suggestion was accepted as a friendly amendment.
friendly amendment.

24€

led-

,4e-e

/ebo.23

DRAFT UNTIL APPROVED BY SENATE

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

Monday, October 6, 2003 at 7:00 pm in Room 3210 WMC

Open Session

Present: ?

Stevenson, Michael

President and Chair of Senate

Absent:

da Silva, Gisele

Apaak, Clement

Dickinson, John

Atkins, Stella

Dunsterville, Valerie

Beynon, Peter

Grimmett, Peter

Brennand, Tracy

Gupta, Kamal

Budd, James

Heaney, John

Clayman, Bruce

Higgins, Anne

Copeland, Lynn

Horvath, Adam

D'Auria, John

Jones, Colin

Driver, Jon

Lemay, Joanna

Fizzell, Maureen

Love, Ernie

Fung, Edward

Mauser, Gary

Giacomantonio, Chris

McArthur, James

Gill, Alison

McFetridge, Paul

Gordon, Robert

Rozell, Sara

Gregory, Titus

Smith, Don

Haunerland, Norbert

Thandi, Ranbir

Hira, Andy

Van Aalst, Jan

Honda, Barry

Wessel, Sylvia

Kaila, Pam

Wong, Milton

Kalanj, Tiffany

Krane, Bill

In attendance:

Lewis, Brian

Brandhorst, Bruce

Naef, Barbara

Finegood, Diane

Percival, Paul

Hayes, Michael

Peters, Joseph

Hibbitts, Pat

Pierce, John

Kenny, Michael

Plischke, Michael

MacLean, David

Sears, Camilla

Scott, Jamie

Shaker, Paul

Weinberg, Hal

Tombe, Trevor

Whittlesea, Bruce

Vaisey, Jacques

Wong, Ken

Waterhouse, John

Weeks, Dan

Wong, Josephine

Woodbury, Rob

Yerbuiy, Cohn

Yoo, Rick

Heath, Ron, Dean of Student Services/Registrar

Watt, Alison, Director, University Secretariat

Grant, Bobbie, Recording Secretary

S.M. 6 Oct 2003

Page

On behalf of Senate, the Chair welcomed the following newly elected Senators to their

first meeting: Tracy Brermand and Trevor Tombe.

Approval of the Agenda

The Agenda was approved as distributed.

Approval of the Minutes of the O

en Session of September

15,

2003

The Minutes of the September meeting were not available and their approval would be

carried over to the next meeting of Senate.

Business Arising from the Minutes

Referring to his response at the last meeting in Question Period with respect to the

membership of the Olympic Legacy Committee, the Associate Vice President Academic

reported to Senate that he had omitted some of the members and he would like to correct

the information for the record. Senate was advised that the Committee would be chaired

by the Associate Vice President Academic with the following membership: Warren Gill,

A/Vice President University Relations, Cathy Daminato, Vice President Advancement,

Michael Murdock representing the Department of Finance, Lee Gavel, Director of

Campus Planning and Development, Ron Heath, Dean of Student Services/Registrar,

Wilf Wedmann, Director of Recreation and Athletics, David MacLean, Director of IHRE,

David Cox, representing the Faculty of Arts, and Wade Parkhouse representing the

Faculty of Applied Sciences. Laurie Summers, the Director of Academic Planning will

function as Secretary, and there will be three student representatives-yet to be named - a

student in Athletics, a student in Recreation, and a Student Senator.

Report of the Chair

The Chair reported that The University Presidents' Council recently had held its annual

general meeting in which four items were discussed. The first item dealt with TUPC's

budget submission which was still confidential, but since the Chair previously had

described to Senate the general strategy, he explained that TUPC argues that the

impending cuts to the operating grants of universities should be cancelled as it was

impossible for universities, and the Government itself, to meet current commitments.

TUPC also argues that previous reductions to the operating grants need to be restored so

that the gaps created by those cuts can be rectified; that support for the BC Knowledge

Development Fund which is crucial to applications from universities to Federal granting

agencies be supported at the Provincial level; that support in aid of research and the

facilitation of research through university/industry liaison offices not be withdrawn; and

without additional support to alleviate current problems regarding physical infrastructure

and space enrolment growth cannot continue.

The second item on the TUPC agenda dealt with the response of the universities with

respect to the Government's Mandates Paper which was discussed at the last Senate

meeting. TUPC urges that the Government takes into consideration the input it requested

S.M. 6 Oct 2003

Page

and hopes the responses received will have influence on the process the Government

pursues. The other two items on the agenda were available in hard copy pamphlets or on

the TUPC web site. The one document entitled "Will I Get In" deals with the pressures

on accessibility in BC and the serious problems concerning the universities in terms of

accommodating student demand. The other document "Innovation Equation" deals with

research issues, some of which are mentioned in the budget submission. In general,

TUPC has come forward with some very clear positions on Government policy and

Government budgeting but it will remain a difficult cycle of increased lobbying,

advocacy, and pressure on the Government to respond to these issues.

5. ?

Question Period

The following question submitted by C. Giacomantonio was read into the Minutes.

