. ?
DRAFT UNTIL APPROVED BY SENATE
Minutes of a Meeting of the Senate of Simon Fraser University held on
?
Monday, January 5, 2004 at 7:00 pm in Room 3210 WMC
Open Session
Present: ?
Stevenson, Michael
President and Chair of Senate
Absent:
Atkins, Stella
Apaak, Clement
Brennand, Tracy
Beynon, Peter
Budd, James
Dunsterville, Valerie
Clayman, Bruce
Fizzell, Maureen
Collinge, Joan (representing C. Yerbury)
Gill, Alison
Copeland, Lynn
Gordon, Robert
da Silva, Gisele
Grimmett, Peter
D'Auria, John
Higgins, Anne
Dickinson, John
Krane, Bill
Driver, Jon
Lemay, Joanne
Fung, Edward
Mauser, Gary
Giacomantonio, Chris
McArthur, James
Gregory, Titus
Naef, Barbara
Gupta, Kamal
Thandi, Ranbir
Haunerland, Norbert
Tombe, Trevor
Heaney, John
Van Aalst, Jan
.
?
Hira, Andy
Wessel, Sylvia
Honda, Barry
Wong, Josephine
Horvath, Adam
Wong, Milton
Kaila, Pam
Woodbury, Rob
Kalanj, Tiffany
Yoo, Rick
Lewis, Brian
Love, Ernie
McFetridge, Paul
Percival, Paul
In attendance:
Peters, Joseph
Bell, KC
Pierce, John
Blackman, Roger
Plischke, Michael
Denham, Judy
Rozell, Sara
Krebs, Dennis
Sears, Camilla
Woodham, Amanda
Scott, Jamie
Shaker, Paul
Smith, Don
Waterhouse, John
Weeks, Dan
Heath, Nick, Acting Registrar
Watt, Alison, Director, University Secretariat
Grant, Bobbie, Recording Secretary
S.M. 5 January 2004
Page
1.
Approval of the Agenda
The Agenda was approved as distributed.
2.
Approval of the Minutes of the Open Session of December
1, 2003
The Minutes were approved as distributed.
3.
Business Arising from the Minutes
There was no business arising from the Minutes.
4.
Report of the Chair
Referring to the weather advisory regarding the possibility of a significant snowfall,
Senate was advised that information about closure of the University would be
distributed through the media and be announced on the University's web site and
on the road conditions phone line.
Senate was advised that the Government had made changes to the University Act,
the majority of which reflected minor legal housekeeping issues. However, some
of the changes affected the membership of the Senate and the Board of Governors.
Order-In-Council appointments on Senate have been eliminated. Current OIC
appointments will continue until the expiry of their term but will not be replaced so
Senate will gradually lose four members. In addition, it will no longer be a
'requirement for faculty and students to be 'full-time' in order to be elected to
Senate and the Board of Governors, and Board members no longer need to be
resident in British Columbia. There was also a slight change in wording with
respect to the authorization required to run a deficit.
5.
question Period
No Pre-requisite checks following submission of final grades for Fall
2003
semester.
It was noted that the new student information system was not capable of
automatically dropping students who have an incomplete prerequisite for a course
for which they have enrolled before the release of grades for the prerequisite
course, and it was now the student's responsibility to drop the course voluntarily if
he/she does not meet prerequisite requirements. Recent experience in some
departments has indicated that students are not dropping and N. Haunerland
questioned what was being done to mitigate this problem.
Senate was advised that this issue was a known gap in the functionality of the new
system that had been identified early, but that was not easily fixed because
prerequisite checking was an on-line process that existed only at the time the
enrolment request was made. There were plans to provide departments with
reports identifying students in this situation early in the semester but the reports
were not yet available. Various suggestions were made about how to manage this
S.M. 5 January 2004
Page 3
. situation including getting instructors to make announcements or sending a
university-wide email about not continuing in courses if the students hadn't
satisfactorily completed prerequisites.
