The Open Collections website will be unavailable July 27 from 2100-2200 PST ahead of planned usability and performance enhancements on July 28. More information here.

Open Collections

UBC Publications

UBC Publications

UBC Publications

[Meeting minutes of the Senate of The University of British Columbia] 1982-04-21

Item Metadata


JSON: senmin-1.0115406.json
JSON-LD: senmin-1.0115406-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): senmin-1.0115406-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: senmin-1.0115406-rdf.json
Turtle: senmin-1.0115406-turtle.txt
N-Triples: senmin-1.0115406-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: senmin-1.0115406-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
The Eighth regular meeting of the Senate of The University of British Columbia
for the Session 1981-82 was held on Wednesday, April 21, 1982 at 8:00 p.m. in the Board
and Senate Room.
Present: President D. T. Kenny (Chairman), Chancellor J. V. Clyne, Dr. R. A.
Adams, Dr. C E. Armerding, Dean G. S. Beagrie, Dr. G. D. Bel I ward, Dean D. R. Birch,
Mr. W. H. Birmingham, Mrs. M. F. Bishop, Dr. T. H. Brown, Rev. P. C. Burns, Mr. G. D.
Burnyeat, Dr. K. O. L. Burridge, Dr. J. J. R. Campbell, Dr. J. Dahlie, Mr. M. S. Dedels,
Dr. J. D. Dennison, Mrs. S. Dodson, Dr. D. Donaldson, Dr. A. J. Elder, Mr. D. B. Fields,
Dean C. V. Finnegan, Mr. H. J. Franklin, Mr. K. D. Freeman, Mrs. E. D. Fulton,
Dean J. A. F. Gardner, Dr. A. M. Hickling, Dr. H. E. Hirsch, Miss S. J. Holmes, Dr. R. F.
Kelly, Dr. R. W. Kennedy, Dean W. D. Kitts, Mr. J. Kulich, Dean P. A. Larkin, Dr. L. M.
Lavkulich, Dr. D. S. Lirenman, Dr. D. Lupini, Dean K. M. Lysyk, Mrs. A. Macdonald,
Mr. T. Mah, Ms. C. E. McAndrew, Mr. M. A. McCann, Dr. A. J. McClean, Mr. D.
Mclnnes, Mr. J. F. McWilliams, Mr. I. C. Miller, Mr. W. Milosevic, Ms. S. M. Provost,
Dean B. E. Riedel, Miss R. E. Robinson, Dr. M. Shaw, Mr. G. M. Shepard, Dr. J. G.
Silver, Dr. C. E. Slonecker, Dr. R. H. T. Smith, Dr. R. A. Spencer, Miss L. M. Stenger,
Dr. R. Stewart, Dr. P. Suedfeld, Dr. N. Sutherland, Dr. P. R. Tennant, Mr. A. Varma,
Dean W. A. Webber, Mr. V. G. Wellburn, Dean R. M. Will, Dr. D.LI. Williams, Dr. M. D.
Willman, Dr. J. L. Wisenthal.
Observer:  Mr. J. A. Banham
Messages of regret for their inability to attend were received from Dr. D. J.
Campbell, Mr. B. J. Coulson, Mr. R. C. Gill, Dr. R. F. Gray, Dr. A. Kozak, Dean P. A.
Lusztig, Dr. J. P. Martin, Dr. W. R. Morford, Dr. J. F. Richards, Dr. G. G. E. Scudder,
Mr. R. J. Summerbell, Miss C. L. V. Warren, Dean L. M. Wedepohl.
Introduction of student senators
The President welcomed the new student senators.
Minutes of the previous meeting
Dr. Silver       ) That the minutes of the Seventh regular meeting
Dr. Burridge  ) of Senate for  the Session   1981-82, having  been
circulated, be taken as read and adopted.
Carried 7754.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
Business arising from the Minutes
(i)     Prizes, Scholarships and Bursaries (P. 7742)
At the previous meeting, the Norton, Stewart, Norton, Cave and Scarlett
Scholarship in Real Estate Transactions was accepted subject to clarification of the
wording of the description. It has been confirmed that the award will be made to a
student in the Faculty of Law and the words, "... in the Faculty of Law ..." have
therefore been included in the description.
(ii)   Noon-hour lectures (P. 7748-9)
Notice of motion had been given at the previous meeting.
Dr. Wisenthal ) That Senate adopt the following statement:
Senate, recognizing that special noon-hour events
are a vital part of the intellectual and cultural
life of the University community, requests the
Registrar to ensure that as few classes as possible
are scheduled at 12:30 p.m. on Monday, Tuesday,
Wednesday and Friday, and reaffirms the existing
policy that no classes be held on Thursday,
between 12:30 and 2:30 p.m.
Dr. Wisenthal stated that the lecture schedules for 1981/82 and 1982/83 made
regular use of the 12:30 p.m. lecture period, except on Thursdays, and the intent was
to have as few lectures as possible during that period to allow students to participate
in extra curricular activities.
It was pointed out that it was necessary to demonstrate that physical space was
being used to the fullest extent possible, particularly when requesting additional
classrooms and new buildings. However, cultural and intellectual activities were
considered to be essential to academic life and from the students' point of view the
noon-hour period was the most convenient time to schedule these activities. It was
suggested that maximum publicity be given to this motion in the hope that lectures
would be held to a minimum during the 12:30 p.m. period.
The motion was put and carried.
