DRAFT UNTIL APPROVED BY SENATE

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

Monday, December 1, 2008 at ?

pm in Room 3210 WMC

Open Session

Present:

Easton, Stephen, Vice-Chair of Senate

Absent:

Arsenault-Antolick, Haida

Bains, Aman

Bart, Brad

Bocking, Natalie

Brennand, Tracy

Chapman, Glenn

Collinge, Joan

Copeland, Lynn

Cormack, Lesley

Dow, Greg

Driver, Jon

Fergusson, Andrew

Fizzell, Maureen

Francis, June

Gencay, Ramo

Gibson, Eli

Golnaraghi, Farid

Gordon, Robert

Hannah, David

Harding, Kevin

Hayes, Michael

Joffies, Michel

Jones; Cohn

Krane, Bill

Laba, Martin

Lee, Benjamin

Letourneau, Michael

Leznoff, Daniel

MacDonald, Camille

O'Neil, John

Paling, Joseph

Parkhouse, Wade

Patel, Ravi

Paterson, David (representing S. de Castell)

Percival, Cohn

Percival, Paul

Peters, Joseph

Pinto, Mario

Pliscbke, Michael

Popadiuk, Natalee

Russell, Robert

Seal, Brent

Shapiro, Daniel

Shermer, Thomas

Thompson, Steve

Wakkaxy, Ron

Warner, D'Arcy

Williams, Tony

Ross, Kate, Registrar & Senior Director Student Enrolment

Watt, Alison, Director, University Secretariat

Grant, Bobbie, Recording Secretary

Janes, Craig

Liljedahl, Peter

Louie, Brandt

McArthur, James

Pavsek, Christopher

Stevenson, Michael

Tapia, Earl Von

Tiffany, Evan

Vaid, Bhuvinder

van Baarsen, Amanda

van der Wey, Dolores

In attendance:

Bennet, Andrew

Clague, John

S.M 1 December 2008

Page 2

Approval of the Agenda

The Agenda was approved as distributed.

Approval of the Minutes of the Open Session of November 3. 2008

The Minutes were approved as distributed.

Business Arising from the Minutes

There was no business arising from the Minutes.

Report of the Chair

There was no report from the Chair.

Question Period

Senate was advised that Student Senators had been approached by students from across the

University concerned about the lack of tutorials, particularly in the Department of

Psychology where it appeared all tutorials had been eliminated. Concerns were raised by

Student Senators about the impact this change may have on the quality of undergraduate

education. The Vice-President Academic indicated that this may reflect the current

difficult budget situation but without further details from the Dean of Arts and Social

Sciences or the Chair of the Department of Psychology he was not able to address this

issue and indicated that he would report back to Senate at the next meeting.

A second issue arose concerning the lack of courses offered in the Summer semester,

particularly

notified that

there

the Department

would only be

four

Political

upper

Science.

division

Political

classes

Science

offered due

students

to lack

had

beenfunding

and concern was expressed about the effect this would have on graduation times. The

Vice-President Academic stated that since the budgets for the next fiscal year have not yet

been set, it is unlikely that courses were being cancelled on the basis of the budget

situation.

A suggestion was made by the Vice-President Academic that future questions relating to

course offerings should be backed up with some hard evidence, such as what courses are

actually being affected and explicit details about the concerns.

Reports of Committees

A) ?

Senate Committee on University Priorities

Paper S.08-120 - External Review - Department of Chemistry

Moved by J. Driver, seconded by M. Letoumeau

"that Senate approve the recommendations from the Senate Committee on

University Priorities concerning advice to the Department of Chemistry

and the Dean of Science on priority items resulting from the External

Review"

A. Bennet, Chair, Department of Chemistry was in attendance in order to respond to

questions.

S.M 1 December 2008

Page 3

•

It was noted by a Senator that the report implied many problems at both the

undergraduate and graduate level within the Department, particularly with respect to

laboratory conditions, quality of courses offered, and the structure of the graduate

program. Inquiry was made as to what efforts were being done to address these issues.