Question

In Dr. Warren Gill's email response to the CAUT report on the Dr. David Noble affair,

Dr. Gill states: "The report of the Academic Freedom and Tenure Committee is

fundamentally flawed. Central to its claims is a view of academic freedom that is

divorced from the employment relationship. We do not subscribe to this view".

Would Dr. Gill, or any other university administration representative, be willing to

outline and/or define the view of academic freedom that the university administration

does subscribe to?

Response

As Senator Giacomantonio points out, Dr. Gill's comment was specific to the context of a

report by the CAUT's Academic Freedom and Tenure Committee investigating a

complaint by a tenured professor at another Canadian university who failed to receive a

tenured appointment at SFU. Within this context, Dr. Gill goes on to take exception with

the Committee's assertion that "A university can violate academic freedom by failing to

make an offer of employment to an applicant." If an unsuccessful candidate in any

academic search can claim a breech of academic freedom simply because they were

unsuccessful in gaining the desired appointment, the meaning of academic freedom is in

danger and the liberty and integrity of search procedures and decisions made in such a

process becomes potentially chaotic.

No further comments on the specifics of the appointment process in question will be

made because the matter is before the Courts. However, the Chair wished to be

absolutely clear that not all aspects of academic freedom are embedded in the

employment relationship. On the specific question of how the university administration

defines academic freedom at SFU, Senators were referred to Section 1.2 of the

Framework Agreement between the University and the Faculty Association. Section 1.2

I ?

of the Agreement contains a very detailed statement and definition which was reached

through negotiation and which is fully supported by the University. The Chair indicated

S.M. 6 Oct 2003

Page

that Section 1.2 will be appended to the Minutes for greater precision in terms of the

historical record.

In response to a question from Senator Apaak about the rumoured closure of the

Cashier's Office and the front service counter of the Registrar's Office, Senate was

informed that the Cashier's Office was planned to close on or about December

10th

but

there were no plans to close the front service counter of the Registrar's Office. The

functions of the Cashier's Office would be merged with the front counter functions of the

Registrar's Office, and the service counter will continue to be open from 9 am to 7:30 pm

four days a week and until 4:30 pm on Fridays. The reason for the merger was in part

due to the implementation of the new student record system but mainly was done to

improve service to students to provide them with 'one stop shopping'.

Reports of Committees

A) ?

Senate Committee on Agenda and Rules

Paper S.03-84 - Motion from Senator Giacomantonio

Moved by C. Giacomantonio, seconded by C. Sears

"Whereas Senate recognized that provincial and federal government

underfunding to post-secondary education in Canada is contributing to

decreasing quality and accessibility to post-secondary education in

Canada; and

Whereas it is desirable that provincial and federal government increase

funding to post-secondary education immediately; therefore, be it resolved

That Senate denounces the chronic provincial and federal government

underfunding of post-secondary education in Canada, and calls on all

levels of government to make funding of post-secondary education a

priority immediately"

Senate was informed that the motion had originated with the Student Senator caucus and

was an attempt to address the problem of underfunding to post-secondary education.

Given the comments at the last Senate meeting and from discussions following that

meeting, students felt that most Senators agreed that funding from the Provincial

Government was lower than it should be. The goal of bringing forth the motion was to

seek Senate's support, and Senators were invited to make amendments if they felt that the

wording was inappropriate or offer alternative suggestions if they felt there was a better

way to address the issue.

Reference was made to the third paragraph and opinion was expressed that the use of the

word 'denounces' was simply too strong. It was suggested that the motion would retain

S.M. 6 Oct 2003

Page 5

its meaning if the words "denounces the chronic provincial and federal government

underfunding of post-secondary education in Canada, and" were deleted.

The

suggestion was accepted as a friendly amendment.

Concern was also expressed about the reference to the activities of the Federal

Government. It was pointed out that the Federal Government has made a very significant

commitment over the past several years to increase Canada's role in research and

development, particularly at universities, and has worked hard to put much more money

into post-secondary education by funding research chairs and research scholarships for

graduate students.

Amendment moved by B. Krane, seconded by C. Apaak

"that the words 'and federal' be deleted from the first and second

paragraphs"

Given the comments about the Federal Government's current support of post-secondary

education, opinion was expressed that it made sense to delete the reference from the first

paragraph. However, it was suggested that there was no reason to delete the reference

from the third paragraph as it would be desirable for the Federal Government to increase

•

funding and to continue to do so. The mover and seconder of the amendment agreed to

withdraw the deletion of the reference to the federal government from the second

paragraph. It was pointed out that the reference to 'all levels of gevernment' could be

interpreted to include local municipal governments and a suggestion to change "all

levels" to "appropriate levels" was accepted as a

friendly amendment to the

amendment.

As a result of the changes, the motion to amend was as follows:

"that the words 'and federal' be deleted from the first paragraph and the

phrase 'all levels of government' be changed to 'appropriate levels of

government'

Question was called, and a vote taken.

AMENDMENT CARRIED

It was noted that the reference to Canada in the first paragraph needed to be changed to

BC.

