DRAFT UNTIL APPROVED BY SENATE

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

Monday, January 7, 2008 at 7:00 pm in Room 3210 WMC

Open Session

Present: Easton, Stephen. Vice-Chair of Senate

Abduiwahab, Kamal

Atkins, Stella

Brebner, Sarah

Brennand, Tracy

Copeland, Lynn

Cormack, Lesley

Dagenais, Diane

Dickinson, Peter

Driver, Jon

Fox, Amy

Francis, June

Gencay, Ramo

Hannah, David

Harder, Derrick

Harding, Kevin

Krane, William

Laba, Martin

LaBrie, John

Lee, Benjamin

Letourneau, Michael

Lewis, Brian

Li, Paul

Liljedabl, Peter

Malcoe, Lorraine Halinka

O'Neil, John

Paling, Joe

Percival, Colin

Percival, Paul

Peters, Joseph

Pinto, Mario

Plischke, Michael

Popadiuk, Natalee

Russell, Robert

Shaker, Paul

Shapiro, Daniel

Thompson, Steve

Tiffany, Evan

Tse, Karen

Vaid, Bhuvinder

van Baarsen, Amanda

Wakkary, Ron

Waterhouse, John

Williams, Peter

Ross, Kate, Registrar and Senior Director Student

Enrolment

Watt, Alison, Director, University Secretariat

Grant, Bobbie, Recording Secretary

Absent

Black, Sam

Corbett, Kitty

Fizzell, Maureen

Gordon, Robert

Hayes, Michael

Javed, Waseem

Lein, Adam

Louie, Brandt

McArthur, James

Shermer, Thomas

Smith, Don

Stevenson, Michael

Warner, D'Arcy

Weeks, Daniel

Williams, Tony

In attendance:

Angerilli, Nello

Friesen, Jane

Hatala, Marek

Heift, Trade

Hinchliffe, Jo

Jones, Christine

Mellow, Dean

Wister, Andrew

S.M. 7 January 2008

Page 2

A pproval of the Agenda

The Vice-President, Academic suggested that Item 6.b.i be changed from

'a motion for

approval to an item to be discussed in Committee of the Whole. Senate was advised that

the suggestion follows from the significant amount of discussion that had occurred prior

to the meeting on this issue. It was felt that it would be appropriate to have an open

discussion to learn more about the concerns and issues and then perhaps gather further

information as required, resulting in the motion being held over to another meeting.

The issue of timing was raised. Senate was advised that even if Senate made a decision at

this meeting, it was probably too late to affect entry to the university in September 2008.

If the admission requirements were changed by late Spring 2008, that would allow

sufficient time to prepare recruiting materials for September 2009 admissions.

There were no objections to the change, and the agenda was approved as amended.

Approval of the Minutes of the Op en Session of December 3, 2007

The Minutes were approved as distributed.

Business Arising from the Minutes

There was no business arising from the Minutes.

Report of the Chair

The Chair welcomed Senator Daniel Shapiro attending his first meeting as Dean of the

Faculty of Business Administration. There was no further report from the Chair.

Question Period

There were no questions.

Reports of Committees

A) ?

Senate Committee on Universit

Priorities

i) ?

Paper S.08-1 - Centre for Education Research and Policy

Moved by J. Waterhouse, seconded on R. Gencay

"that Senate approve and recommend to the Board of Governors, the creation

of the Centre for Education Research and Policy (CERP) as a Schedule B

Centre" ? -

Friesen, Department of Economics, was in attendance to respond to questions.

A small editorial correction was noted to point 2.3 under Governance.

In response to concerns that the Steering Committee appeared to favour representation

from the Department of Economics, it was pointed out that the committee was composed ?

S.M. 7 January 2008

Page

S ?

to reflect representation from all areas associated with the Centre. Although several

members were from Economics, they actually represented areas outside of the Economics

Department and each brought a particular expertise to the project.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

ii) ?

Paper S.08-2 —David Lam Centre - Revised Terms of Reference

Moved by J. Waterhouse, seconded by L. Cormack

"that Senate approve and recommend to the Board of Governors, the revised

Terms of Reference for the David Lam Centre, in the Faculty of Arts and

Social Sciences"

Concern was expressed about the lack of information on membership for the Centre.