From the Board of Governors
Notification of approval in principle of Senate recommendations - subject, where
applicable, to the proviso that none of the programs be implemented without formal
reference to the President and the formal agreement of the President; and that the
Deans and Heads concerned with new programs be asked to indicate the space
requirements, if any, of such new programs. 7755.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
From the Board of Governors  (continued)
(i)      Departmentalization of the Faculty of Forestry (P. 7744)
(ii)     Phasing out of the Certificate Program  in Early Childhood Education and the
Criminology Certificate Program  (P. 7745-6).
Prizes, Scholarships and Bursaries
Mr. McWilliams )      That the new awards (listed in the Appendix) be
Dr. Burridge       )      accepted subject to the approval of the Board of
Governors and that letters of thanks be sent to
the donors.
Reports of Committees of Senate
Admissions Committee
Faculty of Applied Science - Report on Enrolment Control Procedures
Dr. Smith presented the report. Senate had approved enrolment controls for
the Faculty of Applied Science on December 16, 1981. It was agreed at that time
that the procedures for implementing the controls would be brought back to
Senate for approval.  The following recommendations were included in the report:
"I.   First Year Admissions
In September 1981, 485 students registered in first year engineering. It is
estimated that 510 qualified applicants will wish to enter first year engineering in
September 1982. Roughly 280 of these will have taken first year science at
U.B.C, with the remaining 230 applying from U.B.C. programs other than
Science I and other universities, as well as the community colleges and B.C.I.T.
There will also be a group of students who have been assured readmission after
sitting out a year. The limit of 450 thus implies that 60 nominally qualified
students will be turned away.
The deadline for receipt of applications for admission to the Faculty is June 30,
On receiving each application for entry to first year, the Registrar's Office will
first check the student's record and assign the applicant to one of three
A: Good students, with all prerequisites. Accept immediately and notify
this Faculty of acceptance.
B: Students with lower averages than (A), and those with incomplete
qualifications but an otherwise satisfactory academic standing (e.g.
completing prerequisites with a summer session course). Inform student
that application is being reviewed - forward to Applied Science for
C:    Below acceptable level.  Reject without reference to the Faculty. 7756.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
Reports of Committees of Senate
Admissions Committee
Faculty of Applied Science - Report on Enrolment Control Procedures
"I.   First Year Admissions  (continued)
Initially students would be placed in the (A) category (accept) if they were of a
standard roughly equivalent, in terms of overall average, to the top two thirds of
those accepted in September 1981.  These levels would be:
Science I (UBC): 70%
Science I (other universities): 70%
Non-Science I (UBC & other universities): 70%
Community Colleges: 3.2 GPA
B.C.I.T.: 75%
The (C) category would be made up of those applicants who did not satisfy the
current minimum entrance standards as stated in the UBC Calendar.
The deadline for applications is June 30, 1982, however, the applications of
students in the (B) category may be considered as they arrive. The A/B division
will be reviewed on approximately July 15, after the bulk of the applications have
been received, and adjusted downward bearing in mind the target total of 450
admissions. A second review and downward adjustment of the A/B dividing line
will be made on August 15. A final review of applicants in the (B) (hold) category
will be made prior to registration. Each review will move a group of applicants
from the (B) (hold) category to the (A) (accept) category. This procedure will
allow applicants to be considered who do not complete the entrance reguirements
until after the June 30 deadline.
Students who, prior to the introduction of enrolment controls, have been assured
readmission after sitting out a year will be admitted.
2.   Second Year Admissions
Second year enrolment in September 1981 was 524. The anticipated number of
qualified applicants for September 1982 is estimated at 540. Of these some 400
will be students who have completed first year engineering at U.B.C, and about
140 will be students who wish to transfer in from outside the Faculty. Proposed
enrolment limits will permit roughly 100 transfer students. It should also be noted
that about 40 of the 100 transfer places must be reserved for those who have
completed first year engineering at institutions other than U.B.C. The
competition among those wishing to transfer into second year from other
programs may thus be intense. A particular problem involves those students who,
having failed to enter first year engineering in September 1981, are taking a
second year science program especially tailored to permit them to enter second
year engineering in September 1982 with a minimum (5 units) of deficiencies.
Such students have, in the past, been able to transfer if they satisfy the necessary
prerequisites and attain an overall average of 65%. 7757.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
Reports of Committees of Senate
Admissions Committee
Faculty of Applied Science - Report on Enrolment Control Procedures
"2.   Second Year Admissions (continued)
For September 1982, those students who have qualified for admission to second
year engineering on the basis of their performance in a first year engineering
program at U.B.C. or elsewhere in the Province will be admitted automatically -
only program assignment need be made. All other applicants will be considered by
the Dean's Office on an individual basis, with admission levels being set soon after
June 30. The bulk of the hitherto qualified applicants refused entry into second
year seems likely to consist of transfer students. To avoid treating this group
harshly, it is proposed that those with an average of 70% (compared with the
present 65%) be admitted even at the risk of exceeding the overall second year
quota. In addition, no student who meets the minimum transfer entrance
requirements will be denied admission until it is clear that no places are available
in the programs of his choice.
Note that in the case of second year it will be necessary to adhere to the June 30
application deadline so that orderly assignment to individual programs can be
3.   Second Year Program Assignment
Assignment to programs will be made soon after the June 30 application deadline.
Each student will have been required to complete a program preference form on
which will be designated, in order of preference, those programs in which the
student would accept a place.
