Se,lti s/aoJ

DRAFT UNTIL APPROVED BY SENATE

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

Monday, September 14, 1998 at 7:00 pm in Room 126 Halpern Centre

Open Session

Present: ?

Blaney, Jack, President and Chair

Absent:

Berggren, Len

Akins, Kathleen

Blackman, Roger (representing J. Pierce)

Barrow, Robin

Boland, Larry

Beattie, Suzan

Bowman, Marilyn

Clayman, Bruce

Burton, Lynn Elen

Copeland, Lynn

Chan, Albert

Dunsterville, Valerie

Cheng, Winnie

Harris, Richard

Coleman, Peter

Jones, Cohn

D'Auria, John

Mathewes, Rolf

Dhillon, Khushwant

Mauser, Gary

Emerson, Joseph

Segal, Joseph

Emmott, Alan

Warsh, Michael

Finley, David

Wickstrom, Norman

Fletcher, James

Gagan, David

Giffen, Kenneth

Gilhies, Mary Ann

In attendance:

Jones, John

Brown, Robert

Kanevsky, Lannie

Johnson, Rick

Kirczenow, George

Peterman, Randall

Lewis, Brian

Selman, Mark

Marteniuk, Ron

Ward, Roger

McInnes, Dina

Morris, Joy

Naef, Barbara

Ogloff, James

Osborne, Judith

Overington, Jennifer

Percival, Paul

Peterson, Louis

Peters, Joseph

Reader, Jason

Russell, Maya

Russell, Robert

Sanghera, Balwant

Tam, Lawrence

Veerkamp, Mark

Waterhouse, John

Wortis, Michael

Zazkis, Rina

Heath, Nick, Acting Registrar

Watt, Alison, Director, Secretariat Services

Grant, Bobbie, Recording Secretary

S.M. 14/09/98

Page 2

The Chair welcomed new Senator, Dr. Lynn Elen Burton, Dean of Continuing

Studies to Senate.

Approval of the Agenda

The agenda was amended to add the following items under Item 6 - Other

Business:

6.0

Mid-Semester Break

6.iv) Advertisements in the Calendar

6.v)

Exam Schedule/Last Day of Classes

Following the above additions, the agenda was approved as amended.

Approval of the Minutes of the Open Session of June 1, 1998

The Minutes were approved as distributed.

Business Arising from the Minutes

There was no business arising from the Minutes.

Report of the Chair

Paper S.98-60 - Annual Financial Statement (For Information)

Roger Ward, Vice-President Finance and Administration was in attendance in

order to respond to questions.

In response to an inquiry about the increase in the non-recurring expenditures

from 1997 to 1998, Senate was advised that the amount varies from year to year

depending on a variety of circumstances. Senate was advised that full details of

the expenditures are provided in the University's budget which is posted on the

Web under Financial Services.

ii)

The Chair reported that on September 23, 1998 the Minister of Advanced

Education, Training and Technology, the Honorable Andrew Petter will be on

campus for several hours. Most of his time will be spent at the campus barbeque

meeting students.

iii)

The Chair reported that the Vice-Presidents and Deans had met over a

two day period to do some initial budget planning for 1999/2000. He explained

that this is an accelerated budget planning process and the deliberations of that

meeting will be presented to SCUB at its next meeting. The intent is that this

year's budget planning process will follow the same principles as last year and will

be as open and as consultative as possible.

iv)

The Chair advised that at the next meeting Senate will receive a

discussion paper entitled 'President's Agenda'. Comments and advice will be

sought from Senate and the Board of Governors.

S.M. 14/09/98

Page 3

5. ?

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

SENATE NOMINATING COMMITTEE

I) ?

Paper S.98-61 - Elections

The following are the results of elections to the following Senate Committees:

Committee To Review University Admissions (CRUA)

One (Alternate) Faculty Member

to replace Norbert Haunerland from date of

election to May 31, 1999.

Elected by acclamation:

Heeson Bai

Senate Appeals Board (SAB)

One (Alternate) Graduate (at-large)

to replace Andrea Welling from date of

election to May 31, 2000.

Elected by acclamation: ?

Thomas du Payrat

SENATE COMMITTEE ON ACADEMIC PLANNING

Paper S.98-62 - Cooperative Resource Management Institute

Moved by D. Gagan, seconded by

Osborne

"that Senate approve and recommend approval to the Board of

Governors, as set forth in S.98-62, the proposed Cooperative

Resource Management Institute, as a Schedule A institute"

Randall Peterman, School of Resource and Environmental Management was in

attendance in order to respond to questions.