The Chair reported that this issue had been discussed at length by Chairs and
Directors and reported that it appeared to be a matter of great concern particularly
within the Faculty of Science. As a result of those discussions, the Chair reiterated
his understanding that reports identifying some of the problems would be available
to departments. However, because of the various types of prerequisite structures,
these reports would not identify all cases. It should be ascertained when that report
would be available and information should be conveyed to instructors advising
them that there is this problem in the new system and there may be students in
their course that have not fulfilled the prerequisites. It was also the Chair's
understanding that specialists attached to the SIMS team would be in contact with
individual departments where this was a problem to review the extent of the
problem, the nature of the special complicating factors that wouldn't be caught by
the basic reports, and then a general report on what should be done would be
prepared.
The Chair felt it was important that the basic reports be made available to
instructors quickly and requested the Vice President Academic to convey the
.
?
?
discussion and concerns of Senate to the Chief Information Officer. The Chair also
?
indicated that this issue would be reported back to Senate.
4. ?
Reports of Committees
A)
?
Undergraduate Curriculum Implementation Task Force
i)
?
?
Paper S.04-1 - Discussion Paper on the Implementation of University-wide
?
Writing, Quantitative, and Breadth Requirements
The following members of the Committee were in attendance in order to respond
to questions: Dennis Krebs (Chair), Roger Blackman, and KC Bell.
In order to permit wide-ranging discussion, the chair suggested that Senate move
into a Committee of the Whole
Moved by P. Percival, seconded by D. Smith
"that Senate move into Committee of the Whole"
Question was called, and a vote taken.
?
MOTION CARRIED
• ?
Discussion began with an overview of the process by the Chair of the Task Force.
Senate was advised that the heart of the recommendations passed by Senate in
S.M. 5 January 2004
Page 4
principle were unchanged. However, the exact ways in which to achieve those
goals have slightly changed. The Implementation Task Force feels strongly that
students need to be prepared to take writing and quantitative courses and that
quantitative courses ought to be defined broadly to include courses that were non-
mathematical in nature. However, the earlier committee suggested that students be
admitted to SFU in the current way and then students who did not receive high
grades in English 12
or in the Math 11 or
12
would then have to take an English or
a Math proficiency test as a prerequisite for entering the university level writing or
quantitative course. The present committee felt that students ought to be screened
prior to admission to identify those students who had not made satisfactory
progress in English and recommends that all students applying to Simon Fraser,
except those who obtain excellent grades in English
12
(or equivalent), be required
to take a language proficiency test. The Learning Proficiency Index (LPI) has been
identified as the most appropriate test, particularly since it is used by both UBC and
UVic and most students already take it. With respect to the assessment of
quantitative abilities, the Implementation Committee recommends that instructors
of first year Q courses be encouraged to develop tests that assess the abilities
necessary for their course and require their students to take those tests prior to or at
the first course session. The main reason for the deviation from the previous
committee's recommendation in this regard pertains to the special kind of
quantitative courses envisioned for students in the Humanities. In addition, the
implementation Task Force recommends that only students who can be helped
with writing or math be admitted and, in conjunction with this recommendation, is
the creation of a Student Learning Centre and a foundational writing course.
The following points are a summary of the lengthy discussion.
• Reference was made to page 8 of the report with regard to the W course
requirements. The original recommendation, which was approved in principle
by Senate, required six credits of courses that fostered writing ability. The
present recommendation specifies that at least one of the courses should be an
upper division course. Opinion was expressed that this was a significant
change from the original recommendation. In response, it was explained that
the committee had two competing lines of thought. On one hand, it was felt
that completing the writing requirement at the start of the student's program
would benefit the student the most; on the other hand, it was felt that it would
be more beneficial if the writing experience was done in conjunction with their
major. Since two courses were required, the committee felt it was a reasonable
solution to require one lower division and one upper division course.
• While in agreement that entry requirements with respect to quantitative and
writing ability for university admission were essential for all disciplines, opinion
was expressed that once students were admitted they should be allowed to
chose their own breadth courses. It was pointed out that different Faculties have
S.M. 5 January 2004
Page 5
. different needs and what may be valuable in some Faculties may not be
beneficial in others and having inflexible, overall requirements for all students
in all faculties was believed to be a major flaw in the recommendations.
