1989.
Moved by K. Rieckhoff, seconded by A. Wotherspoon
"that Senate record its, acknowledgement and
congratulations to G. Ivany"
Question was called, and a vote taken
?
MOTION UNANIMOUSLY
CARRIED
5.
REPORTS OF COMMTTFEES
I )
SENATE NOMINATING COMMITTEE
Paper S.89-26 - Elections
i) ?
The following are the results of elections to fill vacancies on the
following Senate committees:
SENATE COMMITTEE ON AGENDA AND RULES (SCAR)
One Senator (at-large)
to replace G. Strate for balance term of office,
September 1, 1989 to September 30, 1990.
Names of candidates: ?
K. Giffen
P. Gray
S. Verdun-Jones
Individual receiving the highest number of votes, and
declared elected:
?
S.
VERDUN-JONES
SENATE COMMITTEE ON CONTINUING STUDIES (SC
CS)
One Faculty Senator
to replace G. Strate for balance term of office, from
September 1, 1989 to September 30, 1990.
Elected by acclamation:
?
A. RUDRUM
i
sELECTORAL STANDING COMMITTEE (ESC)
One Student Senator
to replace S. Rashed from date of election for no
specified term of office.
Elected by acclamation:
?
K. GIFFEN
S.M. 10/07/89
Page 6
.
ii) ?
The following are the results of elections conducted by mail from the
June
5,
1989 meeting of Senate:
SENATE COMMITTEE ON AGENDA AND RULES (SCAR)
One Senator at-large to replace R. Mathewes for balance term of office, from
date of election to September 30, 1990.
Names of candidates:
?
L. Dill
P. Gray
Individual receiving the higher number of votes
and declared elected:
?
L. DILL
SENATE COMMITTEE ON CONTINUING STUDIES (SCCS)
One Student Senator to replace R. McGivern for balance term of office, from
date of election to September 30, 1990.
Names of candidates:
?
P. Gray
S. Wade
Individual receiving the higher number of votes
and declared elected:
?
S.
WADE
SENATE LIBRARY COMMITTEE (SLC)/UBRARY PENALTIES APPEAL
COMMITTEE 'LPAC
One Student Senator and one
Student Senator Alternate to replace J. Shickele
and R. Di Fonzo respectively for balance terms of office, from date of election
to September 30, 1990.
Names of candidates:
?
P. Gray
C. Green
Individual receiving the higher number of votes
and elected as Regular Member for term of office
from
date of election to September 30, 1990:
?
C.GREEN
Runner-up elected as Alternate Member for term of
office from date of election to September 30, 1990:
?
P. GRAY
K. Rieckhoff questioned the electoral procedures relevant to Alternate
positions on committees by referring to the recent procedure whereby out Of
S.M. 10/07/89
Page 7
40
Regular
candidates the one with the highest number of votes was declared the
Regular member with the runner-up declared the Alternate. He suggested
there was a logical deficiency in eliminating from the balloting those who
voted for the winning candidate, and that voters should have been allowed to
vote for the two candidates of their choice. R. Heath indicated that this
matter would be addressed and, if necessary, referred to the Electoral
Standing Committee for consideration.
b) SENATE COMMITTEE ON ACADEMIC PLANNING
i)
?
Paper S.89-27 - Enrolment Limitations - Department of Economics
Moved by R. Saunders, seconded by E. Alderson
"that Senate approve and recommend approval to
the Board of Governors, as set forth in S.89-27, the
proposed enrolment management plan for
admission to the Major, Honors and Minor Programs
in the Department of Economics and that for
1989/90, a target of 200 new admissions to Major
• and Honors Programs in Economics be established
and that to achieve this target a minimum CGPA of
2.4 be required for admission to Major, Honors and
Minors Programs in 1989/90"
L. Boland, Chair of the Department of Economics, was in attendance as a
resource person to answer inquiries.
Concerns were expressed about limiting enrolment at a time when the
University was moving towards a period of greater access, and the option of
using a college transfer program to offer courses in the Fraser Valley was
raised. L. Boland indicated that the Department was attempting to deal with a
problem on campus and he did not see how having faculty teaching out in the
Fraser Valley instead of on campus would solve the problem unless it
represented an addition to -the Department's teaching complement. The
Department was also concerned about controlling the quality of its courses
and instructors.