The Chair of the Department responded by summarizing the issues surrounding faculty

levels and indicated that if more faculty were available the Department could eliminate the

double numbering (graduate/undergraduate) course offerings. It was also noted that

because of the way the Co-Op program operates at SFU, List and second year chemistry

courses have to be offered three times a year at Burnaby and once a year at the Surrey

campus. If the Department were able to reduce the frequency of these offerings, many

more fourth year courses and graduate course (with different numbers) could be offered.

Senate was advised that the graduate program produces high quality graduate students who

last year won the highest number of awards at the National Chemistry Conference in

Edmonton, Alberta. With respect to the issue of laboratory conditions and equipment, the

Dean is developing a plan to deal with the situation over the next three years.

An opinion was expressed that established programs across the University have all been

losing resources as funding has moved into more favoured strategic programs. The result is

that across the board budget cuts year after year have harmed the older core disciplines. In

addition, the older parts of the University infrastructure suffer proportionately more

because there is no funding to refurbish buildings or laboratories. The. Shrum Science

• ?

Building which houses many of the Chemistry laboratories does not meet current

standards and is considered to be unsafe by the reviewers. Most of the core programs in

Arts and Science are underfunded and the administration is faced with balancing essential

needs for expansion of new programs and adequately funding established programs.

With regard to the possibility of a new chemistry building, Senate was advised that the ten

year capital plan contains provision for the construction of such a building. Depending on

Government priorities, this might possibly be completed by 2013. It was suggested that if

the Government were aware of the considerable safety issues of the existing facilities, they

might be encouraged to change their priorities and fund a new building.

Further discussion ensued concerning issues such as faculty teaching load, graduate student

support, operation of the Co-op program, and the safety issues referred to in the report.

The Dean of Science assured Senate that hiring in Chemistry is one of the two highest

priorities in the current and upcoming fiscal year.

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION CARRIED

ii)

Paper S.08-121 - Report from the Faculty of Environment Interdisciplinary

Programming Committee

Moved by J. Driver, seconded by M. Plischke

"that Senate accepts that the proposed programming for the Environment

Faculty satisfies the condition of the motion approved by Senate 7 April

2008 that established that Faculty"

S.M 1 December 2008

Page 4

J .

Clague, Department of Earth Sciences and Chair of the Faculty of Environment

Interdisciplinary Programming Committee, was in attendance in order to respond to

questions. ?

A point of order was raised about the wording of the motion. It was noted that the

motion appeared to be inconsistent with the support documentation which refers to the

Faculty being provisionally approved with final approval being contingent upon certain

conditions.

Discussion took place concerning the intent of the April 2008 Senate motion and revisions

to the wording of the motion were suggested. Finally the Chair proposed that the phrase,

'that established the Faculty'

be struck from the motion, a solution that was acceptable to all

concerned.

The Vice-President Academic provided background information about the committee

process and stated his belief that the motion passed by Senate in April 2008 approved the

establishment of the new Faculty on condition of further approval by Senate of the

proposed programming. The report before Senate focuses on the proposed programming.

SCUP passed two motions reaffirming support for the new Faculty and for the

programming proposed by the Committee. The blueprint document describes a

governance structure for the new Faculty and provides a timeline for the development of

some of the proposed programming. The motion presented to Senate by SCAR essentially

states that the proposed programming satisfies the condition of the motion approved by

Senate in April 2008 and that the April motion established the Faculty because the

establishment was conditional on approval of the programming.

Senate was reminded of some of the issues raised at Senate in April 2008 with regard to

the establishment of the new Faculty and views were expressed that the report addresses

some but not all of these concerns. Although the Committee did an excellent job and

developed an excellent framework for an Environment Faculty, concern lingered about

adding a new Faculty at a time of budget deficits, cutbacks to faculty and staff, insufficient

funding for graduate students, and course reductions. A question was posed as to whether

the new Faculty can realize its potential despite the budgetary reality, and although there is

support for the concept of an Environment Faculty, there are serious concerns about

investing money in a proposal which may not be sustainable.