• Disappointment was expressed about recommendation three concerning
quantitative proficiency which recommends that instructors be encouraged to
develop tests to test specific knowledge. Opinion was expressed that this
proposal went against the spirit of the original recommendation which
suggested that SFU adopt minimum standards in three areas - writing,
quantitative and breadth so that the University can guarantee that SFU students
meet certain minimum standards, and encouraging faculty to develop
quantitative proficiency tests will not guarantee minimum standards. Opinion
was expressed that the original concept seems to have been abandoned and it
was suggested that the committee reconsider this recommendation.
• Concern was expressed with respect to recommendation six which implied that
the University would be responsible for providing remedial courses for students
admitted under this category and clarification was sought as to why this
recommendation was necessary in light of recommendation one which would
require students to reach a certain level of proficiency prior to admission.
Recommendation six was intended to help students who are admissible but
. have been identified as having marginal writing skills and the foundation course
would ease their transition into the required writing course. Although course
instructors would give some remedial assistance, the design of the course would
teach students to write at a university level. It was the Committee's belief that
the University should not be admitting students who require more remedial
work than the University could provide and the University should not be in the
business of providing a lot of remedial assistance.
• Referring to the recommendation concerning post-admission tests of
quantitative proficiency, it was suggested that the tests should be pre-admission
and that the arguments for having post-admission tests were unconvincing. It
was also suggested that if standardized tests were not acceptable for Humanities
then Humanities students could be exempt from the tests or tested in another
way rather than making a change which affects everyone else.
• The level of writing skills of international students was raised as an issue by
several Senators and it was suggested that more attention should be paid to this
matter. It was suggested that international students be offered the option of an
in-depth linguistic and cultural orientation preparation, such as the English
Bridge Program, rather than simply requiring a particular level in an English
proficiency test.
S.M. 5 January 2004
Page 6
• Suggestion was made that the University should have a regular writing centre
that was discipline specific and also geared toward graduate students.
• Reference was made to the Centre for Writing Intensive Learning. It was
suggested that expectations in terms of faculty requirements to create writing
intensive courses were onerous and may be affecting the number of courses that
could be offered under this initiative.
• Concern was expressed that there was no mention of additional TA support in
the documentation, especially in relation to writing intensive courses. It was
noted that the Committee has recommended that TAs be given additional
support and that recommendation has already been implemented. It was also
pointed out that the possibility of providing training to TAs to give writing
intensive courses, and the development of graduate courses for teaching
assistants in writing within their discipline were also being considered.
• Concern was expressed that the recommendations could be implemented
without the creation of the student learning centre and it was suggested that one
should not happen without the other. It was acknowledged that having both
occur concurrently would significantly increase the costs and it was hoped that
the extra funding needed would be sought and not be drawn from the current
operating budget. Senate was advised that meetings had already taken place
with the Vice President Advancement about raising funds for a student learning
centre. Suggestion was made that consideration be given to how a student
learning centre located on campus would be able to serve non-traditional
students and students not taking courses at the Burnaby location.
• It was suggested that the proposed Task Force should have student
representation.
• Opinion was expressed that there appeared to be an imbalance between
Faculties as to modifications. Reference was made to the change concerning
the requirements for the quantitative proficiency test as a result of objections
raised by the Humanities but when concerns were expressed by the Faculty of
Science with regard to the breadth requirements it was pointed out that no
changes were possible because they were part of what Senate had approved. It
was suggested that the Task Force should be prepared to revisit this issue and
consider some flexibility within the requirements.
In response to an inquiry as to whether it was possible to make changes to the
recommendations, Senate was advised that consultations were ongoing and that it
was the intent of the Task Force to meet with all of the Faculty Curriculum
Committees, have open forums, and meet with as many departments and programs
as possible over the next couple of months. Recommendations would be revised in
S.M. 5 January
2004
I
?
