j.p

Minutes of a meeting of the Senate of Simon Fraser University held on Monday, April 6, ?

1998 at 5:30 pm in Room 3210 West Mall Centre

Open Session

Present: ?

Blaney, Jack, President and Chair

Bawa, Parveen

Beattie, Suzan

Blackman, Roger (representing J. Pierce)

Boland, Larry

Bowman, Marilyn

Chan, Albert

Clayman, Bruce

Cleveland, William

D'Auria, John

Emmott, Alan

Jones, Cohn

Kanevsky, Lannie

Ki rczenow, George

Lewis, Brian

Marteniuk, Ron

Morris, Joy

Osborne, Judith

Overington, Jennifer

Parmar, Neelam

Percival, Paul

Peterson, Louis

Russell, Robert

Sanghera, Balwant

Selman, Mark

Tam, Lawrence

Waterhouse, John

Winne, Phil

Words, Michael

Absent:

Baert, Jessica

Barrow, Robin

Berggren, Len

Blazenko, George

Coleman, Peter

Dobb, Ted

Dunsterville, Valerie

Etherington, Lois-

Gagan, David

Giffen, Ken

Gilhies, Mary Ann

Hassan, Nany

Ho, Lawrence

Jones, John

Mathewes, Roll

Mauser, Gary

McInnes, Dina

Naef, Barbara

Nip, Harry

Oglouf, James

Reed, Clyde

Segal, Joseph

Warsh, Michael

Wickstrom, Norman

Wong, Tim

Yagi, Ian

Wong, Tim

In attendance:

Knockaert, Joseph

Rieckhoff, Klaus

Tamminga, Philip

Heath, Ron, Dean of Student Services/Registrar

Watt, Alison, Director, Secretariat Services

Grant, Bobbie, Recording Secretary

S.M. 06/04/98

Page 2

The Chair noted the election of Lawrence Ho to Senate as a Student Senator

to fill an existing vacancy until May 31, 1998; and recognized the presence

of Klaus Rieckhoff, former Senator and former Board member.

Approval of the Agenda

Due to time constraints of the resource person attending to speak to item 6-

c, the Chair suggested that 6-c be dealt with prior to 6-a and 6-b. Following

this minor adjustment, the Agenda was approved.

Approval of the Minutes of the Open Session of March 2, 1998

Referring to page 4, Senate paper S.98-25, J. D'Auria requested that the

Minutes clarify that J. Pierce was Chair of SPCSAB during the period covered

by the annual report and that the present Chair of the committee is J.

D'Auria. The Chair noted that the Minutes would be amended accordingly.

Referring to the discussion in the second paragraph on page 9, concern was

expressed that the Minutes did not accurately reflect discussion wherein it

was suggested that the word 'defined' should be replaced. Senate was

advised that all of the concerns and comments raised by Senate were

considered. The revised Statement of Purpose will be brought back to

Senate for further consideration in May.

Following the above amendment/clarifications, the Minutes were approved.

There

Business

was

Arising

no business

from the

arising

Minutesfrom

the Minutes.

Report of the Chair

The Chair reported that although the general nature of the budget has been

announced, the actual budget letter which activates the process of

discussion and allocation has not yet been received.

Reports of Committees

a) ?

Senate Committee on Academic Planning/Senate Committee on

Undergraduate Studies

Faculty of Applied Sciences

Pa p

er S.98-32 -Com

utin g

Science Under

raduate Curriculum

Revisions (For Information)

Senate received information that SCUS, acting under delegated authority,

approved a proposal for a two-year pilot project designed specifically for

non-computing students to allow them to obtain essential software

knowledge and skills. The project consists of two existing courses and the

following new course: CMPT 118 which was also approved for addition to

the list of elective courses for the Certificate in Computing Studies.

S.M. 06/04/98

Page 3

b) ?

Senate Committee on Academic Planning/Senate Graduate Studies

Committee

Paper S.98-33 - Senate Graduate Studies Committee - Revision to

Membership

Moved by B. Clayman, seconded by J. Osborne

"that Senate approve the recommendation that the Associate

Dean of Graduate Studies be added as an ex-officio voting

member of the Senate Graduate Studies Committee"

Amendment moved by L. Boland, seconded by G. Kirczenow

'to insert the word 'non' before the word 'voting'

B. Clayman briefly explained the organization of the Office of the Dean of

Graduate Studies and advised that the position of Associate Dean of

Graduate Studies is a position of significant responsibility in the University.

