DRAFT UNTIL APPROVED BY SENATE

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

Monday, March 5, 2001 at 7:00 pm in Room 3210 WMC

Open Session

Present: Stevenson, Michael, Chair and President ?

Absent: Budra, Paul

Atkins, Stella

Chan, Albert

Barrow, Robin

Cooper, Kait

Bawa, Parveen

Dunsterville, Valerie

Clayman, Bruce

Giffen, Ken

D'Auria, John

Grimmett, Peter

Davidson, Willie

Hold, Angela

Deigrande, James

Jones, John

Dill, Larry

LaRocque, Linda

Driver, Jon

Livadiotakis, Georgia

Finley, David

Mauser, Gary

Gerson, Carole

McArthur, James

Gill, Alison

McFetridge, Paul

Gupte, Jaideep

Naef, Barbara

Hill, Ross

Paterson, David

Jackson, Margaret

Runyowa, Mac

Klymson, Sarah

Warsh, Michael

Love, Ernie

Wong, Milton

Marteniuk, Ron

Yerbury, Cohn

McInnes, Dina

Zazkis, Rina

Miralles-Sanchez, Veronika

Mundle, Todd (representing L. Copeland)

In attendance:

Ogloff, James

Anderson, Bob

Osborne, Judith

Chant, John

Percival, Paul

Elliott, Liz

Peters, Joseph

Heath, Nick

Pierce, John

Jara, Lorena

Russell, Robert

Jones, Cohn

Sanghera, Baiwant

Knockaert, Joe

Smith, Michael

Steinbach, Christopher

Stewart, Ryan

Waterhouse, John

Weldon, Larry

Wessel, Sylvia

Wortis, Michael

Yau, David

Zaichkowsky, Judy

Heath, Ron, Dean of Student Services and Registrar

Watt, Alison, Director, University Secretariat

Grant, Bobbie, Recording Secretary

S.M. 5 March 2001

Page

Approval of the Agenda

In order to accommodate a visitor, item 6.D.i was moved to follow item 6.A.i.

Following this change, the agenda was approved as amended.

Approval of the Minutes of the Open Session of February

2001

Request was made to add L. Copeland's name to the list of Senators present at

the last meeting. Following this change, the Minutes were approved.

Business Arising from the Minutes

There was no business arising from the minutes.

Report of the Chair

Commenting on recent press releases, the Chair reported that tuition fees would

be reduced by

with universities to be fully compensated for the loss by the

provincial government. The government also announced an increase of 5,000

student spaces for the post-secondary system. In addition, the government has

announced a very significant infusion of one-time only money for health research

and infrastructure needs. While this was very positive, the Chair pointed out

that expectations were that the funding would protect against inflation and cover

existing cost increases such as utilities but would provide very little additional

flexibility. Expectations were that the budget would be passed in the near future

and universities would receive their budget letters shortly thereafter.

In response to an inquiry about capital funding, the Chair advised that within the

one-time funding, there was money for planning, i.e. to develop specifications

and architectural details but there was no commitment for implementation of

any projects.

Question Period

There were no questions.

Reports of Committees

Senate Nominating Committee

Paper 5.01-14 - Elections to Senate Committees

Senate was advised that no nominations had been received for student positions

on the Senate Committee on Continuing Studies or the Senate Committee on

Disciplinary Appeals. These vacancies would be carried forward.

With respect to the annual turnover of committee memberships on June Vt,

Senate was informed that the Senate Nominating Committee was starting its

work early this year and was currently in the process of recruiting committee

members. Senators wishing to nominate or be nominated for any committee

were asked to forward the information to the SNC.

S.M. 5 March 2001

Page 3

D) ?

Senate Committee on University Priorities

i) ?

Paper S.01-19 - Establishment of the Centre for Restorative justice

Moved by J

Pierce, seconded by B. Clayman

"that Senate approve and recommend approval to the Board of

Governors, the establishment of the Centre for Restorative Justice

as outlined in S.01-19"

L. Elliott, School of Criminology, was in attendance in order to respond to

questions.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

B) ?