Page
• light of these consultations and a revised document would then be distributed to
the University community and to Senate to allow comment on the revised
recommendations. Following that final consultation, the recommendations would
come back to Senate for approval.
Moved by T. Gregory, seconded by C. Sears
"that Senate move out of Committee of the Whole"
Question was called, and a vote taken.
?
MOTION CARRIED
On behalf of Senate, the Chair thanked members of the Committee for their
participation at Senate and for their ongoing work on this project.
B) ?
Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies
i)
Paper
S.04-2 -
Curriculum Revisions - Faculty of Applied Sciences
Moved by
J.
Dickinson, seconded by B. Lewis
"that Senate approve the change to Grade 11 Admission
. ?
Requirements in Kinesiology for British Columbia and Yukon
applicants, as set forth in
S.04-2,
effective
2004-3"
Question was called, and a vote taken.
?
MOTION CARRIED
Senate received information that the Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies,
acting under delegated authority, deleted one course, approved four new courses,
and approved minor revisions to existing courses and programs in Kinesiology and
Communication.
ii)
Paper S.04-3 -
Curriculum Revisions - Faculty of Education
Senate received information that the Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies,
approved four new courses and minor revisions to existing courses and programs in
the Faculty of Education.
iii)
Paper
S.04-4 -
Curriculum Revisions - Faculty of Science
Senate received information that the Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies,
acting under delegated authority, approved six new courses and minor revisions to
existing courses and programs in Biological Sciences, Mathematics, Molecular
Biology and Biochemistry, Physics, Statistics/Actuarial Science.
S.M.
5 January
2004
Page
C) ?
Senate Committee on Continuing Studies
?
.
i)
Paper S.04-5 -
Criteria and Guidelines for the Establishment of Certificates
for Successful Completion of Non-credit Courses
Moved by
J.
Coll inge, seconded by
J.
Waterhouse
"that Senate approve the revisions to the Criteria and Guidelines for
the Establishment of Certificates and Diplomas for Successful
Completion of Programs of Non-Credit courses as set forth in
S.04-5"
Question was called, and a vote taken.
?
MOTION CARRIED
ii)
Paper S.04-6 -
Annual Report 2001/2002
and 2002/2003
(For Information)
The Annual Report of Senate Committee on Continuing Studies for the years
2001/2002 and 2002/2003
was received by Senate for information.
iii)
Paper
S.04-7 -
Report - Non-Credit Certificate for the Object Technology
Program (For Information)
J. Denham and A. Woodham, Program Directors for Applied Science Programs in
Continuing Studies were in attendance in order to respond to questions.
Senate received a report on the Non-Credit Certificate for the Object Technology
Program for information. This report was submitted in compliance to Senate's
request that a report on the academic and financial aspects of the program be
provided to Senate following three years of operation.
D) ?
Senate Graduate Studies Committee
i)
Paper S.04-8 -
Curriculum Revisions - Faculty of Applied Sciences
Senate received information that the Senate Graduate Studies Committee, acting
under delegated authority, approved four new courses and minor revisions to
existing courses and programs in Computing Science, Kinesiology, and Resource
and Environmental Management.
ii)
Paper
S.04-9 -
Curriculum Revisions - Faculty of Arts
Senate received information that the Senate Graduate Studies Committee, acting
under delegated authority, approved four new courses and minor revisions to
existing courses and programs in Criminology, Economics, and Psychology.
S.M. 5 January
2004
I
?
Page 9
iii)
?
Paper
S.04-10 -
Curriculum Revisions - Faculty of Science
Senate received information that the Senate Graduate Studies Committee, acting
under delegated authority, approved four new courses and minor revisions to
existing courses in Biological Sciences.
7.
Other Business
There was no other business.
8.
Information
The date of the next regularly scheduled meeting of Senate is Monday, February
2,
2004.
The Open Session adjourned at 8:35 pm and moved directly into Closed Session.
Alison Watt
Director, University Secretariat
n