. DRAFT UNTIL APPROVED BY SENATE
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE SENATE OF SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY HELD
?
ON MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3,1992 KLAUS RIECKHOFF HALL, 7:00 P.M.
OPEN SESSION
.
Present: ?
Saywell, W.G., Chair
Barrow, A.
Blackman, R.
Blaney, J.
Boland, L.
Bowman, M.
Bukovac, S.
Carlson, R.
Chan, B.
Clayman, B.
D'Auna, J.
Dahl, H.
Dobb, T.
Etherington, L.
Giffen, K.
Haje, P.
Heinrich, K.
Hoegg, J.L.
Jones, C.
Krane, W. (representing R. Brown)
Leiss, W.
Marteniuk, R..
Mauser, G.
Morrison, T.
Nicol, I.
Nielsen, V.
Palmer, E.
Palmer, L. ?
cm
?
1)
Pinfield, L.
?
r-c1UC;tl
Reilly, N.
Rieckhoff, K.
Saunders, R.
Shannon, D.
Shapiro, S.
Stewart, M.L.
Toohey, K.
Verdun-Jones, S.
Wade, S.
Walker, R.
Warsh, M.
Winne, P.
Wotherspoon, A.
Heath, W.R., Secretary
Grant, B., Recoiling Secretary
Absent:
?
Beattie, S.
Brown, A.
Cercone, N.
Choquer, K.
Covell, M.
Delgrande, J.
Dill, L.
Evenden, L.
Jespersen, J.
Lindberg, T.
Luk, W.S.
McKeown, B.
Menzies, A.
Munro, J.
Myers, T.
Rae, B.
Soheili, A.
Swartz, N.
Thomson, K.
In attendance:
N. Heath
I
S.M. 03/02/92 -
Page 2
1.
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
The Agenda was approved as distributed.
2.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE OPEN SESSION OF JANUARY 6. 1992
Following a request to amend the spelling of the word 'complimented' in the third
paragraph from the top of Page 8, the Minutes were approved.
3
Paper S.92-15 - Re
p
ort - International Students - Policies (For Information
It was pointed out that the document before Senate was an abridged version of the
legal opinions contained in a larger document prepared by legal counsel. Inquiries were
made
as to who
provided this legal advice and if the full report was available to interested
Senators. The Chair advised that since the Vice-President Academic was not present, he
was unable to provide the specific source of the legal opinions, and indicated that he
would take the matter of Senators having access to the complete document under
advisement.
ii) Referring to Item 3 (ii) under Business Arising on Page 2, L. Palmer wondered if the
information on the timing for completion of degree requirements by students in
Engineering Science Program was available at this time. The Secretary of Senate
reported that he had not as yet received a response to his request for this information but
indicated he would send Engineering Science a reminder.
4
I)
?
Ministry of Advanced Education. Training and Technology
Senate was advised that the Hon. Tom Perry, Minister of Advanced Education,
Training and Technology is expected to visit campus before the end of February. Upon
determination, the date of this visit will be announced to the University community.
ii)
?
Awards
The Chair was pleased to report that a Ph.D. student in Chemistry from Simon
Fraser University had won one of two awards from the National Science and Engineering
Research Council (NSERC) for having one of the best doctoral dissertations in the
country, and Business Administration students from the Co-op Accounting Concentration
had received top honors in the CA examinations this year.
a) ?
Senate Undergraduate Admissions Board
i) ?
Paper S.92-16 - B.C. Council on Admissions and Transfer - Principles and
Guidelines
Moved by R. Saunders, seconded by S. Bukovac
I)
"that Senate endorse and approve the "Principles and Guidelines for
Transfer, prepared by the British Columbia Council on Admission and
Transfer, as set out in S.92-16"
5.
S.M. 03/02/92
N?
?
Page 3
0 ?
N. Heath, Director of Admissions, was in attendance to respond to questions.
R. Saunders introduced the paper by providing brief background information by pointing
out that Senate had previously edited and approved in-principle an earlier version of the
document in October 1990. Since that time, BCCAT has attempted to incorporate as
much as possible the suggestions from colleges and universities, the result of which is the
current document before Senate for endorsement.
Clarification was requested with respect to SUAB's concern with regard to Guideline #1.
Senate was advised that it was SUAB's belief that detailed course outlines were
necessary to make an accurate evaluation of courses for transfer credit and since this
condition no longer appeared in the current
important to mention this concern to BCCAT
letter as proposed be forwarded.
Question was called, and a vote taken.
?
MOTION CARRIED
•11iI1 :1Jihi*
i) ?
Paper S.92-13 - Motion to establish an Ad Hoc Committee of Senate
Moved by N. Reilly, seconded by L. Boland
"thatSenate establish an 'Ad Hoc' committee to:
i)
assess the benefits and costs to the University and community of the
University's policy on the admission of international undergraduate
students,
ii)
examine the underlying principles and goals regarding the admission
of international undergraduate students,
iii)
consult widely both inside and outside the University, and
iv)
submit a report with recommendations to SCAP (for transmission to
Senate) by December 31, 1992,
and that the membership of the 'Ad Hoc' committee be as follows:
i)
the Vice-President, Academic, or designate
ii)
four faculty members (*), elected by Senate
iii) one Student Senator, elected by Senate
iv) one Lay Senator, elected by Senate
v)
the Registrar, or designate
vi) the Director of Analytical Studies, or designate
Footnote (*): For the purpose of the membership of the committee, it is
intended that 'faculty' be interpreted as those entitled to
vote in elections to Senate. This category includes Deans
and Associate Deans."