A suggestion was made that the funds which were earmarked for the new Faculty could

be used elsewhere to create more classes or hire more teaching resources thereby

addressing some of the existing concerns. In response to concerns about funding, Senate

was reminded that opportunities currently exist in the environmental area to attract new

funding and that any relief that is obtained in one sector will provide trickle down effects

in other sectors.

It was pointed out that the start up cost for the new Faculty is relatively low. Its creation is

expected to galvanize individuals and units in terms of producing synergies and will

capitalize and bring together the strengths in this area that currently exist within the

University in different Faculties. The University must move forward even in difficult

financial times and this is an incredible initiative for SFU which should go forward.

S.M 1 December 2008

Page

Although there was promise for future development, disappointment was expressed that

S ?

nothing was being done to improve the environmental science program immediately. It

was pointed out that the Committee had insufficient time to reformulate the program but,

in the timeline proposed by the Vice President Academic, it was one of the first items to

be dealt with.

A concern was expressed that the proposed programming was not possible by the

participation of the units within the new Faculty without a considerable number of

courses being taught outside the new Faculty. The programming appeared to be set up in

an interesting way for an ideal Environment Faculty without considering the people in the

Faculty and what they have to offer or how they would be most interested in putting their

programming forward.

Given the concerns about funding and whether or not there is sufficient money to create

the new Faculty or whether funding should be directed to alleviate some of the existing

deficiencies and problems, the following amendment was made:

Amendment moved by C. Percival, seconded by J. Paling

"that the following be added to the end of the current motion:

and advises

the Board that Senate considers the creation of the Environment Faculty and

associated programming to be a lower academic priority than the integrity of current

programs"

SIn response to a request that the Chair rule on the admissibility of the amendment, the

Chair ruled the amendment was in order.

An opinion was expressed that this was a hostile amendment and it was not a good idea to

send to the Board a major initiative which would bring considerable attention to SFU and

at the same time tell the Board that Senate considers it a low priority. The wording of the

amendment implies that the proposed new Faculty is not equal in academic priority and

should only move forward after all other issues in the university have been addressed and

opinion was expressed that it was not appropriate to forward such a recommendation to

the Board.

It was noted by a Senator that creating a new Faculty simply because of funding

opportunities raises an issue of academic freedom by taking away the University's ability to

determine its own academic priorities.

It was further stressed that even in tight economic times, the University should move

forward smartly and strategically and the creation of the new Faculty provides a unique

opportunity to do so.

Question was called on the amendment,

and a vote taken. ?

AMENDMENT FAILED

Brief discussion took place with respect to the proposed name of the new Faculty and the

Vice-President, Academic provided background information. Senate was reminded that

the constituent members of the new Faculty will develop the name and bring it forward

for approval by Senate and the Board of Governors. A concern was expressed that

S.M 1 December 2008

Page 6

including the word sustainability in the name would take the Faculty into a number of

other

It was

areas

pointed

including

out that

Business

the proposed

Administration

programming

and Economics.implies

the

status quo with the

constituent units providing complementary programs. Concern was expressed that this was

not the intent and suggestion was made that Senate should provide a clear statement that

new program development is expected with the approval of this motion.

Amendment moved by P. Williams, seconded by M. Pinto

"that Senate accepts that the proposed programming for the Environment

Faculty, including a strong commitment to new program development at both the

undergraduate and graduate level,

satisfies the condition of the motion

approved by Senate 7 April 2008"

The Chair ruled that discussion and vote on the amendment was in order.

Opinion was expressed that the amendment may disadvantage existing programs. It was

noted that the amendment strengthens the motion and provides direction to the units as to.

Senate's expectations about program development.

Question was called on the amendment,

and a vote taken.