Main motion, as amended, now read

"Whereas Senate recognizes that provincial government underfunding to

post-secondary education in BC is contributing to decreasing quality and

I ?

accessibility to post-secondary education in BC; and

Whereas it is desirable that provincial and federal government increase

funding to post-secondary education immediately; therefore, be it resolved

S.M. 6 Oct 2003

Page 6

That Senate calls on appropriate levels of government to make funding of

post-secondary education a priority immediately"

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED

ii) ?

Paper S

.03-85 -

Motion from Senator Giacomantonio

Moved by C. Giacomantonio, seconded by E. Fung

"that Senate recommend to the Board of Governors that the income from

the 2% penalty charged on non-payment of tuition and student fees

resulting from the tuition fee boycott, for the Fall 2003 semester, be put

directly into the University's bursaries funds"

Senate was advised that the motion had originated with the Student Senator caucus

following discussions about the tuition boycott at the last Senate meeting. Students felt

that since the money collected from the penalties would not have been money normally

received by the University, putting the funds into bursaries would benefit students who

really need the money. It was hoped that Senators would support the motion regardless

of their feelings about the boycott.

It was pointed out that any time students fail to pay fees on time there was a cost to the

University because the money which likely had been considered and accounted for was

not there to spend. It was also noted that it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to

identify students who did not pay their fees because of the boycott from those who did

not pay their fees for other reasons.

It was suggested that individual students need not be identified, merely the extra sum of

money received by the University as a result of the boycott needed to be determined.

Opinion was expressed that this could likely be done by comparing the difference

between tuition income from penalties last year to that of this year. However, it was

pointed out that other factors had to be considered in the determination, such as the

impact of increased fees and enrolment growth in each year.

Discussion ensued with respect to feasibility of calculating the amount of increased

revenue and putting that amount into bursaries rather than into general operating funds.

As a result of the discussion, the suggestion that some reasonable amount attributable to

the tuition fee boycott could be estimated and transferred to bursaries was accepted as a

friendly amendment.

Opinion was expressed that there was significant benefit to students and the University in

supporting this motion, which raised the profile of the tuition fee issue and benefited

students at little cost to the University.

S.M. 6 Oct 2003

Page 7

The motion as amended was read as follows:

"that Senate recommends to the Board of Governors that the income from

the 2% penalty charged on non-payment of tuition and student fees

estimated to result from the tuition fee boycott for the Fall 2003 semester

be put directly into the University's bursaries funds"

Question was called, and a vote taken. ?

MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED

(19-17)

iii) ?

Paper S.03-86 - Bond Funds Allocation Policy (For Information)

P. Hibbitts, Vice-President Finance and Administration was in attendance in order to

respond to questions.

Questions were raised about the checks and balances of the process, the reporting

structure, and the openness of information. With respect to checks and balances, Senate

was advised that any project coming before the committee had to be supported by a Vice-

President and the normal procedure would be for the Vice President Finance and

• Administration and the President to sign off each project before they go to the Board of

Governors. It was pointed out that the University had undergone a vigorous and

scrupulous investigation by the rating agencies with respect to the financial management

and policies of the institution and had received the lowest interest rate of any university

in Canada. With respect to openness, the bond allocations will become part of the annual

financial report received by Senate each year. In addition, the general prospectus for the

bond was a public document and was available.

Following discussion, the policy was received by Senate.

Research Ethics Board

i) ?

Paper S.03-87 - Annual Re

ort (For Information)

B. Whittlesea, Chair of the Research Ethics Board, and H. Weinberg, Director of the

Office of Research Ethics were in attendance in order to respond to questions.

Senate received the Annual Report of the Research Ethics Board for information.

Senate Committee on University Priorities

i) ?

Paper S.03-88 - External Review - Department of Sociolog

and Anthropology

S.M. 6 Oct 2003

Page

Moved by J. Waterhouse, seconded by B. Clayman

"that Senate concur with the recommendations from the Senate Committee

on University Priorities concerning the advice to the Department of

Sociology and Anthropology on priority items resulting from the external

review as outlined in S.03-88"

M. Kenny, Department of Sociology and Anthropology was in attendance in order to

respond to questions.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

ii)

Paper S.03-89 - Final Progress Re

ort - Gerontology Program and Research

Centre (For Information)

Senate received the final progress report from the Gerontology Program and Research

Centre and received information that the Gerontology Program and Research Centre had

successfully fulfilled the recommendations put forward by SCUP as a result of the May

2000 external review report.

iii)

Paper S.03-90 - Proposal for a Faculty of Health Sciences

Moved by J. Waterhouse, seconded by J. Pierce

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

the establishment of a Faculty of Health Sciences at Simon Fraser

University effective September 1, 2004 as outlined in S.03-90"

The following members of the Institute for Health Research and Education were in

attendance in order to respond to questions: B. Brandhorst, M. Hayes, D. Finegood, D.

MacLean, and J. Scott.

Discussion began with a brief introduction of the paper, and the following points are a

summary of the lengthy discussion.

• One of the most significant public policy issues in Canada today is that of the funding

and delivery of health services, with post-secondary health education and research

receiving considerable funding. The proposal before Senate is an attempt to identify a

unique role for SFU in the health field. The vision and direction for the proposed

Faculty will distinguish SFU from other universities by focussing on programs

directed toward the integration of social and natural science research with population

outcomes, societal application and policy analysis, rather than clinical programs.