Students will be assigned to programs in four separate groups:
1. First Class Average
2. Second Class Average
3. High Pass Average (58-64%)
4. Low Pass Average (50-57%)
Each student in the first group will be assigned to a program before any student in
the second group. The second group, in turn, will be assigned before those in the
third, and so on.  Within each group, the following procedure will apply:
Students will be assigned to the program of their first choice in descending
order of their sessional average mark. If the program of their first choice is
full, the student is not assigned immediately, and the search continues down
the list with as many first choices as possible being accommodated. Only
after an attempt has been made to assign each student in the group to his
first choice are second choices considered. Students not receiving their first
choice are then reconsidered in descending academic order, this time in an
attempt to satisfy their second choices. The process continues until all
students have been assigned, or are unable to command a place in a program
that is acceptable to them. 7758.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
Reports of Committees of Senate
Admissions Committee
Faculty of Applied Science - Report on Enrolment Control Procedures
"3.   Second Year Program Assignment  (continued)
The aforementioned procedure is an attempt to give the better students their
preferred program, and also keep the less popular programs open to those students
who indicate them as their first choice. Departures from this procedure will be
made only in unusual circumstances when necessary to ensure fair treatment of an
individual student."
Dr. Smith      )
Dr. Spencer  )
That Senate approve the recommendations for the
implementation of enrolment controls in the
Faculty of Applied Science.
On behalf of the Dean of the Faculty of Applied Science, Dr. Spencer
reported that although it had been agreed that 450 students would be admitted to
first year engineering, it was hoped to exceed that number.
The motion was then put and carried.
School of Architecture - Proposal to Limit Enrolment
Dr. Smith presented the report which was circulated with the agenda:
"The School of Architecture has been on selective admission for many years,
certainly since January 1969 when it appealed to Senate to limit the First year of
the program to 70 students. The number of applications for admission still far
exceed the number of places that can be made available, e.g. last year we had 227
applicants for 55 places. Preliminary indications suggest there may be fewer
applicants this year, but there is always a surge at the closing date, March 31st.
The steady demand for admission is consistent with world-wide trends in School of
Architecture populations beginning in the early 70's and continuing today, with the
resulting increase in the number of schools with enrolments over 1,000 students
e.g. more than ten in North America in the last ten years. The phenomena of the
very large schools e.g. Copenhagan 2,500, Mexico City 4,000, Buenos Aires 9,000,
Turin 7,000, has not yet been seen here. In Canada the largest school was the
University of Manitoba, which went up to 500, but the average is around 200-250,
even though they could be much larger e.g. in Ontario three schools together offer
a total of only 180 places to 1,200 applicants, because retrenchment hit there just
as expansion plans were proposed.
The total number of students in this School is hard to calculate. One would expect
that with an entering class of 70, the enrolment would be 65 in Second and 60 in
Third year at normal attrition rates for a total of 195 students. However, despite
their good academic backgrounds these students are changing their field of study
in their second degree program and therefore exhibit different rates of progress in
in architectural design. The mode of instruction is the design tutorial. This was
adopted to provide the individual attention to offset the discrepancy in the rate of
progress of the students. In addition, the students are encouraged to "Study
Abroad", or to get more work experience, or to take extra design tutorials.  Hence 7759.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
Reports of Committees of Senate
Admissions Committee
School of Architecture - Proposal to Limit Enrolment  (continued)
"many are "incomplete" at varying stages in the program, and they may return to
full-time or re-enrol on part-time status as it suits them. As a result, Second and
Third year enrolments do not show the decline in numbers one would expect, but
because of the backlog are actually larger than First year and fluctuate
considerably and unpredictably. Even the number of graduating students does not
indicate the size of the final year because many students take two terms to
complete the graduation project Part 2. Thus our estimates of the total 1982-83
enrolment vary from 200 to 245 students and could go higher, and it is very
difficult to be more precise. There is, however, a major problem of staffing in
dealing with either the high or low figure.
A further complication to our prediction is provided by the cyclic nature of the
economy as it manifests itself in the Vancouver building scene. As we all know,
the federal government, through control of monetary and tax policies, controls the
flow of money into the building industry to create employment or otherwise
regulate economic activity in the nation. The most recent federal budget has put
a stop to a wide range of building activity in Vancouver and created a temporary
recession in architectural activity. Students tend to stay out and work in the
boom periods and come back to school in a slump, so we fully expect a big rush in
the fall of 1982.
With a tutorial system the capacity of the School is at least partially determined
by two factors - the number of work places available and the number of staff,
where the number of design specialist faculty is the governing factor.
The question of overcrowding has been a long-standing one for the School of
Architecture which occupies space in the Lasserre Building, West Mall Annex, and
the Armouries. The School attempted to bring this matter to the attention of
Senate in April 1977 by framing a motion to curtail enrolment in First year to 45
students until there was a "dramatic improvement in both quantity and quality of
space made available to the School." For some reason the motion from the School
Council was withdrawn before it reached the Senate but the situation is
substantially the same. The enrolment capacity of the present space by use is
probably 170, but would probably be 150 at proper standards. The present
situation verges on being outright dangerous from a fire safety point of view. It is
also clear that many students are working at home, which defeats the principle of
interaction which is supposed to complement the tutorial system.