Senate was advised that this Centre had been operational without terms of reference for

many years, and upon the retirement of its Director and members of the original Steering

Committee, it was felt to be an appropriate time to put in place the terms of reference

which are currently before Senate. Once the terms have been approved, the process of

finding a new Director and organizing a Steering Committee will take place. An opinion

was expressed that Senate should be assured that there was a reasonable set of qualified

individuals interested in the Centre and it would be helpful to have a list of members

S ?

before approval of the terms of reference. It was pointed out that the terms of reference

explain how the Steering Committee will be developed.

Discussion turned to the proposal to move from a Schedule B Centre to a Schedule A

Centre which would be housed in the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences. It was noted

that the Centre had always operated largely as an interdisciplinary centre drawing quite

widely from members outside of Arts and Social Sciences and a concern was expressed

that changing from a Schedule B to a Schedule A Centre narrowed those interdisciplinary

links. Senate was reminded that it was common for Schedule A Centres to have members

from Faculties other than from the Faculty in which they are housed. An opinion was

expressed that having more information around the membership would have provided a

clearer understanding of the vision for the Centre in this regard.

Moved by P. Percival, seconded by M. Letourneau

"that the motion be tabled until revised documentation is brought forward

containing a proposed membership list for the David Lam Centre"

It was noted that proponents of a centre normally draw up the terms of reference

outlining the proposed mandate. A membership list showing the expertise of the

individual members helps to identify interest in a centre. Without that

information, interest in the centre is hard to gauge. Senate was advised that this

S ?

was a unique situation and without terms of reference it might be difficult to

organize a steering committee.

S.M. 7 January 2008

Page 4

In response

was noted that a new Centre was not being proposed, but an update

of a Centre that has been in existence for many years. Its revised terms of

reference have been drafted for its present and future direction. Furthermore, the

lack of a membership listing was not seen as an impediment to this process.

Question was called on the motion to table,

and a vote taken. ?

MOTION TO TABLE FAILED

Question was called on the main motion,

and a vote taken. ?

MAIN MOTION CARRIED

iii)

Paper S.08-3 - External Review - Department of Gerontology

Moved by J. Waterhouse, seconded by K. Harding

"that Senate approve the recommendations from the Senate Committee on

University Priorities concerning advice to the Department of Gerontology and

the Dean of Arts and Social Sciences on priority items resulting from the

External Review"

A. Wister, Chair, Department of Gerontology, was in attendance to respond to questions.

Question was called, and a vote taken. ?

MOTION CARRIED

iv)

Pa p

er S.08-4 - Joint Major in Communication and Interactive Arts and

Technology

Moved by J. Waterhouse, seconded by K. Harding

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

proposal for a Joint Major in Communication and Interactive Arts and

Technology in the Faculty of Applied Sciences"

M. Hatala, School of Interactive Arts and Technology, was in attendance to respond to

questions.

In response to a question about the impact of Faculty restructuring on this program, it was

noted there several joint major programs already exist in units that cross Faculty

boundaries, and the current restructuring proposal would see the two schools in the same

Faculty, so restructuring would not have any impact. A question arose as to whether

students in this program would qualify for the DTO program. Senate was advised that

students choosing a concentration in Informatics might qualify for this program.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

S.M. 7 January 2008

Page

5

.

?

v) ?

Paper

S.08-5 - 

Joint Major in First Nations Studies and Linguistics

Moved by J. Waterhouse, seconded by R. Russell

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

proposal for a BA in First Nations Studies and Linguistics (Joint Major),

in the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences"

D. Mellow, Department of Linguistics, was in attendance to respond to questions.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

vi) ?

Pa p

S.08-6 - 

Certificate in German Studies

Moved by J. Waterhouse, seconded by B. Vaid

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

proposal for a Certificate in Gemian Studies, in the Faculty of Arts and

Social Sciences"

T. Heift, Department of Linguistics, was in attendance to respond to questions.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

[]

?

vii) Paper

S.08-7 - 

Certificate in Reli

gious

Studies

Moved by J. Waterhouse, seconded by J. Paling

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

proposal for a Certificate in Religious Studies, in the Faculty of Arts and

Social Sciences"

C. Jones, Department of Humanities, was in attendance to respond to questions.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

viii) Pa

S.08-8 - 

SFU Class/Exam Schedule for the 2010 Olympics

Motion #1

Moved by J. Waterhouse, seconded by J. Paling

"that Senate approve the proposed Class/Exam Schedule for the

2010

Olympics"

[The schedule should have referenced the Olympics break as

February

15-26, 

2010.] 

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

S.M. 7 January 2008

Page

Motion #2 ?