It was pointed out that there are a number of different strategies that any
given department might follow in order to bring resources and enrolments
into better balance and it was stressed that departments who do not choose to
. impose enrolment restrictions must not be viewed as having courses and
students less worthy than courses and students in departments imposing
restrictions. One strategy is no better than another and not every strategy is
good for everyone but all strategies must be respected.
S.M.
10/07/89
Page 8
In response to a concern that students might be penalized by losing priorityS
in the following semester for a course dropped under the WD regulation, it
was pointed out that this was existing Senate policy and was not unique to
the Department of Economics.
It was pointed out that as more departments apply enrolment limitations,
there will be fewer programs for students who are unable to meet the
elevated GPA requirements. This is unfair to departments without
restrictions as they end up taking on an ever increasing proportion of
responsibility for these students. The Department of Economics' assertion
that there is a significant difference in the quality of education in a course
with an enrolment of
65
as compared to 120, for example, was felt to be
debatable and question was raised whether the difference in quality is great
enough to warrant introducing enrolment
limitations. L. Boland indicated that
the Department felt that large classes at the upper
division level were
educationally inferior and that there was at the present time a crisis situation
in terms
of the capacity of the Department to service their large number of
students. He went on to say that the Department's
objective is to provide
quality education and reduce its reliance on using sessionals to teach regular
course offerings.
L. Boland further pointed out that unlike some of the other programs with
enrolment
limitations, the Department decided to limit access by using GPA
rather than limiting their upper division courses
to majors, thus leaving the
program open to
all students as long as they meet the GPA requirement.
Concerns were expressed about limiting access
on the
basis of GPA since some
Senators felt it was not necessarily an accurate reflection of a student's
ability.. Opinion was expressed that it was
more appropriate to service major,
minor and honor students rather than the
whole University population and
question was raised as to whether or not the same enrolment goal could be
achieved by limiting admission to upper division courses to majors, minors
and honors. L. Boland indicated that the department considered that option
educationally inferior and unfair to the University as
a
whole.
Referring to page 2, item 3, P. Gray
noted that
the first sentence refers to
students taking lower division courses while the next sentence includes all
Economics courses and he was wondering if
reference to upper division
should be included in the second sentence. L. Boland confirmed that the
second statement should include reference to upper division and the sentence
was amended as follows: "Students other than those accepted into the major,
honors or minor programs in Economics may take
upper division
Economic
courses as long as they meet the CGPA entrance requirements."
Opinion was expressed that by committing itself to accepting more students
a
S.M. 10/07/89
Page
• and trying to do its share in solving the problem of accessibility in the
Province the University was creating a fundamental problem for itself. The
more popular departments become overburdened and require enrolment
limitations which in turn force students into other programs and shifts the
problem into other areas of the University. It was felt the University had to
face this fundamental contradiction and decide its priorities before this
problem would be resolved.
Senate was reminded of over-crowded classes and it was pointed out that
majors cannot make a reasonable and sensible selection of courses in order to
specialize the way they want to, and in many cases can not get enough
courses to take a full-load. Approval of the proposal would balance these
things and make the atmosphere in Economics much more conducive to
education.
It was noted that if this proposal is approved, new requests for enrolment
limitations from other programs likely would be brought forward to Senate.
Inquiry was made as to what specific criteria should apply to these requests
in order to decide whether the situation is desperate enough to warrant
limitations. Inquiry was also made as to whether or not there was a policy
for departments/programs with enrolment limitations to come under review
at some point. R. Saunders advised that one of the tasks of the Senate
Committee on Enrolment Management Planning is to undertake an annual
review of enrolment restrictions.
Since the aim of the Department is to limit the demand on their resources in
order to maintain the quality of their teaching, C. Green felt the matter should
be tabled until the Department can investigate if some of the burden could be
transferred to. the Fraser Valley and whether or not this option could provide
the same quality of education.
Moved by C. Green; seconded by K. Giffen
"that the motion be tabled"
Question was called, and a vote taken.