The School presently has 14.3 full-time faculty members. Of these, eight are
design specialists who normally lead the tutorial groups. Ideally each of these
design tutors would be assisted by two part-time sessionals (practising architects)
from downtown throughout both terms, and between them they look after 15- 20
students four afternoons per week. Our projected 1982-83 budget allows us to
consider hiring only two-thirds of this number of sessionals and the shortfall will
result in further overload of the regular faculty. In addition to their tutorial load
these faculty members provide on or two one-term courses each. The remaining
faculty members provide at least two courses each per term. In their final year,
the students are required to undertake a graduation project in two parts, the first 7760.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
Reports of Committees of Senate
Admissions Committee
School of Architecture - Proposal to Limit Enrolment (continued)
"being a directed study, the second a major design project. Part two requires that
they have a tutorial committee which meets three or four times during that term
but they do see the Chairman once per week for one hour. The Chairmanship of
these committees is spread among the regular faculty members, and outside
professionals are sought as other members of the committee. The distribution of
this workload is determined partially by student choice and faculty availability but
most members of the full-time faculty participate.
On the basis of the design tutorial courses only, with this faculty complement the
total enrolment in the School should probably be between 120 and 150 students.
However, our estimate of the actual backlog of "incomplete" students now at
Third year level and continuing or ready to start in 1982-83 on graduation projects
with all of those on Part 2 needing Committees, is 98 in Fall Term, and 74 in
Spring Term, which will place an alarming workload of between 7 and 5 students
per full-time faculty member per term on average. This workload must be picked
up over and above a more than average "full" workload combination of tutorial and
lecture courses, already producing contact hours above 25 hours/week in many
It should be noted here that the School is short 3.7 full-time positions. The money
for three of these is carried in a contingency fund, but for the past few years it
has been necessary to spend it on part-time sessionals to get the most efficient
staff distribution to the tutorials within the budget and maintain a balance of
elective courses in the program.
The change of the B.Arch. program to an M.Arch. was approved by the UCBC with
NO additional resources. It has hence been impossible to implement as scheduled
for 1982-83. Senate has also just approved a new post-professional Master's
degree, the Master of Advanced Studies in Architecture, which will replace the
present M.Arch. program. So far only Option A of that program has been
approved and other options are still under review. We expect to take the whole
package to UCBC in 1983 with a request for entirely new funding. In the
meantime, recruiting for the current M.Arch. program has been stopped entirely
and the students presently enrolled in that program will continue to complete that
degree. Their supervision requirements add a further overload on the same
We are continuing to seek new resources and outside support. We have received
strong endorsement of our Development Plan from the Architectural Institute of
British Columbia (AIBC). Additionally, we have been host to a Commonwealth
Association of Architects Visiting Board which has accredited this program - the
current B.Arch. - for an additional three years with the expectation that there
will be some action on the new program changes within that time. While their
report will not be available for another month, we know that the Board agrees
with our analysis of overload and understaffing and has made these views known to
the President.
In summary, the existing staff are carrying between 65 to 95 students in the
B.Arch. program and 7 students in M.Arch. more than they can properly handle.
That is between 42% and 78% overload. Reports of Committees of Senate
Admissions Committee
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
School of Architecture - Proposal to Limit Enrolment  (continued)
"On an interim basis until new resources are available, we have no alternative but
to seek enrolment controls which, to be effective, will probably have to be
a) on the size of the First year in order to reduce the total numbers
over time.
b) on the size of the Third year to reduce the biggest source of
overload from graduation project committees, and
c) by modification of regulations to put some limits on free choice
and some constraints on time for completion.
It is therefore moved that:
"Commencing in September, 1982, the number of new students admitted
to First year in the School of Architecture be restricted to 40 students
until additional faculty, space and other resources are available."
The Management Committee of the School with the Registrar will institute a
review of the procedures, regulations and other matters determining the
enrolment problem in Third year and if required, will bring recommendations to
the School Council and Senate for further action to reduce the severe staff
overloading problem that currently exists."
The Committee recommended approval of the recommendation, with the
deletion of the words, "until additional faculty, space and other resources are
Dr. Smith      ) That commencing in September, 1982, the number
Dr. Willman ) of new students admitted to First  Year  in  the
School    of    Architecture   be   restricted    to   40
There was some opposition to restricting First Year enrolment. It was
suggested that the Second and Third Years of the program be more structured
with a time limit set by which students who took time out could return to
complete the degree. There was concern expressed about the number of
enrolment limitations which had been submitted to Senate in recent months and it
was suggested that a study be made of all resources in the University to determine
if they could be "shifted around" rather than limiting enrolment in some areas.
Dr. Shaw drew attention to the recent report of the Retrenchment Committee
which took into account the problems faced by various areas of the University.
He recognized the difficulties experienced by the School of Architecture,
particularly in staffing the program and pointed out that the report from the
School indicated a review of the procedures would take place, particularly those
which affected enrolment in the higher years of the program. 7762.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
Reports of Committees of Senate
Admissions Committee
School of Architecture - Proposal to Limit Enrolment  (continued)
Professor Shadbolt, Director of the School of Architecture, was invited to
speak. He emphasized the difficulties faced by the School, and the necessity for
limiting the enrolment in First Year.
The motion was then put and carried.
Faculty  of  Education  -  Change  in  Admission Reguirements for the One-Year
Program (Secondary) for graduates of other Faculties
At the last Senate meeting, the proposal was referred back to the Senate
Admissions Committee for further consideration.
Dr. Smith       ) That the proposal be lifted from the table.
Dean Riedel  )
The Committee recommended approval of the revised proposal.
