a me,,-,deot

JO1)

/prf9

DRAFT UNTIL APPROVED BY SENATE

Minutes of a meeting of the Senate of Simon Fraser University held on

Monday, March 2, 1998 at 7:00 pm in Room 3210 WMC

Open Session

Present: ?

Blaney, Jack, President and Chair

Barrow, Robin

Absent: ?

Baert, Jessica

Bawa, Parveen

Berggren, J. Len

Beattie, Suzan

Blazenko, George

Boland, Larry

Cleveland, William

Bowman, Marilyn

D'Auria, John

Chan, Albert

Dobb, Ted

Clayman, Bruce

Giffen, Ken

Coleman, Peter

Hassan, Nany

Dunsterville, Valerie

Lewis, Brian

Emmott, Alan

Mauser, Gary

Etherington, Lois

Nip, Harry

Gagan, David

Ogloff, James

Gillies, Mary Ann

Osborne, Judith

Jones, Colin

Oven ngton, Jennifer

Jones, John

Parmar, Neelam

Kanevsky, Lann ie

Sanghera, Baiwant

Kirczenow, George

Segal, Joseph

Marteniuk, Ron

Wickstrom, Norman

Mathewes, Rolf

McInnes, Dina

Morris, Joy

Naef, Barbara

In attendance:

Percival, Paul

Collinge, Joan

Peterson, Louis

French, Charlotte

Pierce, John

Knockaert, Joe

Reed, Clyde

Yerbury, Cohn

Russell, Robert

Selman, Mark

Tam, Lawrence

Warsh, Michael

Waterhouse, John

Winne, Phil

Wong, Tim

Wortis, Michael

Yagi, Ian

Heath, Ron, Dean of Student Services and Registrar

Watt, Alison, Director, Secretariat Services

Grant, Bobbie, Recording Secretary

S.M. 02/03/98

Page 2

Approval of the Agenda

The Agenda was approved as distributed.

Approval of the Minutes of the Open Session of February 5, 1998

The Minutes were approved as distributed.

Business Arising from the Minutes

With the exception of a report concerning a meeting between the Chair of

Senate and the Chair of SUB which is dealt with under 'Other Business', there

was no further business ariing from the Minutes.

Report of the Chair

The Chair presented a brief video of the SFU Pipe Band's trip to New York city to

play at Carnegie Hall. He reported that the Band played to an audience that was

almost a full house and they had received a standing ovation for their

performance.

Reports of Committees

a) ?

Senate Committee on Academic Planning/Senate Committee on

Continuing Studies

Paper S.98-22 - Non-Credit Certificate Program: Certificate in Distance

Learning ?

Moved by D. Gagan, seconded by M. Selman

"that Senate approve and recommend approval to the Board of

Governors, as set forth in S.98-22, the proposed Non-Credit

Certificate Program: Certificate in Distance Learning"

Cohn Yerbury, Director of the Centre for Distance Education, and Joan Cohhinge,

Program Director of the Centre were in attendance in order to respond to

questions.

Concern was expressed that the program would add a considerable number of

new students to an already over crowded campus stretching the University's

limited resources even further. Senate was advised that the Centre, which has a

very well established international reputation in this area, regularly receives

requests from individuals and delegations to tour SFU's facilities and learn about

how SFU delivers distance education internationally. Since the Centre is already

dealing with this on a regular basis it was felt that it would be very helpful to

develop a programmatic approach to the orientation and a cost recovery program

was designed.

Question was called, and a vote taken. ?

MOTION CARRIED

S.M.

02/03/98

Page 3

0 ?

b) ?

Senate Committee on International Activities

Paper

S.98-23 -

Annual Report (For Information)

Joe Knockaert, Director of the Office of International Cooperation, was in

attendance in order to respond to questions.

It was noted that Senate had previously been advised that the Eastern Indonesia

University Development Project was to be completed in

1998,

and an inquiry was

made as to why this report showed the end date as being

2000.

Senators were

reminded that the report last year indicated that the project would not be

extended beyond

1998

but would be phased out slowly with some activities

continuing to the year

2000.

This has not changed and it is expected that most of

the activities after

1998

will be managed from the project office in Burnaby rather

than in Indonesia. It was also pointed out that PhD and Masters-programs for a

few Indonesian Fellows would take until the year

2001

to be completed.