?
MOTION TO TABLE FAILED
Question was called on the main motion,
and a vote taken.
?
MAIN MOTION CARRTD
.
a
S.M. 10/07/89
?
I.
Page 10
ii) ?
Paper S.89-28 - Fraser Valle
y
College/Si
Memorandum of Understanding
Moved by R. Saunders, seconded by B. Clayman
"that Senate approve and recommend
approval to the Board of Governors, as set
forth in S.89-28 the Memorandum of
Understanding between Fraser Valley College
and Simon Fraser University, dated
April 4,
1989, as amended by an Amending
Agreement, dated June 29, 1989, which
agreement, as amended, is hereafter called
the Memorandum of Understanding"
L. Salter introduced the paper by explaining that this is a university transfer
program wherein the first and second year courses which have been designed
in conjunction with the Department of Communication will be given by Fraser
Valley College and then those students will be able to take third and fourth
year from Simon Fraser University. This is a common procedure in other
subject areas.
Referring to the background documentation dated March
15,
1989, an
inconsistency was pointed out in admission requirements wherein one
statement guaranteed admission to the Major program in Communication at
Simon Fraser upon successful completion of the requirements of the college
transfer program and the other statement included an additional condition,
namely admission to the major was subject to the student satisfying regular
admission requirements. ?
The second statement was a much stronger
requirement and clarification was requested. L. Salter confirmed that the
intent is to apply the stronger requirement and pointed out that the
agreement will keep the standards of the two institutions compatible at all
times.
K. Rieckhoff suggested that any changes to this agreement would take effect
only after approval of Senate and the Board and requested that the
suggestion be recorded in the Minutes.
Question was called, and a vote taken.
?
MOTION CARRIED
0
S.M. 10/07/89
Page 11
. 6. OTHER BUSINESS
i) ?
Paper S.89-29 - Search Committee Membership - Vice-President
Academic
Moved by J. Blaney, seconded by K. Rieckhoff
"that Senate approve, and
the Board of Governors,
composition of the Search
President, Academic be c
President, Administration'
selected by the President"
recommend approval to
?
that Item (b) in the ?
Committee for a Vice-
?
hanged from 'the Vice-
?
to "a Vice-President,
The Chair introduced the paper by explaining that it was critical to proceed in
the most expeditious way possible to get the search committee operational.
Modifications to the previous procedures are essentially editorial in the sense
that the basic constituency is not being altered but changes are necessary to
reflect changes in the University's organizational structure.
It was rioted that if the changes were approved, it would be possible for the
President to select the Vice-President Academic to serve on the Committee
is but the Chair assured Senate that this would be inappropriate and would not
occur. A further concern was raised about holding student elections at this
late in a summer semester when the majority of students are not on campus.
The Chair indicated that although he recognized it was not the most desirable
time to hold an election, he felt it was preferable to delaying the search
procedures for the appointment of the most critical position in the academic
role of the university.
Question was called, and a vote taken.
?
MOTION CARRIED
ii)
Regulations re Visitors to meetings of Senate Committees
P. Gray inquired as to what the regulations were with regard to
Senators attending meetings of Senate committees. The Chair indicated that
with the exception of closed committees such as the Senate Committee on
University Budget and the Senate Committee on Honorary Degrees, observers
were allowed to attend open sessions of Senate Committee meetings.
iii)
$100 Registration Tuition Deposit
C. Green, on behalf of fellow students, raised the issue of the $100
registration tuition deposit that students are being required to pay for the
. ?
Fall semester and wanted to know if students could defer this payment. R.
Heath indicated this question fell under the jurisdiction of the Finance Office.
'
S ?
$
S.M. 10/07/89
Page 12
iv) Senate Meeting Time
At the request of N. Swartz, a straw vote was taken on the suggestion
"that Senate shall always be held in the evening". The majority of Senate
voted in opposition.
7.
NOTICES OF MOTION
There were no notices of motion.
8.
INFORMATION
The date of next regularly scheduled meeting of Senate is Monday, August 14,
1989.
The Assembly moved directly into Closed Session at 6:40 p.m.
W.R. Heath
Registrar and Secretary of Senate
[1