"(I)    Change (1981-82 Calendar, p.I I I, col.2, A.3.(b), para.2) - sentence "Subjects
marked with ... theatre*." to:
"Subjects marked with an asterisk must be accompanied by a concentration in
a subject not so marked: Agriculture*, anthropology*, art, Asian area
studies*, biological sciences, chemistry, Chinese*, commerce, economics*,
English, French, geography, geology, German*, history, home economics,
Italian*, Japanese*, library+, mathematics, music, physical education,
physics, political science*, Russian*, Sociology*, Spanish*, and theatre*."
+lt is possible for a student who has a bachelor's degree to combine teacher
preparation with a master's program in the School of Librarianship. For
further information, refer to the description of programs in the School of
(2) Delete (ibid, para.3) sentence "Students with appropriate concentrations or
with a major in one or more of the social sciences (anthropology, Asian
studies, sociology, economics, and/or political science), and with at least
three units of history and three units of geography will be considered."  "
In response to a query on why Psychology was not included as a
concentration, Dean Birch explained that Psychology was not a subject per se in
the high school curriculum. On a further query on the extent to which Geology
was offered in high schools, it was stated that at least two courses in "Earth
Science" were offered in almost every high school in the province.
The motion was then put and carried. 7763.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
Reports of Committees of Senate
Admissions Committee  (continued)
Faculty of Law - proposal concerning credit for single term courses
The committee recommended approval of the proposal:
"Calendar entry to be added on p. 169 of the 1981/82 Calendar
at the end of the section headed, "Examinations - (i) General", following the
provision for readmission after withdrawal or failure:
Where a student has withdrawn in the Spring term of his or her second or third
year, and is granted readmission into second or third year, he or she will receive
unit credit towards the requirements of that year for Fall term courses completed
before withdrawal, provided that:
(i)      withdrawal was necessitated by a medical or family emergency; and
(ii)     the  student  achieved  a  passing  mark  in  each completed course, and an
average mark of at least 55% over all completed courses.
Rationale: Under our present rules a student who is forced to withdraw in the
Spring term of his or her second or third year because of a medical or family
emergency, cannot carry forward any credit for one term courses fully completed
before withdrawal. He or she must be readmitted to the same year, and must
complete a full course load for that year, thus duplicating up to half a year's work.
In the rare case where withdrawal was really caused by an unavoidable emergency,
this rule operates somewhat harshly. The Committee's proposal would permit the
student to receive credit for all one-term courses already completed, and would
therefore enable him or her to complete second or third year by taking enough
units to make up the total required for the year. It would be open to the student,
under the present proposal, to take those remaining units in the Fall or Spring
term, or to spread them over both. The requirements labelled (i) and (ii) in the
proposal are designed to ensure that the provision cannot be used so as improperly
to reduce a student's load by spreading his or her courses over more than three
Dr. Smith      ) That    the    proposal    of    the    Faculty    of    Law
Dean Lysyk  ) concerning   credit   for   single   term   courses   be
In response to concern that the proposal would have an adverse effect on
part-time students, Dean Lysyk stated that it was not the intention to close the
door on part-time legal study but that the proposal was a liberalizing of the
regulations which would benefit students. It was realized that there might be
implications if the regulation was applied to part-time students, and the Faculty
would consider this question in due course.
Dr. Smith stated that the question of part-time study had been raised by the
Admissions Committee but the proposal did not relate to part-time study.
The motion was then put and carried. 7764.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
Reports of Committees of Senate  (continued)
Budget Committee
Dr. Wisenthal presented the report on behalf of the Chairman of the Committee,
Dr. Scudder.
"Three items are reported to Senate at this time:
1. Retrenchment 1982-83:  Reductions in Full-time Equivalent Positions
In the February 17, 1982 report to Senate, the Senate Budget Committee noted
that the bulk of the 1982-83 retrenchment would be in the reduction of Academic
and Support staff position budgets. At that time, only preliminary estimates on
the number of equivalent positions were available.
Now that final retrenchment adjustments have been made, and the 1982/83
Interim Operating Budget has been approved, details on the final reductions in
full-time equivalent positions are now available.   Table I presents these data.
2. Budget adjustments
The President has advised that he has been able to provide for positions in Social
Work and Sports Medicine, as recommended by the Senate Budget Committee.
Faculty travel funds for Agricultural Sciences will also be provided.
3. Priorities
The Committee is now preparing to formulate some guidelines prior to discussing
academic planning and priorities as they relate to the preparation of the
University budget. To this end, among the documents being considered are the
(i)      The Mission of The University of British Columbia, UBC, November 1979.
(ii)     Report   of   the   Committee   on   Academic   Priorities   and   Goals,   Faculty
Association, UBC, January 1982.
(iii)    Criteria  for the Evaluation of Academic Programs and Academic Units,
President's Committee on Fiscal Retrenchment, UBC, October 20, 1981.
The Senate Budget Committee would welcome suggestions, and invites members
of Senate to submit ideas in writing. 7765.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
Reports of Committees of Senate
Budget Committee (continued)
Academic Staff
Support Staff
Faculty   Sessional     T.A.  Subtotal    Tech.  Sec/Clk.  Subtotal
Agricultural Sciences
Applied Science
Commerce & Bus. Adm.
r oresTry
Graduate Studies
Health Sciences
Pharmaceutical Sciences
Credit Course Prog.-
Academic Services
Centre for Cont. Ed.