Senate was advised that the proposal had been discussed at length by SCAP and

referred back to the School with a number of recommendations with respect to

making the new Institute more inclusive to a larger group of researchers both on

and off campus. The proposal before Senate has been revised to reflect the

suggestions from SCAP.

Reference was made to the composition of the Advisory Board and concern was

expressed that representatives from SFU appeared to be in the minority. It was

pointed out that the structure is very typical and it was not unusual for an advisory

board to be dominated by external members. Brief discussion followed with

respect to the role of the Advisory Board, and Senate's attention was drawn to

the supporting documentation which indicates that the Advisory board has no

legal responsibility and exercises no direct control over the Institute.

0 ?

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

S.M. 14/09/98

Page 4

ii)

Paper S.98-63 - SCAP Annual Report (For Information)

The Annual Report of the Senate Committee on Academic Planning was

received by Senate for information.

c) ?

SENATE COMMITTEE ON ACADEMIC PLANNING/SENATE COMMITTEE

ON CONTINUING STUDIES

Paper 5.98-64 - Non-Credit Certificate Program: Certificate in Leadership

Learning

Moved by D. Gagan, seconded by J. Osborne

"that Senate approve and recommend approval to the Board of

Governors, as set forth in S.98-64, the Non-Credit Certificate

Program: Certificate in Leadership Learning"

Mark Selman, Associate Dean of Continuing Studies, was in attendance in order

to respond to questions.

Opinion was expressed that the central strength of the University rested in its

academic expertise within academic departments. Concern was expressed that

non-credit programs such as the one being proposed respond to the needs of the

outside community but fall outside the core academic areas of

departments/schools. It was suggested that the development of such

programming reflects a change of emphasis in the University and concern was

expressed that outside people were teaching programs under the University's

name in areas where there is no core expertise within the University.

It was pointed out that individual programs and course offerings have to be

approved by the Senate Committee on Continuing Studies, a committee whose

academic membership reflects a wide spectrum of views. The University has a

mandate to provide continuing education and it is the responsibility of the

Committee to make sure its non-credit programming complements the

academic expertise in the University. It was also noted that non-credit programs

are very popular, self-supporting, and they put the University in touch with many

businesses and industries who end up supporting SFU through contributions.

They also create goodwill and credibility in the community at-large. SFU has a

reputation for being an innovative university in the area of continuing education

because it has always geared its non-credit offerings to the expertise and interests

of its faculty members and the strengths of the University.

Brief discussion followed with respect to the specific ICBC program and its

potential for growth as well as the process for developing other programs under

this certificate.

In response to a suggestion that either SCAP or some other committee look at

the role of Continuing Studies vis-a-vis academic programs and how it views itself

in the future, Senate was advised that the three-year plan from Continuing

S.M. 14/09/98

Page 5

. Studies is widely available for perusal. Suggestion was also made to the Dean of

Continuing Studies that she may wish to initiate inquiries within the University

with respect to perceived priorities for continuing studies.

Question was called, and a vote taken. ? MOTION CARRIED

SENATE APPEALS BOARD (SAB)

Paper S.98-65 - Annual Report (For Information)

The Annual Report of the Senate Appeals Board was received by Senate for

information.

SENATE COMMITTEE ON ACADEMIC PLANNING/SENATE COMMITTEE

ON UNDERGRADUATE STUDIES

or I

Senate received information that the Senate Committee on Undergraduate

Studies, acting under delegated authority, approved minor revisions to existing

courses and programs within the Faculty of Education, including Minor Programs

in Environmental Education and Early Childhood Education, and B.Ed. as a

• ?

Second Degree.

SENATE COMMITTEE ON ACADEMIC PLANNING/SENATE GRADUATE

STUDIES COMMITTEE

Paper S.98-67 - Graduate Curriculum Revisions - Department of English

(For Information)

Senate received information that the Senate Graduate Studies Committee,

acting under delegated authority, approved revisions to the calendar description

of the graduate program reflecting the expanded role of the Writing Centre, the

teaching of Writing and Rhetoric within the English Department, and the

addition of a new heading and section 'Specialization in Print Culture 1700-

1900".

ii)

Paper S.98-68 - Graduate Curriculum Revisions - Department of

Geography (For Information)

Senate received information that the Senate Graduate Studies Committee,

acting under delegated authority, approved two new courses in Urban Studies -

URB 600, URB 601.

iii)

Paper S.98-69 - Graduate Curriculum Revisions - Department of History

(For Information)

I s ?