In response to an inquiry for further information about the President's Advisory

Committee on International Activities, Senate was informed that the correct title

for this body was Presidential Task Force on International Strategy and its specific

task was to examine the operation of the Office of International Cooperation,

review the university policy on international activities, and to review the role of

the Senate Committee on International Activities. A report was produced which

. recommended that the Office of International Cooperation be made a central

clearing house for information about international activities in the University, and

changes were recommended to the university policy on international activities

and the role of SCIA. These will be brought to Senate for discussion likely in May.

Concern was expressed about the lack of information in the report with respect to

the rationale for decisions being made about projects. Senate was advised that

SCIA currently is advisory to the President and receives full documentation of

projects prior to providing its advice to the President. There will be a change in

this process once the new policy recommendations are brought to Senate and it

will be easier for people to access more detailed information once the role of the

Office of International Cooperation has been changed.

Reference was made to a recent news release about a joint project between

Malaysia, Nortel and Simon Fraser University and inquiry was made as to why this

project did not appear in the annual report before Senate. Senate was advised

that the project is at the discussion stage among Nortel, the Faculty of Applied

Sciences and the Multimedia University in Malaysia. If a Memorandum of

Agreement can be reached, SCIA would consider it at that time.

The following Notice of Motion was submitted by R. Russell for the next meeting

of Senate:

"that Senate recommend to the Board of Governors that an

external review of the Eastern Indonesia University Development

S.M. 02/03/98

Page 4

Project be undertaken. Senate further recommends that this

review be completed by March 1, 1999" ?

Pa p

er S.98-24 - IUSEC Revisions (For Information

Following a brief discussion about the number of students participating in

exchange programs, and the membership of IUSEC in relation to SCIA, the report

with respect to revisions to membership and terms of reference was received by

Senate.

Senate Policy Committee on Scholarships, Awards & Bursaries

i) ?

Paper S.98-25 - Annual Report (For Information)

+ ?

$odcø

uc md b"I

John Pierce, member of Senate and Chair of SPCSAB' and Charlotte French,

Director, Student Academic Resources were in attendance in order to respond

to questions. .3

1'Yur;,

Ctivve ?

CJ,tc

* PCA3

ClIs a t

Reference was made to the Graduate Scholarship Program and concern was

expressed about students who hold scholarships being allowed to work part-time.

Senate was advised that students were originally prohibited from working while

they held scholarships on the theory that they should concentrate full-time on

their studies. However, the value of the award has not been able to provide

students with the assurance of full time support and allowing part-time

employment was a suitable compromise.

Concern was expressed about the scholarship funds being reduced by an amount

equal to donations and it was suggested that the scholarship fund should remain

fixed. The Chair advised that he had agreed to a request from SPCSAB that there

be a moratorium on such reductions for five years.

In response to an inquiry about the relationship between offers accepted and

offers declined on page 7 of the report, and whether these have changed over

time, Senate was advised that the numbers are very consistent with past statistics.

Senate Committee on Academic Planning/Senate Committee on

Undergraduate Studies

Paper S.98-26 - Undergraduate Curriculum Revisions - Faculty of Science

(For Information)

Senate received information that SCUS, acting under delegated authority,

approved minor changes to the Environmental Science Program, changes to

existing courses in Biological Sciences and Earth Sciences; and vectors in various

Chemistry and Physics courses were re-written so that the nominal hour of open

workshop is designated as tutorial rather than laboratory.

S.M. 02/03/98

Page 5

Senate Committee on Academic Planning/Senate Committee on

Enrolment Management/Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies

i) ?

Paper S.98-27 - Admission to Faculty

Moved by D. Gagan, seconded by P. Bawa

"that Senate approve, and recommend approval to the Board of

Governors, as set forth in S.98-27, the principle of admitting

students directly to Faculties for 98-3 and subsequent semesters"

D. Gagan provided Senate with a brief introduction in which he pointed out that

the proposal does not preclude students from the opportunity to experiment with

and investigate various disciplines and subjects before deciding on a specialization

or program. Faculties will be unable to assign all available spaces in specializations

to new entries and consequently students will be able to apply to move into those

specializations when they are qualified to do so. Similarly, students will not be

restricted from applying to transfer to another program (if qualified) should their

aspirations change. From an academic perspective, the establishment of specific

admission requirements germane to a program's requirements will allow students

to be better prepared for entry - and for faculties to select new students on the

basis of appropriate academic preparation. From an administrative perspective,

having defined enrolment targets and quotas for programs and Faculties will assist

inthe planning of course spaces and the corresponding assignment of teaching

resources.