Student Services
Physical Plant ~
12.6      67.1
62.4      31.6
Credit course programs reductions in correspondence courses and in extrasessional
studies (Spring & Summer).
Academic services reductions in Berwick Centre (5.9 sessional) and in Botanical
Gardens (4.0 Technical).
Administration   reductions   in   VP   &   Bursar   (I),   Resources   Office   (I),   Vice-
Provost (I), Finance (I), Alumni Association (3)." 7766.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
Reports of Committees of Senate
Budget Committee  (continued)
Dr. Wisenthal agreed to provide details on how the Committee arrived at the
figures quoted in Table I.
Dr. Wisenthal went on to report, for information, that the operating grants for
1982/83 to the three Universities from the Universities Council of British Columbia
had been allocated. U.B.C. was to receive $179,242,575, an increase of 10.8% over
the 1981/82 operating grant. The increase for the three Universities was 12%. He
gave some details on the breakdown of the funds allocated to U.B.C.
The Senate Budget Committee had met to discuss the implications of the
allocation of the grants to the three Universities and had recommended to the
President that the following concerns be conveyed to the Board of Governors and to
the Universities Council.
1. That the Provincial Government ceiling of 12% on the 1982/83 grant for
general operating purposes for the three Universities is totally unrealistic in
the light of the special inflationary pressures faced by Universities in such
areas as library collections and scientific supplies and equipment.
2. That the Universities Council has not indicated the principles upon which it
allocated the 1982/83 operating grant among the three Universities and that
such information is essential as a basis for intelligent and responsible
academic planning.
3. That the Universities Council's 10.8% increase in the U.B.C. operating grant
for 1982/83 in the context of the overall 12% increase in the total operating
grants of the three Universities is inadequate and unacceptable. The
Universities Council has apparently continued to ignore the high cost per
student of U.B.C.'s extensive professional and graduate programs. We are
forced to conclude that the Universities Council is, in effect, encouraging
the University to compromise its commitment to high quality and essential
professional and graduate programs.
Dr. Wisenthal explained that the Committee felt that the criteria used by the
Universities Council to distribute the funds discriminated against the well established
University with a large range of high cost programs in such essential areas as
professional faculties and graduate programs. It was felt that the emphasis was being
placed on enrolment as opposed to the cost of programs and on development of new
programs as opposed to strengthening existing programs. 7767.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
Reports of Committees of Senate
Budget Committee (continued)
A general discussion followed during which concern was expressed over the
allocation of operating funds to the three Universities. While much of the concern
was centred on the needs of the professional faculties and the graduate programs,
Dean Finnegan pointed out the difficulties being encountered in the basic programs of
the Faculty of Science where it would become necessary to limit enrolment in the
near future if sufficient funding was not forthcoming. The opinion was expressed that
the apparent preoccupation of the Universities Council with enrolment figures
appeared to be counter to the government position that the quality and nature of
programs and not enrolment should determine the allocation funds.
It was agreed that the matter of insufficient funding was of major concern and it
was suggested that the implications of continued underfunding should be brought to
the attention of the provincial government.
Library Committee
Proposed new Policy on Branch Libraries and Reading Rooms
Dean Larkin presented the report.
"The primary responsibility of a university library is to develop the best collection
possible and to make that collection easily accessible to all who need to use it.
This end may, upon occasion, be furthered by the location of collections outside
the Main Library in places more convenient to the groups using them. In
establishing branch libraries, however, careful consideration must be given to the
need for broadly based, cost-efficient service units, staffed for adequate security
and reasonable hours of operation and requiring minimal duplication of collections.
The policies which follow have been formulated to ensure the continued viability
of branch library collections and services and to redefine the University Library's
role in relation to departmental reading rooms.
Branch Libraries
Branch libraries are major collections located outside the Main Library and are
integral parts of the University Library, available to the entire University
community and under the supervision of the University Librarian.
1. Branch libraries are the primary repositories for materials usually covering
several related subject areas. The Main Library, in general, does not
duplicate the collections of branch libraries.
2. Branch libraries are oriented toward the needs of those faculties and
departments primarily served by them but, as integral parts of the
University Library, are responsible for serving all members of the
3. Branch libraries are staffed by at least one professional librarian and such
other clerical and student assistance as is required, appointed by and
responsible to the University Librarian. 7768.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
Reports of Committees of Senate
Library Committee
Proposed new Policy on Branch Libraries and Reading Rooms
Branch Libraries (continued)
"4. Major branch libraries maintain the same, or approximately the same hours
of service as the Main Library. All branch libraries are staffed to provide
adequate, assured access to their resources.
5. Branch libraries have complete catalogues for materials in their collections,
and organize and administer the collections in a manner consistent with
established university library procedures.
Establishment of Branch Libraries
Branch libraries can only be established upon the recommendation of the
University Librarian and the Senate Library Committee in consultation with the
academic deans concerned with the approval of the President. The decision must
rest primarily on the following considerations:
1. The extent of teaching, graduate and research programs.
2. The number of students and faculty to be served.
3. The nature of the collection which can be formed as compared with the
needs of a broad group of users.
4. Present or future availability of quarters in a suitable location.
5. The degree of financial support available for staff, collections, and
catalogue preparations.
Reading Rooms
Reading rooms provide departments with small working or reference collections,
usually associated with study space, in departmental quarters and under
departmental control.
1. Reading room collections consist for the most part of reference and other
heavily used materials to which the department needs access at all times.
They will normally duplicate material held in the University Library system.