Moved by J. Waterhouse, seconded by S. Brebner

"that Senate requests the Calendar Committee conduct an assessment of

the feasibility of extending the annual Reading Break to a full week on a

regular basis"

In response to an inquiry as to why it Senate's vote was required, rather than having the

committee decide on its own to conduct an assessment, it was noted that approval of the

motion by Senate would encourage the committee to review this issue.

Question was called, and a vote taken. ?

MOTION CARRIED

ix) ?

Pap

er S.08-9 - Centres and Institutes Re

ort 2006/2007 (For Information)

A question was raised about what action was taken against centres and institutes that

failed to provide a financial report. Senate was advised that since the majority of units

receive no financial support from the University, leniency was shown in demanding

financial reports. It was noted that two centres that had received funding had not

submitted financial reports; the Vice-President Research advised that he would look into

this. It was also mentioned that the Faculty Restructuring Task Force has made specific

recommendations concerning the operation of centres and institutes and there was no

intent to take further action until the recommendations were discussed and/or finalized.

It was noted that page 4 indicates that the Centre for Coastal Studies was active, yet no

description of the Centre appeared in documentation (pages 10-11). The Vice-President

Research confirmed that this was an oversight in the document.

Brief discussion ensued with respect to the basis for defining a centre as being 'active'

versus 'inactive'. Senate was advised that as long as the proponents of a centre can cite

'minimal activity' such as seminars, colloquia, etc the centre is considered active but the

intent is to have greater stringency in the assessment process in the future but to do this,

the current policy would have to be modified.

B) ?

Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies

i) ?

Paper S.08-10 - Change to Admission Re

q uirements with re gard

to BC Provincial

Grade 12 Examinations (For Information)

N. Angerilli, Associate Vice-President, Students and International, K. Ross, Registrar and

Senior Director, Student Enrolment, and J. Hinchliffe, Assistant Registrar, were in

attendance to respond to questions.

S.M. 7 January 2008

Page 7

. ?

Senators were reminded that Senate had approved a change in the agenda to allow

discussion of this item in Committee of the Whole, with formal consideration of the

motion being held over to another meeting. The Chair suggested that a one hour time

limit be considered for the discussion.

Moved by M. Letoumeau, seconded by J. Paling

"that Senate move into a Committee of the Whole for a period of one hour

to discuss this item"

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

At the outset, B. Krane provided Senate with background on this item. Senate was

advised that the University of Victoria had approved this measure, while the University

of British Columbia, after a split vote, defeated a similar motion and decided to study the

issue further and report back to its Senate. One of the reasons for bringing this issue

forward at SFU was to provide prospective students with greater certainty regarding their

admission and scholarship applications. Secondly, it was proposed so that different

categories of students (direct entry from high school, transfer, and out of province) would

be treated on a more equitable basis. Thirdly, it was felt that since admission offers were

mostly based on self-reporting and interim grades, the provincial exam results have fairly

limited utility in the current admission process, other than to revoke offers if the

S ?

standards for admission are not met. Referring to the recent emails on this subject, the

Associate Vice President Academic stated that they seemed to revolve around the quality

of students and the need to protect the reputation of the University.

Many questions, concerns, comments, and suggestions were raised during the discussion

of this issue.

• Firm offers of admission need to be made earlier. Many students get early offers of

guaranteed admission from other universities (along with everything guaranteed from

residence to parking) and an offer from SFU which is conditional, puts SFU at a

disadvantage. Having to wait for-provincial marks creates a level of uncertainty and

stress for prospective students.

• It was suggested that the proposal would affect the reputation of the University.

Some alumni had expressed concern that this change would result in the perception

that SFU had lower standards than UBC, and SFU degrees would lose their value.

• In order to identify and try to deal with top students early, procedures have been

adopted to prioritize and ensure that offers are made quickly to students with high

averages. A written strategy for recruitment exists for international students and plans

are underway to put together a recruitment plan to more effectively target top

domestic students.

• Comments supporting or criticizing the use of the final exams for admissions

decisions touched on grade inflation, gender bias in school vs. exam results, on-line

courses, teaching to the exam and restricting flexibility in learning, standardized

curricula, student preparation for university level work, the Ministry's/Government

S.M. 7 January 2008

Page

support for exams, and the issue of differing processes in other jurisdictions. It was

suggested that Provincial exams should not be eliminated without having some other

means to measure high school students. Entrance exams were suggested, perhaps

collaborative entrance exams with the other universities.

• A suggestion made about the possibility of considering provincial exams in English

and Mathematics.

Data were requested on the following issues:

• Size of the population of top students entering university; percentage of top students

attending SFU.