Moved by D. Gagan, seconded by R. Blackman

S.M. 14/09/98

Page 6

"that Senate approve and recommend approval to the Board of

Governors, as set forth in S.98-69, the following addition to the

Calendar entry:

Full-time thesis-option students are expected to complete their

degree requirements in a maximum of five semesters, and project-

option students in a maximum of three semesters. Part-time thesis-

option students are expected to complete their degree

requirements in a maximum of eight semesters and part-time

project option students in a maximum of six semesters"

Moved by M. Russell, seconded by

Overington

"that the motion be tabled until the recommendations of the

Graduate Students Survey Implementation Task Force have been

received"

Initial results from the graduate survey indicate that completion time is a fairly

salient issue and suggestion was made that it would be prudent to wait until the

Task Force has completed its work before Senate considered this matter.

Question was called, and a vote taken. ?

MOTION TO TABLE CARRIED

Senate received information that the Senate Graduate Studies Committee,

acting under delegated authority, approved minor revisions to existing courses

within the Department of History, including deletion of HIST 863, 866, 889, and

new courses HIST 812, 825.

SENATE COMMITTEE ON AGENDA AND RULES

Paper S.98-70 - Report - Ad Hoc Committee to Review the Role of

Senate regarding University Policies

Moved by D. Gagan, seconded by B. Sanghera

"that Senate approve the addition of section 3 to the terms of

reference of the Senate committee on Agenda and Rules:

3. To receive, in a timely manner, all proposed new University

Policies and all proposed revisions to existing policies (excluding

those policies negotiated with employee groups), and to

determine which policies should be forwarded to Senate.

Senate consideration will take one of the following forms:

Approval For those proposed policies and policy revisions which

SCAR determines to fall within Senate's jurisdiction as

defined by the University Act.

Advice For those proposed policies and policy revisions which

SCAR determines to be of direct interest to Senate

and which should be discussed at Senate.

S.M. 14/09/98

Page

• Information For those proposed policies and policy revisions which

SCAR determines should be circulated to Senate for

information."

It was noted that the motion pertained to proposed new policies and future

revisions to existing policies. Inquiry was made as to the process to be followed if

there were concerns about existing policies not under revision. Senate was

advised that these concerns could be brought forward to Senate for consideration

at any time.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

Inquiry was made as to the status of the remainder of the statements on the blue

cover sheet of document

S.98-70, particularly the two statements at the top of

page two. Senate was advised that they are statements of what SCAR has agreed

to do but do not form part of the formal motion. If Senate desired, they could be

moved as motions. It was pointed out that the policies referred to were currently

under revision and therefore would come to Senate probably by the end of next

semester.

Opinion was expressed that the Policy Gazette was a good idea but concern was

raised that not everyone may have access to the Web. Suggestion was made that

the information, in some form, be advertised in SF News in order to alert a wider

•

section of the university community. There were no objections to this suggestion.

ii)

Paper

S.98-71 -

Voting Eligibility - Part-time Employees

Motion #1 - Continuing Faculty

Moved by D. Gagan, seconded by R. Blackman

"that Part-time tenure-track and tenured faculty (Instructors,

Assistant Professors, Associate Professors and Professors including

faculty on post-retirement contracts) and continuing Lecturers,

Senior Lecturers and Lab Instructors and Librarians with

appointments of 50% or greater be granted the same rights as full-

time colleagues holding the same rank, to nominate, stand for

election and vote in the following:

• elections to Senate committees;

• elections for search committees for chairs/directors, deans, vice-

presidents and president

• elections of chairs/directors

• ratification of chairs/directors and deans (internal candidates)

• recall votes for chairs/directors and deans"

Question was called, and a vote taken. ?

MOTION #1 CARRIED

Motion #2 - Limited Term Faculty

Moved by D. Gagan, seconded by R. Blackman

S.M. 14/09/98

Page

"that Part-time Limited Term faculty (Instructors, Assistant

Professors, Associate Professors and Professors) and Limited Term

Lecturers, Senior Lecturers and Lab Instructors and Librarians with

appointments that are 50% or greater and longer than one year, be

granted the same rights as full-time colleagues holding -t ' he same

rank, to nominate, stand for election and vote in the followig:

• elections to Senate committees

• elections for search committees for chairs/directors, deans, vice-

presidents and president

• elections of chairs/directors

• ratification of chairs/directors and deans (internal candidates);

• recall votes for chairs/directors and deans"

Opinion was expressed that it was inappropriate to give limited term

appointments the same rights and privileges as faculty who have long term

commitments to the University.

It was pointed out that a number of limited term appointments are made

because of the nature of funding for the position in question, and the process of

appointment and renewal is equivalent to the tenure-track process. In such

cases, the appointments result in tenure-track positions and opinion was

expressed that they should have the same rights and privileges.