In addition, they may contain ephemeral or expendable publications which
are of particular interest to the department concerned.
2. Reading rooms exist primarily for the benefit and convenience of the
department concerned. As University property, the quarters and collections
should, however, be accessible to other members of the University.
3. Materials in reading room collections are purchased from departmental,
research or faculty funds.
4. Reading rooms are ordinarily staffed by departmental employees, who are
hired by and work under the supervision of the department concerned.
5. Reading rooms frequently maintain restricted hours of opening, depending on
the needs of the department and on its ability to provide supervisory staff. 7769.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
Reports of Committees of Senate
Library Committee
Proposed new Policy on Branch Libraries and Reading Rooms
Reading Rooms  (continued)
"6. Reading rooms may have a catalogue representing their own holdings,
maintained with the assistance of the Library. Reading room collections are
not represented in the central library catalogues.
Establishment of Reading Rooms
A department head who wishes to form a reading room should take a proposal to
the Dean of his Faculty. Responsibility for finding a suitable location and
financial support rests with the Department and Faculty concerned. The Library
will assist, if it can, by advising on procedures for operating a reading room and by
providing information needed for a local catalogue.
Implications of Implementation of New Policy
The Library has completed an extensive review of its relationship to reading
rooms. That process included the preparation of a substantial report on the cost
and effectiveness of the present reading room system, a survey of faculty
departments to determine their views on the importance of reading rooms, and
lengthy discussions with the Senate Library Committee on the alternatives
available to the Library in the face of retrenchment and the increased cost of
materials. While the review was prompted by immediate financial shortages,
prospects for funding over the longer term were considered to be most important.
From the review process, which has continued over the past six months, a number
of essential conclusions and decisions have emerged:
1. General Priorities
In the face of declining purchasing power and staff, the limited funds available to
the Library must be used to support fewer, larger units which will be viable over
the long term. In addition to changes in the Library's relationship to reading
rooms, the organization of services in the Main Library and the status of small
branches must also be re-examined as opportunities for reorganization arise.
2. Collections Funding
It will not be possible after 1982/83 to purchase materials for reading room
collections from collections funds allocated to the Library. The continued loss in
purchasing power of Library collections funding requires that priority be given to
maintaining the quality, scope and accessibility of central collections. If
duplicate subscriptions are to continue to exist in reading rooms for the
convenience of departmental users, responsibility for funding them must be
shifted to those departments.
In order to alleviate some of the burden which will have to be assumed by
departments choosing to continue their reading rooms, the Library will:
(a) provide such collections support to reading rooms as circumstances
permit through the 1982/83 fiscal year (departments will, however, be
expected to assume responsibility for the costs of reading room books
and periodicals for 1983/84); Reports of Committees of Senate
Library Committee
Proposed new Policy on Branch Libraries and Reading Rooms
Implications of Implementation of New Policy
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
"2.       Collections Funding  (continued)
(b) recommend to the University that a portion of the funds required to
support essential reading room collections be transferred from the
Library to departments in 1983/84. At best, this would be sufficient to
cover only a fraction of the collections costs, but it might help
departments to continue a core collection of those reading room
materials they consider essential.
The transfer of responsibility for reading room collections to the departments will
resolve persistent and growing questions of priority in the purchase and location of
materials. Within the limits of available financial resources, departments will be
able to decide how much duplication is required and which titles are most needed
in their reading rooms.
3.       Services to Reading Rooms
As part of the process of retrenchment, the Library's Reading Rooms Division will
be disbanded in September, 1982. Limited assistance to reading rooms will
continue to be available for the remainder of 1982/83, but it will no longer be
possible to provide some kinds of assistance available in the past.
Processing services (ordering, receiving, recording, cataloguing, binding) for
reading rooms will be continued through 1982/83, although some changes will be
necessary before the year's end as services are phased out. After April I, 1983
central processing of reading room materials must be discontinued. The Library
processing divisions will no longer be in a position to order and receive materials
purchased for reading room collections, nor will the holdings of reading rooms
continue to be reflected in the central microcatalogue.
For those reading rooms that wish to continue to maintain a local catalogue, the
Library will establish a procedure for providing catalogue copy. It may be
feasible, as an option, to provide printed catalogue cards for titles already
recorded in the UBC Library catalogue data base. "
In response to a query, it was agreed that each Faculty would be notified of
the cost of operating Reading Rooms within its jurisdiction. As a point of
clarification, Dean Larkin stated that the Committee was recommending that a
portion of the present Library budget for Reading Rooms would be allocated to
departments with Reading Rooms for collections.
The students expressed concern about the implications of closing department
Reading Rooms and suggested an amendment to item 6 of the proposed new policy
on Reading Rooms, second sentence to read, "reading room collections be fully
represented in the Central Library catalogue until April I, 1983 after which only
those holdings affected by journal-cancellations or by closure of reading rooms
will be recorded". It was agreed that the students would discuss the matter fully
with the Librarian and a report would be brought back to Senate at a later date. 7771.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
Reports of Committees of Senate
Library Committee
Proposed new Policy on Branch Libraries and Reading Rooms  (continued)
There was much concern expressed over the difficulties which would be
experienced by departments with the loss of purchasing power which would result
under the new policy.
After further discussion, the motion was put and carried.
Motion re Rules of Order
Dr. Elder proposed a change to the motion which was circulated:
Dr. Elder     ) That the Nominating Committee name an ad hoc
Rev. Burns ) committee to recommend rules of order for the
guidance of Senate.