S.M. 6 Oct 2003

Page 9

Since the goals of the proposed Faculty are much the same as the goals of the existing

Institute, the transformation to a Faculty was questioned. Institutes can not offer

degree programming so having a Faculty would provide students, faculty, and the

University with new opportunities to offer graduate and undergraduate programs that

focus on health and public policy issues which will be attractive to students who are

seeking alternatives to the traditionally based clinical health programs. In addition, a

Faculty will enable SFU to more fully participate in the funded research opportunities

available in the health field. Having an academic home for a program provides a core

group of faculty members with whom students can interact on a consistent basis, a set

of regularly taught courses, and students and faculty can interact with each other as a

group rather than being spread across departments.

•

Reference was made to the proposed development of a M.Sc. Program in Public

Health and a question was raised at to why such a program would not be housed in

the Faculty of Science. It was pointed out that the new Faculty would encompass a

very broad, multidisciplinary focus on health and that vision would be reflected in its

programs. If the program were housed in the Faculty of Science, or any other

existing Faculty, the program would be much more narrowly defined and lose the

proposed interdisciplinary aspect.

• • Senate was advised that the School of Kinesiology has expressed concerns about the

creation of a new Faculty. There are concerns that students will be confused between

the new Faculty and the School which also has the study of-health as part of its

mission. They had questions about the structure, resources, and the demands that a

new Faculty would place on the University, and arguments that there was inadequate

rationale for the development of a new Faculty. Fears were expressed about the risk

of competing undergraduate programs in the health area, and finally, there was a

feeling that the existing IHRE could support the expansion of health studies at SFU

and that a new Faculty, while being a worthwhile goal, was unnecessary and

premature in its current form.

• In response to concerns about the lack of documentary evidence regarding support

from other departments interested in the health area, Senate was advised that

Gerontology, Sociology and Anthropology, Geography, Molecular Biology and

Biochemistry, and a good proportion of the members of the IHRE are supportive.

The Dean's Advisory Committee of the Faculty of Science met to discuss an earlier

version of the proposal and the vast majority were strongly in favour. The

Department of Psychology's support fell somewhere in the middle and was described

to Senate as somewhat skeptical but cautiously optimistic. The Steering Committee

for IHRE which is comprised of approximately 20 faculty members voted

unanimously in favour of the new Faculty and, with the exception of some concerns

from Kinesiology and Psychology, there was felt to be broadly based support within

the university.

S.M. 6 Oct 2003

Page 10

would

With respect

cost the

University

question of

money,

costs, it

but

was

agreed

was pointed

that over

out that

the long

there

term

would

a Facultybe

additional costs to establish the Faculty over and above the cost that has already been

budgeted for IHRE.

• Concern was expressed that there may be insufficient faculty members

interested/available to constitute a Faculty, and questions arose about the process for

faculty appointments, whole departments moving into a new Faculty, and expected

growth for the Faculty. D. Finegood and J. Scott provided Senate with their views of

the interest in participating in the new Faculty. Senate was also assured that any

movement of a department or program from an existing Faculty to the new Faculty

would have to go through the normal committee process and receive approval from

Senate and the Board of Governors. With respect to the joint appointment process,

departments would not lose half the teaching services of a faculty member as faculty

members be similarly cross-appointed from the new Faculty to existing

departments/schools

6- U

la44

t, ,

tii

/ti

,Z.4

_h441.-'f

4,alL,J

• In ordec to attract very good faculty members and populate the new Faculty, a clearly

identified Faculty home is necessary as it indicates a clear commitment on the part of

the institution to provide the infrastructure and support in that field of study.

• The proposal will move the university in a new strategic direction, an area that has

been identified as an important emerging field of study where funding is available,

and it is important for the university to make its move at this time. The motion

establishes a structure for future development and details of the organization should

be developed by the faculty members within the Faculty.

• A Faculty has to be more than just a research institute. It must have a significant

minimum body of faculty members and a significant number of instructional

programs, and the proposal is insufficient to support the creation of a new Faculty.

• It was pointed out that the next Board of Governors meeting was not scheduled until

the end of November. Since there were many concerns expressed about the

vagueness of the documentation and the lack of documentary evidence of support, as

well as email documentation that some Senators received and others did not, it was

suggested that it might be better to postpone the issue to the next meeting of Senate so

that everyone would have the same information and could come to the meeting better

informed and be prepared to vote on the motion.

Moved by C. Sears, seconded by R. Yoo

"that the motion be postponed to the November meeting of Senate"

S.M. 6 Oct 2003

Page 11

Senate was advised that the intent of the motion to postpone was to seek answers in as

much detail as possible to the questions and concerns raised and to provide documentary

evidence surrounding the support or opposition regarding the creation of a new Faculty.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION TO POSTPONE FAILED

Question was called on the main motion,

and a vote taken.

MAIN MOTION CARRIED

(27-

The Chair noted that it had been the kind of debate expected of a university Senate -

articulate and impassioned, and he thanked the resource people for attending. In view of

the concerns, especially in units whose mandates were very closely connected to the

mandate of the new Faculty, the Chair expressed his hope that the administrators

responsible for further action see that the sensitivities of these other interests are

addressed when bringing forward follow up motions to Senate and the Board.