He felt it was appropriate for a person holding this position to be a voting

member of the SGSC, and advised that the SGSC overwhelmingly supported

the motion. Opinion was expressed that it was inappropriate to give

administrators votes on committees making decisions on behalf of academic

units.

Question was called on the amendment,

and a vote taken. ?

AMENDMENT FAILED

Question was called on the main motion,

and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

ii)

Faculty

of ADDlied Sciences

Paper S.98-34 - Communication Graduate Curriculum Revisions (For

Information)

Senate received information that the SGSC, acting under delegated

authority, approved the following new courses: CMNS 891 and 892;

changes to the Comprehensive Exams; and minor changes to existing

graduate Communication courses.

ii)

Paper S.98-35 - Resource and Environmental Management Graduate

Curriculum Revisions (For Information)

Senate received information that the SGSC, acting under delegated

authority, approved changes to Required and Elective course requirements;

change in wording for the Ph.D. degree requirements; and minor changes to

existing graduate REM courses.

S.M. 06/04/98

Page 4

iii) Faculty of Arts

iculum

Senate received information that the SGSC, acting under delegated

authority, approved revisions to the Ph.D. dissertation procedures.

ii)

Paper S.98-37 - Master of Publishing Program Curriculum Revisions

(For Information)

Senate received information that the SGSC, acting under delegated

authority, approved new courses: PUB 605, 606, 607, 898; an increase in

course work for the degree from 40 credit hours to 43 credit hours; and

minor revisions to existing graduate Publishing courses. Brief discussion

took place with respect to the increase of credit hours for course work.

Senate was advised that the increase resulted from the introduction of the

new courses and a rearrangement of credits of existing courses to better suit

the needs of the program.

Other Business

c) Paper S.98-40 - Motion re CJSF Radio

Moved by J. Morris, seconded by A. Chan

"that Senate supports CJSF Radio's application to the CRTC for

an FM license"

Philip Tamminga, Program Coordinator,

CJSF

Radio was in attendance in

order to respond questions.

In response to questions about the operation of the radio station and how

the expanded license will impact students, Senate was advised that funding

for the radio station comes primarily from the Student Activity fee, a

proportion of which is dedicated to

CJSF.

Additional funding will not be

requested from students or from the University.

CJSF

is operated by the

Simon Fraser Campus Radio Society, a non-profit registered society under

the Societies Act in BC. The station is currently designated and licensed by

the CRTC as a campus community radio station with a mandate to provide

services to students and the SFU community. Policy is determined largely

through the membership which is a volunteer organization (with the

exception of two paid staff) and conforms with the policies of the CRTC.

Programming in terms of music emphasizes local musicians, particularly

SFU artists, and public affairs and news programming emphasizes SFU's

academic achievements. The radio station is seen as a link between

Burnaby mountain and the surrounding community and provides

opportunities for students and community members to gain media access

and media training skills.

S.M. 06/04/98

Page 5

• ?

The Chair informed Senate that he had personally written a letter of support

which did not include any implication or expectation of financial support.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION UNANIMOUSLY

CARRIED

a) ?

Paper S.

98-38 - R.

Russell motion re Eastern Indonesia University

Development Project

Moved by R. Russell, seconded by L. Peterson

"that Senate recommend to the Board of Governors that an external review

of the Eastern Indonesia University Development Project be undertaken and

completed by March

1, 1999.

The purpose of the review is three-fold:

To determine what academic benefits SFU has accrued as a result of the

EIUDP

To see if the Simon Fraser University Policy on International Activities

has been adhered to by the EIUDP

see if the stated goals of the EIUDP have been met"

J. Knockaert, Director of the Office of International Cooperation, and K. Rieckhoff,

former Senator and past member of the Board of Governors, were in attendance in

order to respond to questions.

Senate was advised that the EIUDP is a CIDA funded international development

project which was awarded to Simon Fraser University in

1988

and was reviewed

and renewed in

1993.