AMENDMENT CARRIED

An amendment to add at the end of the motion that the name of the Faculty be the

Faculty of Environment and Sustainability was ruled out of order by the Chair.

Brief discussion followed in which issues such as the interdisciplinary programming and

whether an institute would be the best place to house such programming were raised.

The Vice-President Academic provided the following summary response to some of the

concerns and issues raised during debate.

Firstly, on behalf of Senate and the University, he expressed thanks and appreciation to the

programming committee for their hard work in producing such a useful and interesting

report, and a special acknowledgement was extended to John Clague, Chair of the

Committee.

With respect to programming, programs will initially stay the same. There are students in

the programs expecting to complete their degrees and there are strong valid disciplines

represented that are of considerable value to students and to the research activities of the

University. However, that does not mean that new programs will not be developed.

There are suggestions for development in the document and units will also have their own

ideas about how they wish to develop. Environmental Science is expected to be one of

the first priorities with respect to development.

In response to issues raised about the structure of the Faculty, Senate was assured that

while it will be governed internally and have a committee structure like every other

Faculty, it will be unique in the sense that it will require considerable collaboration

S.M 1 December 2008

Page 7

outside the Faculty with units on campus to deal with policy issues and interdisciplinary

programming.

The use of the term institute which is quite prominent in the report is somewhat

misleading. SFU tends to use the term institute for very specific functions and the

programming committee, when referring to an institute, was considering a structure

completely different than existing institutes for housing interdisciplinary programs as they

develop.

Regarding the issue of funding, the Vice-President Academic felt that it would be

imprudent if the University refused to move forward with new initiatives because of

budget concerns. The relatively small amount of funding which is required for the start up

of the newFaculty will pay off for the units and students that are going to be associated

with the Faculty, and for the other areas that will interact with the Faculty.

Question was called on the main motion

as amended, and a vote taken.

MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, CARRIED

B) ?

Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies

Paper S.08-122 - New Early Learning Specialization (ELS) within the Bachelor of

General Studies. Faculty of Education

0 ?

Moved by-B. Krane, seconded by R. Patel

"that Senate approve the Early Learning Specialization program in the

Faculty of Education"

A suggestion by P. Percival to change the wording of the motion as follows was accepted:

"that Senate approve the Early Learning Specialization

stream in the Bachelor

of General Studies Program

in the Faculty of Education"

Question was called, and a vote taken.

MOTION, AS AMENDED, CARRIED

ii)

Paper S.08-123 - Curriculum Revisions - Faculty of Education (For Information)

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

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

the Faculty of Education.

A discrepancy between the course title for EDUC 332 on Senate paper S.08-122 and

Senate paper S.08-123 was noted. Senate was advised that the correct title appeared on

paper S.08-123. The Chair indicated that the title would be corrected on paper S.08-122.

S.M 1 December 2008

Page 8

iii)

Paper S.08-124 - Curriculum Revisions - Faculty of Applied Sciences (For

Information)

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

under delegated authority, approved new courses, and/or changes to program

requirements and existing courses in the following areas: Engineering Science,

Communication, and Computing Science.

iv)

Paper S.08-125 - 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 prerequisite changes for courses in the Explorations

Program.

Paper S.08-126 - Curriculum Revisions - Faculty of Health Sciences (For

Information)

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

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

courses in the Faculty of Health Sciences.

vi)

Paper S.08-127 - Curriculum Revisions - Faculty of Science (For Information)

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

under delegated authority, approved new courses and changes to program requirements

and existing courses in the following areas: Earth Sciences, Molecular Biology and

Biochemistry, Statistics and Actuarial Science, and Management and Systems Science.

C) ?