The view was expressed that while there may be some limited term

appointments such as those described above which ought to be included, there

were many other limited term appointments which were not equivalent to

tenure-track positions and should not be given the same rights. Unless adequate

wording was offered to distinguish between the different groups, opinion was

expressed that the motion was inappropriate. Objection was also made to giving

part-time limited term appointments the same rights and privileges as continuing

faculty.

Question was called, and a vote taken. ?

MOTION #2 DEFEATED

Motion #3 - Support Staff

Moved by D. Gagan, seconded by R. Blackman

"that Part-time continuing support staff with appointments of 50%

or greater with terms of longer than one year, be granted the same

rights as full-time colleagues holding the same type of appointment,

to nominate, stand for election and vote in the following:

• elections for search committees for deans, vice-presidents and

president"

Objection was raised with respect to allowing support staff to vote on search

committees in general, and opinion expressed that extending this privilege to

part-time support staff went too far.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION #3 CARRIED

S.M. 14/09/98

Page 9

iii)

Paper S.98-72 - Revision to SCAP Membership

Moved by D. Gagan, seconded by

Osborne

"that Senate approve that the membership of SCAP be amended

to replace the Director of Extension Credit Programs with the Dean

of Continuing Studies"

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

6. ?

OTHER BUSINESS

Mid-Semester Break

Senate's attention was drawn to the mid-semester break announced in the new

Calendar affecting classes on Monday, February 16th, 1999 and Tuesday, February

17th, 1999.

It was noted that the idea for a mid-semester break originated from a student

held referendum in which approximately 60% of the votes cast were in favour of

the idea. However, the academic staff had no input or opportunity to debate this

issue and this matter should have been addressed by Senate. It was pointed out

that scheduling a mid-semester break required the approval of Senate.

Therefore,the break

g h

ft"u

ILhe declared not to exist and SenateThe given an

opportunity at the next meeting to consider how a mid-semester break might be

accommodated.

Points of order were raised but the concerns were resolved by agreement that

the Registrar be instructed to bring forward to the next meeting, an appropriate

motion, together with rationale and all possible options, for a mid-semester

break.

It was also agreed that the University community would be notified that no mid-

semester break had been approved by Senate at this time, and that Senate

would consider this matter in October.

ii)

Paper S.98-73 - Burnaby Mountain Development

Moved by A. Chan, seconded by

Reader

"Under the authority outlined in Section 370)(o) of the

University

Act, 1996 R.S.B.C., Chap. 468, Senate recommends that the Board

of Governors submits any and all construction plans regarding the

Burnaby Mountain Development Project to Senate for full

consultation purposes before the Board gives its final approval to the

project"

S.M. 14/09/98

Page 10

R. Brown, President Designate of the Burnaby Mountain Community

Corporation, and R. Johnson, Director of Facilities Management, were in

attendance in order to respond to questions.

R. Brown indicated that while he had no problem with the principle of the

motion, he was concerned with the specific language which he felt was

unworkable. He explained that it was perfectly reasonable to bring the major

issues pertaining to the development project to Senate for information and

discussion but he pointed out that the Board of Governors had already approved

what property of the University will be developed and had endorsed the Official

Community Plan which has been approved by the City of Burnaby. R. Brown

went on to say that there were two items on the immediate agenda which he felt

would be very interesting for Senate to discuss. A vision statement for the project

is currently in preparation and once that has been agreed to by the community, a

master plan for the overall development of the project will be undertaken. He

indicated he would be quite happy to bring both of these items to Senate for

discussion and consultation prior to taking them to the Board.

A suggestion by

Overington to change the motion as follows, was accepted as a

friendly amendment:

"Senate recommends that the Board of Governors submits any and

all community development plans regarding the Burnaby Mountain

Development Project to Senate for full consultation purposes

before the Board gives its final approval to the project plans"

Senate was advised that students were largely concerned with the human

component of the plan rather than detailed planning documents, and R. Brown

indicated that the two items which he had previously referred related to this type

of issue.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION (AS AMENDED) CARRIED

iii) ?

Paper S. 98-74 - Student Day of Action

Motion #1

Moved by

Morris, seconded by

Overington

"that faculty consider student participation in the National Day of

Action on Friday, October 16, 1998 as grounds for academic

concession"

Federal cuts over the past several years to post-secondary education were referred

to, and Senate was advised that the Canadian Federation of Students had

organized a national Day of Action to protest these cuts and call upon all levels of

government to assume responsibility for the adequate funding of post-secondary

education. Since increased funding benefits everyone at the University, it is

hoped that students and faculty could work together to ensure that students who

wish to participate in the Day of Action would not be penalized for missing class.