The mandate of the project was to strengthen the teaching

programs, primarily in the basic sciences, in a number of Eastern Indonesia

universities and to promote the establishment of long term linkages between SFU

and Indonesian campuses. There were five universities in Indonesia and SFU was

actively engaged in partnerships with a number of other Canadian universities who

assisted SFU in the project. The EIUDP is one of the largest CIDA funded

development projects to be operated through a university and SFU's role was to

coordinate activities such as sending faculty to Indonesia to give

seminars/workshops and short courses and placing Indonesian graduate students

from the project in Canadian university programs.

R. Russell emphasized his view that the people who have worked on the project

have all been well intentioned. However he felt an external review was necessary

because of the concerns many other people have about the project and about the

way it has been run, including concerns about the previous internal review by

SCIA, and SFU's involvement with the Indonesian Government. Questions have

also been raised about whether or not academic standards in the program were

being met in accordance with university policy, and what long term benefits were

being accrued to the university.

It was noted that the issue of SFU's involvement with governments such as the one

in Indonesia was an issue more fittingly concluded in a discussion of SFU's policy

S.M.

06/04/98

Page 6

on international activities. Expectations are that Senate will be receiving a revision

of this policy soon.

Several members of SCIA expressed opinion that the questions raised in the motion

were sound and deserved to be addressed, but concern was raised about the

appropriateness of referring this matter to the Board of Governors. Suggestion was

made that referral to SCIA would be more appropriate since at least two of the

questions fell within the academic jurisdiction of Senate. It was noted that while

SCIA did not have the resources or the depth/breadth on its membership to conduct

the review itself, it could arrange for a review by selecting a committee with an

appropriate membership which could include both internal and external members.

Senate was provided with a history of the project by K. Rieckhoff who indicated

that at the time of the review in

1993,

concerns were raised about the academic

qualifications of the Indonesian participants in the program, the lack of

information/consultation with the Board and the university community, and the

review processes conducted both by CIDA and internally. Many people felt that

members of SCIA who reviewed the project had conflicts of interest with the

project, and that the positive ranking by CIDA of the project was flawed because

participants who were receiving considerable funding from the project were not

likely to criticize the program when consulted during the review process.

The following motion was moved by

Overington as an amendment but the Chair

ruled against it because it was not germane to the main motion and suggested that

it be presented as a notice of motion for a subsequent meeting:

"that Senate recommend to the Senate Committee on International

Activities that procedures through which international projects are

developed and approved are reviewed and are amended to include

more input from the campus community"

Senate was advised that CIDA itself will be undertaking a monitoring of the project

in May

1998

and will be organizing a final review of the project in the year 2000.

Opinion was expressed that although it was important that the questions in the

motion be addressed, an external review conducted by the University would be

expensive and might not be the best process. CIDA is not likely to be convinced to

include questions of particular interest to SFU, although it might be prepared to

look at the issue of academic benefits. Opinion was expressed that a CIDA review

would not serve the same needs of the University and an external review should be

independent of both CIDA and SCIA. Concern was expressed that the motion

spoke against Senate and its subcommittee process and that if broader input for

every project were to be undertaken the process would become unworkable.

Opinion was expressed that the main motion, if passed, concedes Senate's

jurisdiction to the Board of Governors, implies a lack of confidence in one of

Senate's subcommittees, and sets a dubious precedent.

S.M. 06/04/98

Page 7

0 ?

Amendment moved by J. Osborne, seconded by A. Chan

"that Senate review the Eastern Indonesia University Development

Project to be completed by March

1, 1999....

It was noted that the rest of the motion would remain. SCAR would then decide

the appropriate subcommittee structure, and the external review process and

membership issues.

Suggestion was made that the composition and terms of reference of the review

committee be subject to the approval of Senate. Since the amendment specified

that Senate undertake the review, the Chair assured Senate that this was implicit in

the amendment.

Question was called on the amendment,

and a vote taken.

AMENDMENT CARRIED

Opinion was expressed that point three was too broad in scope and should be

curtailed to focus on SFU's interest.

Amendment moved by P. Winne, seconded by B. Sanghera

"that the words 'with respect to Simon Fraser University's interest' be

appended to the end of point 3"

Question was called on the amendment,

and a vote taken.