• ?
The following suggestions to the membership were accepted as friendly amendments:
a) ?
Item i) - add the words "who shall be Chair", and
version of the document, SUAB felt it was
and has therefore recommended the draft
S.M. 03/02/92
1/
?
Page 4
b) ?
Delete item vi) on the understanding that the Director of Analytical Studies woul
be available as a resource person as required.
Amendment moved by S. Shapiro, seconded by G. Mauser
"that items i) and ii) be changed as follows:
i)
assess the benefits and costs to the University and community of the
University's policy on the admission of students, both undergraduate
and graduate
ii)
examine the underlying principles and goals regarding the admission
of students, both undergraduate and graduate"
Concerns were expressed about the high ratio of graduate foreign students in some
departments, particularly departments with existing student quotas, and it was suggested
that if issue is going to be reviewed at the undergraduate level, it should also be reviewed
at the graduate level.
It was argued that there appeared to be no evidence to suggest that a problem existed at
the graduate level and, in contrast to the situation at the undergraduate level, no qualified
Canadian graduate students were being denied access to graduate programs. It was
also pointed out that SFU's pattern of distribution of graduate visa students is very similar
to the pattern of visa graduate students in other universities across Canada and
reservations were expressed about reviewing the present graduate student policy at this
time.
Question was called on the amendment,
and a vote was taken.
?
AMENDMENT FAILE
Amendment moved by T. Morrison, seconded by S. Wade
"that the membership be changed to include one International Student
designated from the International Student Society"
Opinion was expressed that in the interest of fairness to all parties concerned, the
Committee should include representation from international students. Discussion took
place with regard to the criteria and the practical difficulties surrounding the selection and
appointment of such a student, particularly since there was no identifiable organization
representing this group of students. It was further argued that international students
would be included in the consultative process of the Committee and reservations were
expressed about the need to have a formal representative on the committee itself. Further
opinion was expressed that an international student representative on the Committee can
provide a better understanding of the complexities of the issues and, as the group of
students most directly affected by the findings of the Committee, international students
have the right to be represented on the Committee.
In response to some of the practical concerns, Senate was advised that international
students can easily be identified as students who are neither Canadian citizens nor
Landed Immigrants, and the definition of student is clearly set out within the Rules of
Senate. In order to provide complete symmetry in the election of all members of th
committee, the following suggestion was accepted as a friendly revision to th
S.M. 03/02/92
Page 5
• ?
amendment:
"that the membership be changed to include one International Student
elected by Senate"
All nominations for membership on the Committee would come forward to Senate through
the Senate Nominating Committee in the usual manner.
Question was called on the amendment,
and a vote was taken.
?
AMENDMENT CARRIED
Inquiry was made with respect to why an ad hoc committee was being established rather
than having committees such as SCAP, SCEMP and/or SUAB look into the issue. It was
argued that the proposed task would require a significant amount of time, and standing
committees of Senate which have an interest in this issue may not be able to handle such
an enormous task in addition to their regular business and therefore such committees
may not be able to give the issue the attention it deserves. It was pointed out that
although the motion recommends that the report be submitted to SCAP for transmission to
Senate, referral to appropriate committees would be made depending on the outcome of
the report.
Question was called on the motion, as amended. ?
MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED
ii) Paper S.92-14 - Motion to review final exam scheduling
SMoved by H. Dahl, seconded by B. Chan
"that the Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies undertake a
review of scheduling of final examinations"
A suggestion by S. Bukovac to change the motion as follows was accepted as a friendly
amendment:
"that the Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies undertake a
review of final examinations including scheduling, regulations, and
procedures"
Senate was advised that some of the procedures and recommendations regarding final
examinations have been modified by Senate action over time and others are outdated. It
was therefore felt that it was important to review the entire examination process in light of
current university procedures and practices.
Concern was expressed that the amended motion implied the inclusion of grading
practices which is an essential part of final examinations and suggestion was made that
the Minutes explicitly reflect the fact that the intent of the above motion was not meant to
include this issue.
. ?
In order to clarify the intent of the motion in this regard, A. Blackman's suggestion that the
?
wording be changed as follows was accepted as a further friendly amendment:
S.M. 03/02/92
Page 6
"that the Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies undertake a
review of scheduling, regulations, and procedures pertaining to final
examinations"
Question was called on the motion as amended.
?
MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED
i) ?
Paper S.92-17 - Motion re funding level for SFU Library Acquisitions
The following notice of motion was received from G. Mauser and S. Wade:
"that Senate of Simon Fraser University believes that the funding level for
Simon Fraser University Library acquisitions should be increased to
approach the goal recommended in Challenge 2001 - The President's
Strategic Plan and in the Report of the University Library Review
Committee"
8. ?
Information
The date of the next regularly scheduled meeting of Senate is Monday, March 2, 1992.
The Assembly moved directly into Closed Session at 8:20 p.m.
W.R. Heath
Secretary of Senate
S
is