Moved by P. Percival, seconded by T. Gregory

"that the Rules of Senate be suspended to allow the meeting to continue

past 10 p.m. in order to continue business"

Question was called, and a vote taken. ?

MOTION CARRIED

Suggestion was made that the remaining agenda items be considered out of sequence so

that all of the items requiring action were dealt with prior to the items on the agenda for

information. There were no objections to this suggestion.

D) ?

Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies

i) ?

Paper S.03-92 - DOAC recommendation to extend the Diverse Qualifications

Admission Policy for five years

Moved by B. Krane, seconded by D. Weeks

"that Senate approve the recommendations in the DQAC review of

extending the Diverse Qualifications Admission Policy by five years to

Fall Semester 2009 with a review to occur in 2008, as set forth in S.03-92"

K. Wong, Secretary to the Diverse Qualifications Adjudication Committee was in

attendance in order to respond to questions.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

S.M. 6 Oct 2003

Page 12

Other Business

i) ?

Paper S.03-10l - Research Ethics Board -Short-term appointments

Moved by P. Percival, seconded by B. Clayman

"that Senate approve a revision of the membership selection process for

the Research Ethics Board contained in Policy R20.01 as follows:

3.7.f In the event that a member of the Research Ethics Board is unable

to attend its meetings, the Senate Committee on Agenda and Rules

has the authority to appoint a temporary replacement to act in place

of the regular member until the regular member returns or until an

election can be held"

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

Senate Nominating Committee

Paper S.03-100 - Elections - Senate Committee Vacancies

Senate was advised that two nominations had been received resulting in the

election by acclamation of Adam Horvath to the Senator at-large position on the

Senate Committee on Continuing Studies for term of office to May 31, 2005, and

the election by acclamation of Sara Rozell to the Senator at-large position on the

Senate Library Committee/Library Penalties Appeal Committee for term of office

to May 31, 2005. No nominations were received for the Faculty member (Arts)

position on the Senate Committee on University Teaching and Learning and that

vacancy would be carried forward.

The following Senate papers were on the agenda for information, and Senators were

asked if there were any questions or comments on the information presented. There were

no questions. The items were dealt with as follows.

Paper S.03-91 - CFI and CRC Strategic Research Plan (For Information

Senate received the CFI and CRC Strategic Research Plan for information.

Paper S.03-93 - Undergraduate Curriculum Revisions - Faculty of Arts

Senate received information that the Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies, acting

under delegated authority, approved revisions to existing programs and courses in

Archaeology, Contemporary Arts, Criminology, and Geography.

S.M. 6 Oct 2003

Page 13

Paper S.03-94 - Undergraduate Curriculum Revisions - Facult

of Science

Senate received information that the Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies, acting

under delegated authority, approved revisions to existing programs and courses in

Biological Sciences, Earth Sciences, Statistics and Actuarial

Paper S.03-95 - Graduate Curriculum Revisions

Senate received information that the Senate Graduate Studies Committee, acting under

delegated authority approved that all graduate courses identified as comprehensive

exams, extended essays, projects or theses that formerly lacked any associated credit

hours, now have credit hours attached. SGSC also approved that in graduate programs

that will be collecting fees on a 'per credit' basis, students will register in all 'capstone'

requirements (theses, projects, exams, etc) for one semester. If subsequent semesters of

registration are required, students will register for a 'completion' course, and such

courses will have half the credit value of the capstone. This change requires the creation

of completion courses for all capstone requirements in all graduate programs that collect

fees on a per credit basis.

Paper S.03-96

Graduate Curriculum Revision - Faculty of App

lied Sciences

Senate received information that the Senate Graduate Studies Committee, acting under

•

delegated authority, approved changes to the Comprehensive Doctoral Examination

procedure in the School of Communication.

Paper S.03-97

Graduate Curriculum Revisions - Faculty of Business Administration

Senate received information that the Senate Graduate Studies Committee, acting under

delegated authority, approved revisions to existing courses in Business Administration.

Paper S.03-98 - Graduate Curriculum Revision - Faculty of Education

Senate received information that the Senate Graduate Studies Committee, acting under

delegated authority, approved changes to the requirements for the doctoral program in the

Psychology of Education.

Paper S.03-99 -Graduate Curriculum Revisions - Faculty of Science

Senate received information that that the Senate Graduate Studies Committee, acting

under delegated authority, approved two new courses in Earth Sciences.

The meeting adjourned at 10:05 pm. The agenda for the Closed Session was deferred to the next

meeting of Senate.

I ?

Alison Watt

Director, University Secretariat

To: MEMBERS OF SENATE

PLEASE ATTACH THIS PAGE TO THE OPEN MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER

0-01

2003 MEETING OF SENATE (REFERENCE ITEM 5, PAGE 3-4).

Extract from the Framework Agreement between SFU and SFUFA

1.2 Academic Freedom

Academic freedom is the freedom to examine, question, teach and

learn, and it involves the right to investigate, speculate and comment

without reference to prescribed doctrine, as well as the right to

criticize the University, Faculty Association and society at large.