L. Boland read a prepared statement to Senate strongly opposing the proposal

because he felt it would not solve any of the problems that are alleged to exist

and it would have an adverse affect on the long standing and successful liberal

pedagogy traditional to SFU. SFU students have been given the opportunity to

shop around the university before committing to a specific major or Faculty in

order to learn what kind of education they might be most interested in pursuing.

Opinion was expressed that direct admission will have a negative impact on these

students and will constrain their choices.

Concern was expressed by several Senators that barriers would result in transfers

between Faculties. It was pointed out that spaces would always be kept available

for transfers and it should not be difficult for Faculties to handle students wishing

to transfer in. Concern was also expressed that priority for course registration will

be extended to the first and second year courses thus restricting opportunities for

students to get into courses needed to qualify for transfer to another Faculty.

Opinion was expressed that should barriers start to arise, Senate should be

consulted about the problem as opposed to setting up an administrative

procedure to handle the issue without Senate's input/approval. Inquiry was made

about whether or not there would be enrolment space for students not admitted

to the Faculty in a course offered at the 100-level which was a requirement for

. ?

the major program. Senate was assured that sufficient space would be left

available for students who may wish to transfer and need the course to qualify.

S.M. 02/03/98

Page 6

Inquiry was made about the impact of this proposal on academic advising and the

existing admission procedure which is now centrally handled by the Registrar's

Office. Senate was informed that students who are admitted directly to a Faculty

or program will generally be advised by that Faculty/Department, students who

are still considering a number of options will continue to get assistance from the

Academic Resource office. With respect to admissions, the Registrar's Office

(Admissions) will work cooperatively with departments on selecting students but

admission decisions will rest with the Faculty. Approval of majors now rests with

each Faculty and this proposal just moves the process back a step and spreads out

the workload.

In response to an inquiry as to what would happen if a Faculty did not meet their

admission target, Senate was informed that SFU currently has more applications

than can be admitted so this not expected to be a problem. However, if it should

occur then the relationship between a Faculty's enrolment pattern and its

resources would have to be addressed over a period of time.

Opinions expressed in favour of the proposal included the ability to better

balance workload and resources, the ability to attract high quality students,

especially into highly competitive programs, stability for students in the planning

of their course of study, and the ability to better inform students as to their

chances of gaining acceptance into programs of their choice.

Discussion turned to the issue of managing the direct admission process, and

inquiry was made as to how specific Faculty targets would be set and how growth

for each Faculty determined. It was pointed out that growth now is the result of

either competitive planning through the Academic Enhancement Fund or new

funding being received from the Ministry which, at the present time, is not

forthcoming. At some point, universities might not only be given enrolment

targets but they might be required to admit specific numbers of students into

specific programs/faculties. However, expectations are that universities will

continue to have what are now called productivity FTEs and if there is no funding

for them, direct admission provides some control so that the burden is shared

equitably across all Faculties. It was also noted that the Senate Committee on

Enrolment Management and Planning which has representatives from all

Faculties, sets and recommends enrolment targets to SCAP and Senate.

Brief discussion continued in which the issue of transferability was again raised and

suggestion was made that the model in Business Administration be followed so

that a smaller fraction of students could be admitted directly while leaving a

much greater space for other students.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

Senate Committee on Academic Planning/Senate Committee on

Enrolment Management and Planning

S.M. 02/03/98

Page 7

i) ?

Paper S.98-28 - Undergraduate Admission Targets for 1998/99

Motion #1:

Moved by D. Gagan, seconded by B. Clayman

"that Senate approve and recommend approval to the Board of Governors the

undergraduate admission targets for each basis-of-admission group and for each

semester in 1998/99 as set out below and that SCAP be delegated authority to

make adjustments based on changes to the overall enrolment targets and based

on actual enrolment experience in 1998-2 and 1998-3.