Dr. Elder outlined her reasons for recommending Rules of Order for Senate. She
felt it would be particularly beneficial to new members of Senate. The students
strongly endorsed the motion.
Chancellor Clyne spoke against the motion. He was of the opinion that discussions
would be impaired if Senate had to comply with technical rules of order.
The motion was lost 32/25.
Report of the Librarian
The report had been circulated for information. Mr. Mclnnes expressed his thanks
to Dean Larkin and the other members of the Library Committee for their efforts
during the past year. In speaking to the report, Mr. Mclnnes drew particular attention
to the discussion of library collections and support. He stated that despite the support
given by the University the uncertainty of funding from year to year made planning
The report had not been distributed as widely as in the past and Mr. Mclnnes
announced that copies could be obtained from the Librarian's Office.
Dean Larkin commended Mr. Mclnnes for the splendid work he had done in the
past year as Acting Librarian. 7772.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
Report of the Tributes Committee (in camera)
Dean Larkin reported that the committee recommended that the following be
granted emeritus status:
Mr. L. F. Ashley Associate Professor Emeritus of Education
Dr. W. F. Bie Clinical Professor Emeritus of Obstetrics and
Dr. J. S. Forsyth Professor Emeritus of Chemical Engineering
Dr. V. J. Krajina Professor Emeritus of Botany
Dr. J. E. Ross Clinical Associate Professor Emeritus of Obstetrics
and Gynaecology
Dr. G. H. Stephenson Clinical Associate Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry
Dr. D. J. Watterson Clinical Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry
Dr. J. W. Whitelaw Clinical Professor Emeritus of Paediatrics
Dean Larkin )  That    the    recommendations    of    the    Tributes
Chancellor Clyne )  Committee     concerning     emeritus     status     be
In response to a query, Dean Larkin stated that of those who were offered
emeritus status, almost all accepted the distinction. Of the names listed above, all but
one had retired on December 31, 1981. One had retired previously and had only now
accepted the distinction.
The motion was put and carried.
Honorary Degrees
Dean Larkin reminded Senate that a request had been made for nominations for
candidates for honorary degrees. Only one name had been submitted to date. He
would again circulate a request to Deans, Directors and Department Heads and urged
that consideration be given to this matter.
In response to a query, Dean Larkin stated that the candidates who had not been
awarded honorary degrees remained on the list for the following year and were then
dropped from the list. It was suggested that all those who had nominated candidates
for honorary degrees should be informed each year of the status of the nomination.
Criteria for the awarding of Honorary Degrees
The Tributes Committee has reviewed the history of the Committee's work with
respect to the criteria that are to be used in recommending to Senate candidates for
honorary degrees.
Various guidelines have appeared from time to time in the minutes of the Committee,
but there is no record of a formal statement that was approved by Senate.
The Tributes Committee recommends that Senate adopt the following statement on
criteria for the awarding of honorary degrees: 7773.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
Report of the Tributes Committee  (in camera)
Criteria for the awarding of Honorary Degrees  (continued)
"The award of an honorary degree is a recognition by the University of British
Columbia of distinguished achievement or of outstanding service.
Nominees should be distinguished scholars, creative artists, public servants,
persons prominent in the community and the professions, and others who
have made significant contributions to the life of the University, the
Province, or nationally or internationally.
The overriding criteria for the award of an honorary degree should be
excellence, eminence and accomplishment."
Dean Larkin )  That Senate adopt the Criteria for the awarding
Chancellor Clyne ) of Honorary Degrees.
The meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
The next regular meeting of Senate will be held on Wednesday, May 19, 1982.
Chairman. 7774.
Wednesday,  April 21,   1982.
New awards recommended to Senate
Alpha Gamma Delta Award - An award in the amount of approximately $250 has
been made available by the Alpha Gamma Delta Alumni to a member of the Alpha
Gamma Delta Fraternity who is entering her third or higher year of study. In
choosing the candidate, the selection committee will consider the student's
academic abilities, university and community activities, and service within the
Fraternity. (Please note that this award will be made available in the 1982/83
Winter Session.)
G. E. "Ted" Baynes Student Award - An award in the amount of $ 1,000 has been
made available by G. E. Baynes, B.A.Sc. '32. The award will be made to an
undergraduate student in Engineering who is a Canadian citizen and who has
demonstrated strong qualities of leadership, combined with active participation in
sports. In selecting the candidate, consideration will also be given to academic
standing and financial need. The award will be made by the Faculty of Applied
Science in consultation with the Engineering Undergraduate Society. (Please note
that this award will be made available in the 1983/84 Winter Session.)
Kilborn Engineering Scholarship - A scholarship in the amount of $2,000 has been
made available by Kilborn Engineering (B.C.) Ltd. The award will be made to an
undergraduate student entering the penultimate year in a program leading to the
B.A.Sc. degree in Mining, Mineral Processing, or Coal Preparation. Subject to
continued satisfactory academic progress, the award would be renewed for the
student's final year. The award will be made on the recommendation of the
Department. (Please note that this award will be made available in the 1982/83
Winter Session.)
Konorak Prize in Indie Studies - This prize in the amount of $200 is instituted to
promote excellence in South Asian studies. It will be made, on the
recommendation of the Head of the Department of Asian Studies, to a student
who completes a major in South Asian studies, with excellence. It may be
withheld if no suitable candidate is available. (Please note that this award will be
made available in the 1982/83 Winter Session.)


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items