Senate Committee on Continuing Studies

i) - Paper S.08-128 - Annual Report (For Information)

Discussion ensued as to why no information on the Weekend Program NOW which was

in its formative stages during the period covered by the report was not included. Senate

was advised that decision was made not to include information in the 07/08 report

because registration had not yet taken place. Information with respect to current

applications and anticipated enrolment for the Spring semester was available to interested

Senators. It was suggested that since the mandate of the Committee was to deal with the

development of continuing education, both credit and non-credit, items such as the

development of the NOW program should be included. Senate was assured that such

information would be included in future reports.

Reference was made to the last page of the report wherein it appeared that enrolments in

both certificate and diploma programs had decreased by approximately 10%. Senate was

advised that although some may have actually dropped, it was more likely due to factors

such as programs starting and ending in different reporting periods, the ebb and flow of

interests within communities and the marketplace, and a shift made by Continuing Studies

in their approach to marketing.

S.M 1 December 2008

Page 9

Following discussion, the 2007/08 Annual Report of the Senate Committee on

Continuing Studies was received by Senate.

Senate Librar y

Committee

i) ?

Paper S.08-129 - Annual Report (For Information)

The 2007/08 Annual Report of the Senate Library Committee was received by Senate for

information.

Senate Nominating Committee

i) ?

Paper S.08-130 - Election

Senate was advised that one nomination was received to fill the existing vacancy on the

Senate Undergraduate Awards Adjudication Committee and C. Loewe is elected by

acclamation as the Undergraduate Student Alternate. This concludes the work of the

Senate Nominating Committee as all committee positions are currently filled.

7. ?

Other Business

i) ?

Paper S.08-131 - SFU Librar

Annual Report (For Information)

In response to a concern which was expressed about the cost of producing the Library's

annual report, Senate was advised that the document is used not only to report to Senate

but to advise donors that their contributions to various funds have been well spent and as a

recruitment tool to help raise funds for the Library.

Reference was made to first starred footnote of the first table on page 21 and clarification

was requested as to whether the amount mentioned was in fact a dollar amount or a

number amount. Senate was advised that dollar sign was incorrect and the figure

represented the number of volumes.

It was noted that the tables on pages 21, 22 and 23 implied that there were substantial

decreases in electronic subscriptions, collection use and library services. With respect to

electronic subscriptions, Senate was advised that the past methods for counting electronic

subscriptions were inconsistent and adjustments have been made towards a more

consistent method; and, in fact, there were no reductions in a real sense. The use of the

Library is actually increasing but being used in different ways. L. Copeland indicated that

it would probably be useful in future reports for Senate to receive an explanation as to

what the numbers mean to the Library.

Following discussion, the Annual Report of the SFU Library was received by Senate.

S.M 1 December 2008

Page 10

ii) ?

Paper S.08-132 - Revision of Policy GP 24 Fair Use of Information and

Communications Technology (ICT) (For Information)

Referring to page 5, section 2.6 on protective measures, inquiry was made how this

would effect the operations of the Student Society. It was pointed out, that the policy is

meant to apply to services that are provided centrally through IT Services and anyone

using those services are subject to and governed by the specifications in the policy.

Clarification was requested with respect to Section 2.2.1 regarding decision criteria and

who decides as to whether to disclose a user's activity and personal information. Senate

was advised that this would be subject to review by staff with expertise in this area in the

Office of Legal Affairs.

A concern was expressed that these revisions should have been sent to the Student Society

before being presented to Senate and the Board. It was pointed out that announcement of

the policy prior to presentation to Senate/Board was distributed to all members of the

university community with a request for input.

Reference was made to agreements signed by the Simon Fraser Student Society and the

University and suggestion was made that the policy can not be applied to the independent

operations of SFSS. It was pointed out that there is overarching policy that relates to the

signed Memorandums of Understanding and if, for example, data provided by the

University was being misused, the University has the right to investigate the use of that

data. ?

Following discussion, the revised policy was received by Senate.

Information

The date of the next regularly scheduled meeting of Senate is Monday, January 12, 2009.

The Open Session adjourned at 9:35 pm, and Senate moved directly into Closed Session.

Alison Watt

Director, University Secretariat