Specifically, academic freedom ensures:

(a)

freedom in the conduct of teaching;

(b)

freedom in undertaking research and publishing or making public

the results thereof;

Academic staff shall not be hindered or impeded in any way by the

University or the Faculty Association from exercising their legal rights

as citizens, nor shall they suffer any penalties because of the exercise of

such rights. The parties agree that they will not infringe or abridge the

academic freedom of any member of the academic community.

Academic freedom carries with it the duty to use that freedom in a

manner consistent with the scholarly obligation to base research and

teaching on an honest search for knowledge.

As part of their teaching activities, teachers are entitled to conduct

frank discussion of potentially controversial matters which are related

to their subjects. This freedom of expression shall be based on mutual

respect for the opinions of other members of the academic community.

Librarians have a duty to promote and maintain intellectual freedom.

They have a responsibility to protect academic freedom and are

entitled to full protection of their own academic freedom. This includes

the right to express their academic judgement in the development of

the Library collection within the context of Article 1.3.2 and to make

the collection accessible to all users in accordance with the University

Library policies, even if the materials concerned are considered

controversial.

. ?

DRAFT UNTIL APPROVED BY SENATE

Minutes of a Meeting of the Senate of Simon Fraser University h

Monday, November 3, 2003 at

5:15

pm in Room 3210 WMC

Absent:

Atkins Stell ?

{ ?

/i )4;

Brennand, T '

Budd, James

Gordon, Robert

Gupta, Kama]

Honda, Barry

Jones, Cohn

Kaila, Pam

Kalanj, Tiffany

Mauser, Gary

McArthur, James

Naef, Barbara

Peters, Joseph

Scott, Jamie

Smith, Don

Wong, Milton

Woodbury, Rob

Yoo, Rick

Open Session

Present: ?

Stevenson, Michael

President and Chair of Senate

Apaak, Clement

Beynon, Peter

Cameron, Rob (representing B. Lewis)

Clayman, Bruce

da Silva, Gisele

D'Auria, John

Dickinson, John

Driver, Jon

Dunsterville, Valerie

Fairey, Elaine (representing L. Copeland)

Fizzell, Maureen

Fung, Edward

Giacomantonio, Chris

Gill, Alison

Gillies, Mary Ann (representing J. Pierce)

Gregory, Titus

• ?

Grimmett, Peter

Haunerland, Norbert

Heaney, John

Higgins, Anne

Hira, Andy

Horvath, Adam

Krane, Bill

Lemay, Joanne

Love, Ernie

McFetridge, Paul

Percival, Paul

Plischke, Michael

Rozell, Sara

Sears, Camilla

Shaker, Paul

Thandi, Ranbir

Tombe, Trevor

Van Aalst, Jan

Waterhouse, John

Weeks, Dan

Wessel, Sylvia

Wong, Josephine

Yerbury, Cohn

• ?

Heath, Ron, Dean of Student Services/Registrar

Watt, Alison, Director, University Secretariat

Grant, Bobbie, Recording Secretary

In attendance:

Brandhorst, Bruce

Brohman, John

French, Charlotte

Gupta, Arvind

Kenny, Michael

Smith, Michael

S.M. 3 November 2003

Page

Following the announcement by the Chair of the very sad and sudden death of. Senator

Jacques Vaisey, Senate held a minute of silence in his memory.

Approval of the Agenda

The Chair gave notice that in closed session there would be a motion to amend the

agenda in order to add an important item. The agenda for the open session was approved

as distributed.

Approval of the Minutes of the Open Session of September 15, 2003

The Minutes were approved as distributed.

Approval of the Minutes of the Open Session of October 6, 2003

Reference was made to the last sentence of the second paragraph on page 10 of the

minutes. The option of teaching buy-outs was also mentioned as a possibility and

suggestion was made that reference should be included in the minutes, and the last

sentence was amended as follows:

"With respect to the joint appointment process, departments would not lose half the

teaching services of a faculty member as faculty members

could

be similarly cross-

appointed from the new Faculty to existing departments/schools

or funds for teaching

buy-outs could be provided."

Following this amendment, the Minutes were approved.

Business Arising from the Minutes

There was no business arising from either set of Minutes.

Report of the Chair

i) ?

Paper S.03-102 - President's Agenda (For Information)

The President's Agenda which included a statement of objectives for the coming year

was received by Senate for information.

The Chair reported on meetings in Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal with the Association of

Universities and Colleges (AUCC) regarding issues related to the financing of

universities, and with various Government representatives with respect to federal policy

related to the funding of capacity and accessibility with respect to post-secondary

education across Canada. Meetings were also held in Vancouver with the House of

Commons Standing Committee on Finance respecting the need for a new federal-

provincial partnership to address questions of accessibility nationwide and in British

Columbia particularly. In addition, a meeting with the new Provincial Deputy Minister

of Advanced Education to discuss questions of financing and Government commitments

that were not adequately covered in the current budget letters had also taken place. The

Chair believed that issues of quality and accessibility in universities was now better

understood at both levels of Government and there appeared to be a more positive

attitude towards issues surrounding post-secondary education, especially at the federal

level. ?

S.M. 3 November 2003

Page 3

Question Period

There were no questions submitted.

Reports of Committees

A) ?