B.C. Gr. XII

B.C. College

Other

Total Intake

Admission Targets for New

1998-2

1998-3

1,650

375

675

250

775

675

3,100

Students

1999-1

Total

1,750

350

1,400

325

1,350

725

4,500°

[IJ

In order to match the provincially funded FTE target, the intake of new students

would have to be reduced from 5,072 admitted last year to 4,250. The Senate

Committee on Enrolment Management and Planning felt that this reduction in

the number of new students was too step and would significantly raise admission

averages and would induce an enrolment perturbation that would take several

years to move through the year levels. The Committee therefore moved to raise

intake targets to 4,500 students. The 250 additional students would be admitted

in 1998-3 and would be allocated to the Faculties by the Vice-President

Academic in consultation with the Deans.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

Motion #2

Moved by D. Gagan, seconded by P. Percival

"that Senate approve and recommend approval to the Board of Governors the

undergraduate admission targets to each Faculty as set out in the table below and

that SCAP be delegated authority to make adjustments based on changes to the

overall enrolment targets and based on actual enrolment experience in 1998-2

and 1998-3.

Faculty/BOA ?

1998-2 ?

1998-3 ?

1999-1 ?

Total

ADolied Science

B.C. Gr.Xll

154

174

B.C. College

Other

Total

246

361

S.M. 02/03/98

Page 8

Faculty/BOA ?

1998-2 ?

1998-3 ?

1999-1 ?

Total

Arts

B.C.Gr.Xll

931

986

B.C. College

300

476

280

1,056

Other

205

447

210

862

Total

545

1,854

505

2,904

Business Administration

B.C. Gr.Xll

B.C. College

Other

Total

110

Education

B.C. Gr.Xll

B.C. College

Other

120

200

Total

120

200

Science

B.C.Gr.Xll

400

420

B.C. College

135

Other

120

Total

550

675

University

B.C. Gr.Xll

1,550

1,650

B.C. College

375

600

350

1,325

Other

250

700

325

1,275

Total

675

2,850

725

4,250

Note: 250 additional students will be admitted in 1998-3 and will be allocated to

the Faculties by the Vice-President Academic in consultation with the

Deans."

In response to an inquiry as to why Faculty targets were included for 98-2, Senate

was advised that by establishing a total target for the year and targets for 98-3 and

99-1, the residual is the intake for 98-2.

Question was called, and a vote taken. ?

MOTION CARRIED

g) ?

Senate Graduate Studies Committee

i) ?

Paper S.98-29 - Annual Report (For Information)

The Annual Report of the Senate Graduate Studies Committee was

received by Senate for information. ?

S.M.

02/03/98

Page

• ?

Other Business

Paper

S.98-30 -

Draft Statement of Purpose (For Discussion)

Introducing discussion on the draft statement, D. Gagan explained that the

Government has commenced an accountability program, now called

performance management program, for the public sector. Typically, in the public

sector performance management means accounting for the productivity - both in

terms of quantity and quality - that is generated with the resources provided. A

protocol has been signed between the University Presidents' Council of British

Columbia and the Ministry which establishes a process whereby the Vice-

Presidents Academic will negotiate with the Ministry an acceptable process of

accountability for the university system within the Government's performance

management requirement. The Board of Governors of each university will be the

validating body that reports to the Ministry whether or not the University is

achieving its stated purposes. The level of accountability between the Board and

the Ministry will be based on each university's unique mission/purpose. The draft

statement before Senate has been prepared within this context and consists of

objectives (listed on the left hand side of the page) and explanations (listed on the

right hand side of the page) of what each of those objectives mean from SFU's

unique perspective. The draft was presented to Senate for consideration and

input.

Concern was expressed that the wording in Point Five implies that the activities

. described are perhaps more central to the University than excellence to research.

Suggestion was made that the word defined could be changed to 'an institution

able to respond to' but it was pointed out that the statement only deals with

student accessibility as noted by the words on the left side of the page.

Reference was made to Point Two which, in an earlier version, made reference

to the tutorial system when talking about effective and innovative instruction

employing a variety of teaching methods, and concern was raised that this

reference had been deleted in this new version. Also, in an earlier version several

points included reference to the value and support of employees and students.

This has been deleted and opinion was expressed that the reference was worth

including in some form or another.

J. Morris read a written response submitted by the Student Society to an earlier

draft of the Statement of Purpose which included several concerns and questions

about specific points and apparent omissions. Specifically, nothing is included

about the importance of democratic governance structures, or the significant

involvement of all members of the community in decision-making processes.