Senate Committee on International Activities

i) ?

Paper S.01-15 - Ad Hoc Committee to Review the Eastern Indonesia

Universit y

Development Project (For Information)

Members of the Ad Hoc Committee, R. Anderson (Chair), J

Chant and L. Jara

were in attendance in order to respond to questions.

The Chair reported that prior to sending the report to SCIA for action on the

recommendations which would be brought back to Senate, SCAR felt that a full

discussion in Senate would be appropriate.

Moved by R. Barrow, seconded by C. Steinbach

"that Senate move into a Committee of the Whole to allow open

discussion on the report from the Ad Hoc Committee to Review the

Eastern Indonesia University Development"

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

Discussion ensued and the following opinions were expressed.

• Concerns about past process; in particular the long delay that occurred before

a review of the project and associated issues took place, and the lack of an

open and consultative process when the initial involvement in the project was

approved. It was noted that changes to SCIA's policy have corrected some of

these past problems.

• A fairly clear and accurate account of the basic objections of the critics of the

project was provided on pages 35-37, but instead of fully addressing those

criticisms the report focused more on the benefits accrued by Indonesian

participants even though most critics never questioned these benefits.

• • The report does not address concerns about the Canadian government

investing heavily through CIDA programs in Indonesia during a corrupt

government regime and the long term affects of such investments.

S.M. 5 March 2001

Page 4

An issue which needs to be addressed for future projects is whether the

university is willing to support and participate in projects in countries that do

not share the same democratic standards as Canada, or whether support

should be restricted to the countries with similar standards as Canada.

The report sets a new standard for well researched and well written reviews

and one of its values was that it prompted debate within the university about

some very difficult moral issues.

Moved by L. Dill, seconded by I

Waterhouse

"that Senate move out of Committee of the Whole"

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

On behalf of Senate, the Chair extended thanks and appreciation to the

Committee for its hard work. The Chair reported that the comments and

concerns of Senate would be forwarded to SCIA for follow up action on the

recommendations in the report. The Chair also advised that CIDA was currently

undergoing a review of its own policies and funding priorities and there was

possibility that CIDA was considering less involvement with universities and

more direct involvement with governments for official development projects.

ii)

Paper S.01-16 - Annual Report - SCIA (For Information)

C. Jones, Executive Director, International Relations and J

Knockaert, Director of

International Co-operation were in attendance in order to respond to questions.

Reference was made to Annex C on pages 23 and 24 and concern was expressed

about the effort required to develop exchanges for a rather small number of

students. Senate was advised that reciprocity was a very important aspect of

exchange programs and trying to organize large exchange agreements with any

one institution was likely to be problematic whereas having a small number of

students coming from and going to one institution was more feasible.

Discussion ensued with respect to the recruitment process used for exchange

programs. It was pointed out that in comparison with other universities across

Canada, SFU compared quite favourably and was above the national average.

Senate was advised that one of the most serious impediments for students

participating in an exchange was the cost and if additional funding for students

was forthcoming the participation rate would likely increase. The Chair reported

that AUCC was trying to establish a federal program of mobility grants for

students involved in approved exchange programs and there was a concerted

effort to initiate similar financial assistance programs that are currently available

in the United States and in Europe for exchange students.

Brief discussion followed with respect to international co-op placements and

Senate was advised that it was possible that the incentives currently being

considered by the federal government and AUCC could be extended to

S.M. 5 March 2001

Page 5

international co-op placements. [Co-op student numbers are not included in the

data in this report.]

iii) ?

Paper S.01-17 - Change in Terms of Reference for the International

Student Exchange Committee (ISEC) (For Information)

Senate received information that the Senate Committee on International

Activities approved a change in the terms of reference of ISEC with respect to the

reporting structure for the establishment of any new international or domestic

undergraduate or graduate student exchange agreement.