AMENDMENT CARRIED

Suggestion was made that it would be appropriate for the reviewers to consider

how such projects in the future might be improved to enhance the university, its

mission and benefits to the institution. The Chair advised that Senate's comments

concerning a review and a review committee will be taken under consideration by

SCAR.

In response to an inquiry as to whether CIDA could provide funding for a review,

Senate was informed that CIDA would not pay for a review initiated by the

university. If the University were interested, however, it might be willing to include

a representative appointed by SFU as part of their evaluation team.

In response to previous comments that implied that the program had deficiencies, J.

D'Auria noted that the Chemistry Department was a strong contributor to the

program and he personally had been in Indonesia and felt that the program was a

success and faculty members had achieved good results.

On the assumption that the purpose of the current motion was to look at the

University's involvement and to determine whether its stated goals had been met

and to use the experience from this program as a guideline for future projects, it

was suggested that the timing is inappropriate. Opinion was expressed that the

S.M. 06/04/98

Page 8

deadline date should be after CIDA has done the data gathering and completed its

review. The University review committee would then benefit from the work done

by CIDA and have this information available in order to make a better decision as

to whether the project was successful, whether it was run in a responsible manner,

and what, if any, lessons can be drawn from it.

Amendment moved by M. Wortis, seconded by C. Jones

"that the deadline date be changed from March 1, 1999 to a time

following the final CIDA evaluation of the project"

It was noted that the costs for an external review for a project of this size would be

considerable and in view of the current budgetary situation, it made better sense to

minimize costs to the university by benefiting from the data in the CIDA review.

Although there would be some beneficial material, opposition was expressed with

regard to waiting and using information from an international development agency.

The University needs to be responsible and review its own academic standards and

policies.

In response to an inquiry as to how long CIDA reviews traditionally take, Senate

was advised that the process could take six months.

Question was called on the amendment,

and a vote taken. ?

AMENDMENT CARRIED

The main motion, as amended was read

"that Senate review the Eastern Indonesia University Development

Project following the final CIDA evaluation of the project. The

purpose of the review is three-fold:

1. To determine what academic benefits SFU has accrued as a result

of the EIUDP.

2. To see if the Simon Fraser University Policy on International

Activities has been adhered to by the EIUDP.

3. To see if the stated goals of the EIUDP have been met with respect

to SFU's interests."

The Chair noted that it was also understood that the terms of reference of the

review will come back to Senate for approval.

Question was called on the main motion

as amended, and a vote taken. ?

MAIN MOTION (AS

AMENDED) CARRIED

b) ?

Paper S.98-39 - G. Kirczenow motion re Presidential Search Procedures

Moved by G. Kirzcenow, seconded by R. Russell

S.M. 06/04/98

Page 9

• "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"

Concern was expressed about the size and the membership make up of the search

committee. Opinion was expressed that it would be difficult for a committee of this

size to function properly and the majority of the members were non-academic.

Since the current Chair of the Board promised to follow procedures to the letter

when making the next Presidential appointment, it was felt that the membership

and the terms of reference should be reviewed prior to that time.

Background information was provided to Senate with respect to process and

rationale of the previous joint Board/Senate committee decisions which had

established the current committee and terms of reference. It was stressed that the

search committee was intended to be representative of the campus community, and

it was noted that the academic community formed the largest proportion on the

committee.

Opinion was expressed that any review should be a joint review by Senate and the

Board of Governors, and any revisions would have to be approved by both bodies.

•

Amendment moved by P. Percival, seconded by R. Marteniuk

"that the word 'jointly' be inserted in the third line before the word

'reviewed', and the words 'and the Board of Governors' be inserted

in the fourth line following the word 'Senate'

Question was called on the amendment,

and a vote taken. ?

AMENDMENT CARRIED

It was pointed out that the current set of terms of reference and procedures have

never been used and opposition was expressed about revising the committee at this

point.

Question was called on the main motion

as amended, and a vote taken.

MAIN MOTION (AS AMENDED)

FAILED

7. ?

Information

The date of the next regularly scheduled meeting of Senate is Monday, May 11,

1998.

The Open Session adjourned at 7:00 pm and moved directly into Closed Session.

'S ?

Alison Watt

Director, Secretariat Services