Standards need to be set and enforced in departments across the university on

issues such as quality, democracy in governance, and the fair treatment of all

members of the university community, and the university should be committed to

a high standard of ethics both in its treatment of its own community members

and in its involvement with the outside community. While educational

. ?

technology is emphasized in the draft, it must be restricted to ways that improve

and vitalize the research, teaching and learning environments at SFU. Statements

S.M.

02/03/98

Page 10

relating to these issues were felt by SFSS to be worthwhile for inclusion in the

University's Statement of Purpose.

It was noted that a variety of different verbs were used throughout the document

for different paragraphs and the issue was raised as to whether they were used

with specific intent. It was suggested that more careful consideration be given to

the precise wording.

Several Senators commented positively that the Statement of Purpose begins

with a reference to research and teaching being the two main activities of the

University. However, concern was expressed about the text to the left of the first

statement and whether the word "consolidate" conveys the appropriate

sentiment.

The Chair indicated that Senate's comments, concerns, and suggestion will be

taken into consideration and expectations are that a revised draft will be

presented to Senate in May for further consideration prior to the statement going

to the Board of Governors for approval.

ii)

Report of meeting with Chair of SCUB

L. Boland, Chair of SCUB, reported that SCUB had met with the President and

discussed budget principles and the process and schedule for budget preparation.

SCUB will discuss the specific three-year plans of VPs and Deans and then provide

advice to the President.

The Chair wished to add that he had undertaken to provide SCUB with all the

same questions and items sent to VPs and Deans for advice on both the recurring

and non-recurring budget.

iii)

Paper

S.98-31 -

G. Kirczenow motion re SCUB

Moved by G. Kirczenow, seconded by A. Chan

"that the Senate Committee on University Budget establish

guidelines to be followed by the administration in communicating

budgetary information to SCUB"

G. Kirczenow explained that the motion was before Senate because of the

apparent communication barrier between SCUB and the administration and he

felt it would be useful if some kind of framework could be established for

communicating information to SCUB.

Opinion was expressed that the motion contravened the intention of the

University Act for establishing a budget committee which the Act defines as being

advisory to the President. The committee therefore is not a regulatory body and

does not have the power to dictate to the administration what information it

receives. It was pointed out, however, that SCUB's terms of reference specify that

SCUB must maintain an overview and familiarity with the operating and capital

S.M.

02/03/98

Page 11

funds of the university and therefore SCUB needs appropriate information in

order to do that.

Brief discussion ensued with regard to SCUB's role in relation to decentralization

of the budget. Opinion was expressed that SCUB should have access to the

budget as a whole so that they can obtain an overview of the budget and can offer

advice on important financial matters which may impact the University as a

whole.

A suggestion to change the motion as follows was accepted as a friendly

amendment:

"that the Senate Committee on University Budget develop

guidelines to be negotiated with the administration about

communicating budgetary information to SCUB"

The Chair reiterated his intent to share fully with SCUB all matters for which he

requests advice from Vice-Presidents and Deans and, if SCUB wished to provide

advice on other matters within the President's jurisdiction, they were welcome to

do so.

Question was called, and a vote taken. ?

MOTION (AS AMENDED) CARRIED

iv) ?

G. Kirczenow presented the following Notice of Motion for the next

meeting of Senate:

"that Senate recommend to the Board of Governors that the

procedures for the recommendation and selection of candidates for

president of SFU be reviewed and that a revised version be brought

to Senate for discussion and approval at least twelve months before

the next presidential search begins"

In response to a concern about process and an inquiry with regard to a

review of the existing policy on research ethics, Senate was advised that the Vice-

President Research is no longer Chair of the Research Ethics Review Committee.

That responsibility has been delegated to a member of the Committee. It was

also noted that once the Tr-Council policy has been established (probably in

April) universities in general, including SFU, will be reviewing their policy on

research involving human participants. Expectations are that the review process

will include wide consultation, including Senate, in the hope of arriving at a much

better policy.

7. ?

Information

The next regularly scheduled meeting of Senate will take place on Monday, April

6, 1998.

The Open Session adjourned at

9:50

pm and moved directly into Closed Session.

•

Alison Watt

Director, Secretariat Services