C) ?

Ad Hoc Senate Committee to Review Research Ethics Policy Revisions

i) ?

Paper S.01-18 - Proposed Policy and Procedures for Ethics Review of

Research Involving Human Subjects

Committee members W. Davidson, Chair of the Ad Hoc Committee and J

Driver

were in attendance in order to respond to questions.

Senate was advised that the policy revision dated February 16, 2001 had been

presented to the Tr-Council for comment. They have advised that the report did

not comply in certain areas, in particular the issue of informed consent had not

been addressed and the Research Ethics Appeal Board could not be set up as an

ad hoc committee. Since further revisions were necessary, it was felt it would be

better to withdraw the motion and present the document as it stands to Senate

for discussion. A final document addressing the Tr-Council issues and any

concerns /suggestions of Senate will then be brought back for approval.

Moved by W. Davidson, seconded by J

Driver

"that Senate move into a Committee of the Whole to allow open

discussion on the report from the Ad Hoc Senate Committee to

Review Research Ethics Policy Revisions"

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

Discussion ensued and the following comments were expressed.

It was suggested that the composition of the Research Ethics Board should be

expanded to assure wider range of representation within the university

community, such as including one faculty member from each Faculty and

guaranteed positions for at least two graduate students.

Some Faculties have very few ethics applications while other Faculties were

much more involved and it would be more appropriate for Faculties with

expertise and involvement to be well represented.

It was pointed out that the membership had to comply with the Tr-Council

policy statement and it would be difficult to meet the stipulations of the

policy statement if there were a restriction that each Faculty be represented.

S.M. 5 March 2001

Page 6

• The suggestion was made that terms for students be one year as the proposed

three year term was unreasonable and might reduce the number of students

willing to serve.

• Reference was made to the provision in the Tr-Council policy statement

which allowed institutions to use members of other institution's Research

Ethics Boards for their own appeals board. An arrangement of this sort

should be investigated with the University of Victoria.

• Reference was made to section 6.3 and concern was expressed about the

wording that faculty members must take responsibility for actions of their

students as well as teaching ethical issues. It was suggested that reference to

the framework agreement which provides legal protection to faculty

members should be cross-referenced in this section. University policy offered

the same kind of support to other researchers such as post doctoral fellows

and graduate students as long as their work was approved by the Ethics

Board and they follow approved protocol. Suggestion was made that any

revised wording should include reference to researchers other than faculty

members.

• The suggestion was made that appointments of student members of the

Research Ethics Board should be made by the Student Society or the Graduate

Issues Committee of the Student Society. It was pointed out that Senate had

previously recommended that appointments to Senate committees should be

made by Senate.

• Reference was made to Section 5.2 and the word Committee was changed to

Board.

• Clarification with respect to the use of the term Director of Research Ethics in

relation to the Office of Research Ethics was required.

• Concerns around the workload of the Director were expressed and a

suggestion was made that there should be an assistant.

• Reference was made to Section 3.12 and opinion was expressed that it was

necessary to allow the committee to develop procedures as issues arise, and

suggestion was made that it would be helpful if the wording of this section

could be broadened such that regulations could be developed as long as they

are consistent with the policy.

• With respect to the issue of informed consent, the suggestion was made that

the salient points of Section 2 of the Tr-council policy statement should be

incorporated into the document

• Opinion was expressed that a provision for monitoring projects should be

included and a suggestion was made to change the word 'authority' to

'responsibility' in section 3.3.

• Concern was expressed that the wording of Section 6.1.a implied that

minimal risk assessment was determined by the subject rather than by an

appropriate Board/Committee member and suggestion was made that the

wording be revised to clarify the intent.

Moved by J

Waterhouse, seconded by B. Clayman

"that Senate move out of Committee of the Whole and that the

concerns and recommendations of Senate be taken into

consideration by the Ad Hoc Committee for revision, particularly

S.M. 5 March 2001

Page

• the incorporation of policy requirements respecting informed

consent, and that a final draft be brought back to Senate for

approval"

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

On behalf of Senate, the Chair expressed appreciation and thanks to the members

of the ad hoc committee for their hard work.