Senate Committee on University Priorities

Paper S.03-103 - External Review - Latin American Studies Program

Moved by J. Waterhouse, seconded by M.A. Gillies

"that Senate concur with the recommendations from the Senate Committee

on University Priorities concerning the advice to the Latin American

Studies Program on priority items resulting from the external review as

outlined in S.03-103"

J. Brohman, Director, Latin American Studies Program and M. Kenny, Department of

Sociology and Anthropology were in attendance in order to respond to questions.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

ii)

Paper S.03-104 - Graduate Diploma in Bioinformatics

Prior to the formal motion, Senate was advised that since the use of the numbers 601,

602, and 603 for the new courses in MBB would create difficulty with the cross listing of

in Computing Science, both departments had agreed to change these numbers to 611,

612, 613.

Moved by J. Waterhouse, seconded by P. Percival

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

the proposal for a Graduate Diploma in Bioinformatics as outlined in S.03-

104, including new courses MBB

505, 506,

611, 612, 613,

659,

669, 679"

B. Brandhorst and M. Smith, Department of Molecular Biology and Biochemistry, and A.

Gupta, School of Computing Science were in attendance in order to respond to questions.

A question was posed as to how much more work was required for a Master's degree and

why students would want the diploma versus a master's degree. Senate was advised that

the diploma was designed as part of the master's program but did not require a thesis and

would attract students who were already in the industry and wanted to come back for

updating and some additional advanced education.

•

A Senator asked how the new courses being introduced for this program would be offered

without the addition of new faculty. Senate was advised that since the diploma program

S.M. 3 November 2003

Page 4

was a subset of the existing Master's program, many of the new courses were. already

offered as special topics courses so that resources were already in place.

Question was called, and a vote taken. ?

MOTION CARRIED

iii) ?

Paper S.03-105 - Final Update Report External Review - Faculty of Business

Administration (For Information)

Senate received the final update report from the Faculty of Business Administration and

received information that the Faculty had successfully fulfilled the recommendations put

forward by SCUP in September 2001 as a result of the February 1999 external review

report.

B) ?

Senate Policy Committee on Scholarships. Awards and Bursaries

i) ?

Paper S.03-106 - Annual Report (For Information)

J. D'Auria, Senator and Chair of SPCSAB, and C. French, Director, Academic

Resources, Registrar's Office were in attendance in order to respond to questions.

It was noted that the value of the Open Scholarships was less than the cost of a credit

hour and inquiry was made as to when the value was decreased from an exact match.

Senate was advised that the dollar value of the Open Scholarship had started to decrease

in 2000/2001 in order to stay within the budget allocated for scholarships. A follow-up

question asked why it had been decided to adjust the value per credit hour rather than

adjust the GPA requirement which has been maintained at 3.70. Senate was advised that

although there was no set policy, the Committee tried to maintain a reasonable GPA and

tried to balance the funds between the different types of scholarships and bursaries so that

as many students as possible received something.

Reference was made to statistics on page 35 and inquiry was made with respect to the

balance remaining for graduate fellowship allocations in Business Administration.

Senate was advised that this particular table was produced in Fall of 2002 and was

intended to show the allocation to departments, not the total number of awards given.

Most departments award their graduate fellowships during the Spring but Business

Administration awards their fellowships in the Fall so the table reflected the difference in

the way graduate enrolment and award disbursement was done in different Faculties.

A question arose as to whether there was a minimum bursary amount for students in need

and reference was made to students who had applied for approximately $100041500 and

only received

$50.

Senate was advised that the needs assessment not only takes into

consideration what the student has requested, it also includes a reasonableness factor used

to make adjustments up or down and an expectation of a minimum contribution from the

student. Amounts allocated also depend on what the total assessed need is in any given

semester and what the budget allocation is in any given year. It was pointed out that

there was no difference between assessments for international and domestic students.

S.M. 3 November 2003

Page

. In response to a question as to how SFU compared to other universities in terms of

scholarships and bursaries, Senate was advised that in terms of Entrance Scholarships

SFU was competitive with UBC, slightly better than University of Victoria and the

University of Calgary, but slightly behind some of the schools in Ontario where, over the

past several years, there have been significant fee increases with a proportion of the

money directed to scholarships. However the $3000 value of the Entrance Scholarship at

SFU is better than the average range which is usually between $2000-$2500. The Open

Scholarship at SFU is one of the best supports for in-course students at any university in

Canada.

Senate Committee on Agenda and Rules

i) ?

Paper S.03-107 - Membership - Senate Committee on University Honours

Moved by J. Waterhouse, seconded by B. Clayman

"that the Chair of the Senate Policy Committee on Scholarships, Awards

and Bursaries be added as an

ex officio

member of SCUH with voting

privileges"

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

Senate Nominating Committee

i) ?

Paper S.03-108 - Elections - Senate Committee Vacancies

Senate was advised that two nominations had been received resulting in the election by

acclamation of Derrick Harder to the Undergraduate Student (at-large) position on the

Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies for term of office to May 31, 2004, and the

election by acclamation of Trevor Tombe to the Undergraduate Student (at-large)

position on the Senate Library Committee and the Library Penalties Appeal Committee

for term of office to May 31, 2005. No nominations were received for the outstanding

positions on the Senate Appeals Board, the Senate Committee on University Teaching,

and the Senate Committee on Continuing Studies and those vacancies would be carried

forward.