• The number of offers of admission or scholarship are revoked due to exam results

• The effect of applying the proposed change to last year's incoming students

• The correlation of high school provincial exams to university performance over the

long term (20 years)

• The number of students who may have rejected one university over another because

they wanted to make their university decision rather than waiting until August for a

confirmed offer.

• Evidence that students would not come to SFU if provincial exams remain an

admissions factor.

• Evidence of gender bias in school versus exam results

In response to a question as to the process moving forward, the Chair stated that clearly

further data were needed and the proponents of the motion would need to consider the

suggestions and comments made by Senate, and provide whatever data is available to

answer Senate's questions prior to this coming back to Senate for consideration.

Every Senator having had an opportunity to speak at least once, the Chair indicated that

the time limit for discussion had expired. Senate recessed briefly for five minutes.

Following the recess, Senate moved out of Committee of the Whole before continuing

with the remainder of the agenda.

ii) ?

Paper S.08-11 - BC Adult Graduation Di

ploma

(BCAGD) Admission Policy.

Moved by B. Krane, seconded by K. Harding

"that Senate approve the BC Adult Graduation Diploma (BCAGD)

Admission Policy on a permanent basis"

Concerns were expressed about the small number of students involved in this credential,

and a suggestion was made that it might be better to approve the policy again for another

three years to see if participation increased.

An opinion was expressed that the overall performance of the students in this group was

rather poor. A suggestion was made that it would be more appropriate for these students

to go through the college system and transfer to SFU, and that this admission policy be

discontinued.

S.M. 7 January 2008

Page 9

Senators were reminded that SFU had a long tradition of providing alternate pathways

into the university, and that this was another example of an alternate route. It was also

noted that the performance, retention rate, and degree completion time for students in this

group would likely look very similar to other students in the general student population if

a random sample were taken. Senate was advised that the number of students admitted

via this avenue would never be very large, but it would probably be possible to track

them more effectively to ensure that they connect to the appropriate supports within SFU

to assist their success and achieve their goal.

Question was called, and a vote taken. ?

MOTION CARRIED

iii)

Paper S.08-12 - Curriculum Revisions - Faculty

of A

pplied Sciences (For

Information)

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

under delegated authority, approved a change in the admission GPA for the Minor in

Computer and Electronics Design, in the School of Engineering Science.

iv)

Pa p

er S.08-13 - Curriculum Revisions - Faculty

of Business Administration (For

Information)

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

under delegated authority, approved a prerequisite change for an existing course, and a

change in statement about maintenance CGPA.

Paper S.08-14 - Curriculum Revisions - Faculty of Education (For Information)

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

under delegated authority, approved a new course, and minor changes to existing courses

and program requirements.

vi)

Paper S.08-1

- Curriculum Revisions - Faculty of Science (For Information)

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

under delegated authority, approved minor changes to existing courses and program

requirements, and a new Honors option to the Joint Major between Computing Science

and Molecular Biology and Biochemistry.A question was raised about why the new joint

honors program wasn't before Senate for approval.

Secretary's note: This item should

have been on the agenda for approval and will be coming forward to the February 2008

meeting of Senate.

S.M. 7 January 2008

Page 10

vii) ?

Paper S.08-16 - Curriculum Revisions - Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (For

Information)

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

under delegated authority, approved seven new courses and minor changes to existing

courses and program requirements in the School for the Contemporary Arts.

Senate Nominating Committee

i) ?

Paper S.08-17— Elections

Senate was advised that no further nominations had been received. Benjamin Lee was

therefore elected by acclamation to the Undergraduate Student position on the Senate

Committee on International Activities (SCIA), and Dongya Yang was elected by

acclamation to the faculty position representing the Faculty of Arts and Sciences on the

International Student Exchange Committee (ISEC) (not the Faculty from Applied

Sciences as incorrectly indicated on the agenda paper).

The remaining vacancies for the International Student Exchange Committee (ISEC) will

be carried forward to the next meeting.

Other Business

Paper S.08-18 - Policy GP 38 - Sustainability (For Information)

Questions arose with respect to the definition of sustainability versus environmental

sustainability, and the necessity and meaning of the first sentence in Section 3.0.1. The

Secretary of Senate indicated that these questions would be referred to the appropriate

office.

Information

The date of the next regularly scheduled meeting of Senate is Monday, February 4, 2008.

The Open Session adjourned at

9:25

pm, and Senate moved directly into Closed Session.

Alison Watt

Director, University Secretariat