D) ?

Senate Committee on University Priorities (continued)

ii)

Paper S.01-20 - Establishment of the Centre for Scientific Computing

Moved by B. Clayman, seconded by W. Davidson

"that Senate approve and recommend approval to the Board of

Governors the establishment of the Centre for Scientific Computing

as outlined in S.01-20"

Senate was advised that the support documentation should be amended to show

that the Centre would be established as a Schedule B Centre reporting to the

Vice-President Research rather than a Schedule A Centre reporting to the Dean

of Science.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

iii)

Paper S.01-21 - Follow-up - External Review - Gerontology Program and

Research Centre (For Information)

Senate received information that the Senate Committee on University Priorities

had unanimously concluded to withdraw its recommendation that Gerontology

work toward a single intake of students for the Diploma Program.

E) ?

Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies

i) ?

Paper S.01-22 - Change to admission requirements - School of

Kinesiologv

N. Heath, Director of Admissions, was in attendance in order to respond to

questions.

Moved by R. Marteniuk, seconded by C. Steinbach

"that Senate approve the revised admission requirements to the

School of Kinesiology, as set forth in S.01-22, effective January

2002"

0 ?

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

S.M. 5 March 2001

Page 8

ii)

Paper S.01-23 - Change to General Admission Requirements

N. Heath, Director of Admissions, was in attendance in order to respond to

questions.

Moved by J

Waterhouse, seconded by C. Steinbach

"that Senate approve the addition of Calculus 12 to the admission

requirements, as set forth in S.01-23, effective January 2002, under

the List 3 (Science Group)"

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

F) ?

Senate Graduate Studies Committee

Paper S.01-24 - Policy for the temporary and permanent withdrawal of

graduate courses

Moved by J

Driver, seconded by B. Clayman

"that Senate approve the proposed policy for the temporary and

permanent withdrawal of graduate courses"

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

ii)

Paper S.01-25 - Annual Report - SGSC (For Information)

Senate received the Annual Report of the Senate Graduate Studies Committee for

information.

Senate Committee on Enrolment Management and Planning

i) ?

Paper S.01-26 - Undergraduate Admission Targets for 2001/02

Senate was advised of problems caused by rounding factors to some of numbers

in the motion. Corrected numbers were reported and appear in the motion

below.

Motion #1

Moved by J

Pierce, seconded by I

Osborne

"that Senate approve and recommend approval to the Board of

Governors the following undergraduate admission targets for each

basis-of-admission group and for each semester in 2001/02, and that

SCEMP be delegated authority to make adjustments based on

S.M. 5 March 2001

Page 9

changes to the overall provincial enrolment targets for SFU and

based on actual enrolment experience in 2001-2 and 2001-3

Admission Targets For New Students

2001-2 ?

2001-3 ?

2002-1 ?

Total

B.C. GRXII

1,922

125

2,127

B.C. College

459

700

606

1,765

"Other"

172

678

390

1,240

Total Intake

711

3,300

1,121

5,132"

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION #1 CARRIED

Motion #2

Moved by J

Pierce, seconded by J

Osborne

"that Senate approve and recommend approval to the Board of

Governors the undergraduate admission targets to each Faculty as

indicated in the attached table, and that SCEMP be delegated

authority to make adjustments based on changes to the overall

provincial enrolment targets for SFU and based on actual enrolment

experience in 2001-2 and 2001-3"

Question was called, and a vote taken. ?

MOTION #2 CARRIED

Other Business

There was no other business.

Information

The date of the next regularly scheduled meeting of Senate is Monday, April 2,

2001.

Open Session ended at 9:05 pm and Senate moved directly into Closed Session.

Alison Watt

Director, University Secretariat