Other Business

There was no other business.

Information

The date of the next regularly scheduled meeting is Monday, December 1, 2003.

Open Session adjourned at

5:55

pm and Senate moved into Closed Session following a short

break.

• ?

Alison Watt

Director, University Secretariat

DRAFT UNTIL APPROVED BY SENATE

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

Monday, November 3, 2003 at 5:15 pm in Room 3210 WMC

Closed Session

Present: ?

Stevenson, Michael

President and Chair of Senate

Absent:

Atkins, Stella

Apaak, Clement

Brennand, Tracy

Beynon, Peter

Budd, James

Cameron, Rob (representing B. Lewis)

Gordon, Robert

Clayman, Bruce

Gupta, Kamal

da Silva, Gisele

Honda, Barry

D'Auria, John

Jones, Cohn

Dickinson, John

Kaila, Pam

Driver, Jon

Kalanj, Tiffany

Dunstervihle, Valerie

Mauser, Gary

Fairey, Elaine (representing L. Copeland)

McArthur, James

Fizzell, Maureen

Naef, Barbara

Fung, Edward

Peters, Joseph

Giacomantonio, Chris

Scott, Jamie

Gill, Alison

Smith, Don

Gilhies, Mary Ann (representing J. Pierce)

Wong, Milton

Gregory, Titus

Woodbury, Rob

Gnmmett, Peter

Yoo, Rick

Haunerland, Norbert

Heaney, John

Higgins, Anne

Hira, Andy

Horvath, Adam

Krane, Bill

Lemay, Joanne

Love, Ernie

McFetridge, Paul

Percival, Paul

Plischke, Michael

Rozell, Sara

Sears, Camilla

Shaker, Paul

Thandi, Ranbir

Tombe, Trevor

Van Aalst, Jan

Waterhouse, John

Weeks, Dan

Wessel, Sylvia

Wong, Josephine

Yerbury, Cohn

• ?

Heath, Ron, Dean of Student Services/Registrar

Watt, Alison, Director, University Secretariat

Grant, Bobbie, Recording Secretary

S.M. 3 November 2003

Page

Approval of the Agenda

Senate's attention was directed to the additional material - Senate Paper S.C.03-31 -

which had been distributed to Senators.

Moved by J. Waterhouse, seconded by P. Grimmett

"that the Rules of Senate be suspended to allow consideration of the

motion to award Honorary Degrees as set out in S.C.03-31, to be added

under Item 6 - Other Business"

There was no objection to a suggestion to add the paper as the missing Item

of the

agenda.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

The Agenda was approved accordingly.

Approval of the Minutes of the Closed Session of September

15,

2003

The Minutes were approved as distributed.

Report of the Chair

There was no report from the Chair.

Reports of Faculties with regard to Graduating Students and Others who have met

requirements for Certificates and Diplomas

i) ?

Paper S.C.03-30 —Adjustments - Graduands and others who have met

requirements for Certificates and Diplomas (Summer 2003-2 Candidates)

Moved by P. Percival, seconded by A. Horvath

"that Senate approve changes and the award of the appropriate degrees,

certificates, and diplomas as recommended by the Faculty of Applied

Sciences, the Faculty of Arts, the Faculty of Business Administration, the

Faculty of Education, and the Faculty of Science"

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

Senate Committee on University Honours

i) ?

Paper S.C.03-3 I - Honorar

Degrees

Moved by J. Waterhouse, seconded by C. Apaak

S.M. 3 November 2003

Page 3

"that Senate approve the award of the degree Doctor of Laws,

honoris

causa,

on His Holiness the Dalai Lama, past recipient of the Nobel Prize for

Peace, and

on Jimmy Carter, former President of the United States of America, past

recipient of the Nobel Prize for Peace,

and that Senate reaffirm the award of the degree Doctor of Laws,

honoris

causa, on Vaclav Havel.

The degrees would be awarded in April 2004 at the special ceremony to be

held in Christ Church Cathedral, Vancouver"

The Chair briefly provided background information to Senate by explaining that

originally SFU had been approached to join UBC in a city-wide ceremony honoring the

Dalai Lama. At the time it was suggested that in a joint ceremony at Christ Church

Cathedral, SFU would award an honorary degree to Archbishop Desmond Tutu and UBC

would award an honorary degree to the Dalai Lama. A motion with respect to Desmond

Tutu was brought forward and duly approved by Senate. Subsequently, plans have

changed to include Vaclav Havel and Jimmy Carter and UBC now wishes to have

separate ceremonies with the UBC ceremony taking place at the Chan Centre. Senators

were advised that the ceremonies would take place on separate days prior to the dialogue

that will take place at the Wosk Centre following SFU's ceremony. It was noted that this

was a special ceremony completely separate from the June/October Convocations and the

current call for honorary degree nominations.

MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

Question was called, and a vote taken.

Other Business

There was no other business.

The Meeting adjourned at

6:05

pm.

Alison Watt

Director, University Secretariat