S.M.

14/09/98

Page 11

Opinion was expressed that Senate had an obligation to remain neutral and it

would be inappropriate for Senate to grant preferential treatment and

concessions to students who have certain beliefs and wish to engage in a

particular political activity.

Since the focus of the student activity was directly related to education and was

being coordinated for increased funding which would benefit everyone,

suggestion was made that Senate might perhaps be able to support a more

general motion.

Opinion was expressed that the request was very modest and only required

minimal action on behalf of the University. It was pointed out that the motion, as

it was worded, does not obligate or force anyone to do anything; rather it makes a

statement which faculty may or may not consider. Therefore, it should be viewed

as mild support for an issue of importance to students rather than as making a

strong political statement by Senate.

Clarification was requested about the meaning of the term 'academic concession'

and whether the motion, if approved, requires faculty to consider student

participation as grounds for academic concession or whether it means that faculty

may consider it as grounds. It was suggested that "academic concession" would

allow a reasonable opportunity for students to learn the material they have

• missed, as would be provided if they were sick, and faculty would be obliged to

consider student participation as grounds for academic concession but it would

be up to individual faculty members to decide whether participation was

adequate grounds or not.

Opinion was expressed that while it was commendable for students to organize

and participate in this kind of political activity, students should balance their

participation with their individual academic activities as it would be inappropriate

for Senate to condone particular actions on particular topics.

Concern was expressed that the motion, as it is worded, does not allow

consistency between different Faculties or faculty members and some students

may be penalized while others may not.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION #1 DEFEATED

Motion #2:

Moved by J. Morris, seconded by

Reader

"that faculty be encouraged to reschedule any exams, quizzes and

mandatory assignments scheduled for October

16, 1998"

Senate was advised that this motion simply gives faculty members advance notice

of the Day of Action and asks them to give some consideration to help students

. ?

who wish to participate in something that directly benefits everyone at the

University.

S.M. 14/09/98

Page 12

Senate was advised that the Student Society has organized some informational

workshops on this issue and Senators were encouraged to either attend or review

the material available.

It was suggested that perhaps this type of activity should be planned on a

weekend or that students participate between classes. It was noted that the

protest is held downtown and it would not be easy for students to travel back and

forth. Past experience has shown that students have to choose between their

class and participation and it would be helpful if they didn't have to face missing a

quizz or exam.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

? MOTION #2 DEFEATED?

Moved by M. Veerkamp, seconded by P. Percival

"that faculty are advised that October 16, 1998 is a day of action

and protest and they are requested to avoid exams and quizzes on

that day"

Suggestion was made that the motion is out of order since it is essentially the

same as motion #2. The Chair ruled that a vote would be taken on the motion

without lengthy discussion.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

? MOTION DEFEATED

iv) ?

Advertisement in the Calendar

J. D'Auria moved the following Notice of Motion for discussion at the next

meeting of Senate:

"that advertising not be allowed in the Calendar until the principle

has been approved by Senate and the relevant procedures on how

the advertising will be selected are discussed"

Last Day of Classes/Exam Schedule

Senate was reminded of a motion it had previously passed specifying that when

the start of classes falls on a Tuesday after a Monday holiday, the last day of classes

is extended by one day into the exam schedule. This did not happen this

semester even though classes started on the Tuesday after Labour Day.

Senate was advised that when Labour Day falls on the last possible day it can, such

as the case this year, the formula to extend the semester into the exam schedule

does not work. Given all of the steps that the Registrar must take to get the

grades in and check student performances for registration/non-registration in the

following semester, all of the work must be completed by midnight December

24th. If the last day of classes were to take place on December 7th instead of

December 4th, the grading process required to be carried out by the Registrar's

S.M.

14/09/98

Page

•

Office would run into Christmas Day. This situation happens once every seven

years.

Opinion was expressed that the objection was that the Registrar did not bring this

to the attention of Senate and ask for an exemption.

In light of the various Calendar issues which have come up, suggestion was made

that it might be appropriate to set up a calendar committee or designate one of

Senate's standing committees to oversee the Calendar and have the Calendar

officially approved by Senate. The Chair indicated that SCAR would consider the

suggestion and report back to Senate.

7. ?

Information

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

5, 1998

and will be held in

WMC 3210.

The Open Session adjourned at

9:20

pm. Following a brief recess, the Assembly moved

into Closed Session.

Alison Watt

Director, Secretariat Services