9846. November 14, 1990 The Third Regular Meeting of the Senate of The University of British Columbia for the Session 1990-91 was held on Wednesday, November 14, 1990 at 8.00 p.m. in Room 102, George F. Curtis Building. Present: President D. W. Strangway, (Chairman), Chancellor L. R. Peterson, Vice-President D. R. Birch, Mr. S. Alsgard, Mr. D. A. Anderson, Miss M. D. Bain, Mr. R. Bush, Mr. J. A. Banfield, Dr. M. A. Boyd, Dr. D. M. Brunette, Professor P. L. Bryden, Rev. P. C. Burns, Miss A. L. Callegari, Dr. D. G. A. Carter, Dr. R. L. Chase, Dr. S. Cherry, Dr. T. S. Cook, Dr. K. Dawson, Dr. J. D. Dennison, Dr. A. J. Elder, Mr. E. B. Goehring, Dean J. R. Grace, Dr. S. E. Grace, Dr. R. D. Guy, Dr. S. W. Hamilton, Ms. A. Ironside, Dr. M. Isaacson, Dr. S. Katz, Dr. J. G. T. Kelsey, Miss w. A. King, Dr. M. M. Klawe, Mr. 0. C. W. Lau, Dr. S. C. Lindstrom, Dean P. A. Lusztig, Miss S. A. Mair, Dean M. P. Marchak, Dean B. C. McBride, Mr. R. H. McGowan, Mr. B. V. McGuinness, Dr. J. A. McLean, Dean J. H. McNeill, Dr. A. G. Mitchell, Mr. J. A. Moss, Mr. M. D. Nikkei, Dr. L. Paszner, Dr. R. J. Patrick, Ms. B. M. Peterson, Mr. B. D. Prins, Professor R. S. Reid, Dr. P. Resnick, Dean J. F. Richards, Mr. M. M. Ryan, Mr. A. J. Scow, Dr. G. G. E. Scudder, Dean N. Sheehan, Dr. C. E. Slonecker, Dr. L. de Sobrino, Mr. M. Sugimoto, Ms. H. Swinkels, Mr. B. Taylor, Dr. R. C. Tees, Mr. G. A. Thorn, Dr. A. Van Seters, Dr. J. Vanderstoep, Dr. J. M. Varah, Dr. D. A. Wehrung, Dr. R. M. Will, Dr. D. Ll. Williams, Ms. N. E. Woo, Dr. W. C. Wright, Jr. Messages of regret for their inability to attend were received from Dr. A. P. Autor, Dean c S. Binkley, Dean P. T. Burns, Professor E. A. Carty, Mr. N. A. Davidson, Dr. G. W. Eaton, Dr. J. F. Helliwell, Dean M. J. Hollenberg, Mrs. L. Lohia, Mr. W. B. McNulty, Mr. J. R. G. McQueen, Dean A. Meisen, Dean P. B. Robertson, Ms. P. F. Silver, Dr. L. J. Stan. Minutes of previous meeting Dr. Tees ) That the minutes of the Second regular Dr. McLean ) meeting of Senate for the Session 1990-91, having been circulated, be taken as read and adopted. Dr. Grace drew attention to the emeritus status on page 9843 of the minutes. Dr. Grace noted that there was an inconsistency in that males without Ph.d's were referred to as professors, whereas females on this list were referred to as Mrs. It was agreed that the minutes be changed to reflect consistency. The motion was put and carried. 9847. November 14, 1990 Business arising from the minutes Student participation in matters of appointments, promotion and tenure (p.9837) Notice of the following motion had been given at the previous meeting: "Be it moved that an ad hoc committee be instructed to consult faculty and students with regard to the existing Senate guidelines barring student participation from department decision-making on appointments, promotion, and tenure, and report back to Senate on whether changes may be required to these guidelines." The following relevant section from the Collective Agreement, and the specific guideline to Faculties addressed in the above motion, had been circulated for information: Procedures for the Appointment, Promotion and Tenure of Faculty In the Agreement on Conditions of Appointment for Faculty, the University and the Faculty Association have agreed on conditions of appointment, promotion and tenure of faculty. So far as consultation is concerned, the following are the two particularly relevant sections: 5.02 Departmental Consultation (a) The Department Head shall consult formally at meetings convened for that purpose with eligible members of the Department in order to ascertain their views and to obtain their recommendation concerning appointment, reappointment, appointment without term and promotion. Informal consultation with other faculty members is not precluded. (c) Faculty members eligible to be consulted are: (i) In the case of initial appointments, those of a rank equal to or higher than the rank at which the appointment is to be made. (ii) In the case of reappointments and promotions, those higher in rank than the candidate, except that in the case of reappointment of a Professor those holding the rank of Professor are eligible to be consulted. (iii) In the case of appointments without term, those holding an appointment without term and being of equal or higher rank. Principles concerning student membership in Faculties were approved by Senate on January 17, 1973 and rescinded in April 1977. However, Senate recommended that the Faculties adopt the Principles as guidelines until further review. Most Faculties have reaffirmed Principle 3 below: 9848. November 14, 1990 Business arising from the minutes Student participation in matters of appointments, promotion and tenure (continued) Principle 3 Although student opinions shall be sought, and wherever practicable in a formal way, student representation shall not be permitted at Faculty meetings and/or Faculty committees dealing with the following matters: budget, salaries and other financial business; scholarships and other student awards; adjudication of marks and academic standing, and appointments, tenure and promotion (in this particular case student opinions must be obtained by means of appropriate course and instruction evaluations). President Strangway explained that it was important that Senate understand the actual procedures that had to be dealt with since the issues being raised were specifically contained within the Agreement on Conditions of Appointment for Faculty. He then read to Senate the following statement: "The procedures for the appointment, promotion and tenure of faculty are contained in an agreement on conditions of appointment of faculty entered into between the University and the Faculty Association. The agreement was approved by the Board of Governors on behalf of the University pursuant to the Board's authority under the University Act. That agreement cannot be altered except by the agreement of the University and the Association. The Senate has no direct authority to deal with the appointment of faculty, thus any expression of Senate's view would constitute advice to the University on what might or might not be included in any re-negotiation of the agreement with the Faculty Association." Dr. Resnick ) Be it moved that an ad hoc committee be Dr. Katz ) instructed to consult faculty and students with regard to the existing Senate guidelines barring student participation from department decision-making on appointments, promotion, and tenure, and report back to Senate on whether changes may be required to these guidelines. Dr. Resnick explained that he had initiated the motion because it had been brought to his attention that while students were represented on search committees for Presidents, Deans, and Senior Academic Administrators, the Senate guidelines exclude student participation in matters dealing with budget, salaries, scholarships, adjudication of 9849. November 14, 1990 Business arising from the minutes Student participation in matters of appointments, promotion and tenure (continued) marks, appointments, tenure, and promotion. He noted that on looking through the minutes of various Faculties with respect to these guidelines, some Faculties had not adopted guidelines and some had. Also, each Faculty's interpretation of the guidelines varied, resulting in a great deal of inconsistency across the campus. Dr. Resnick emphasized that the motion did not commit Senate to any course of action, and that if the motion passed it would be the ad hoc committee's responsibility to consult broadly with Faculties and Departments and report back to Senate with a set of recommendations, which might or might not suggest changes. He also acknowledged that the proposed committee would have to be involved in discussions with the Faculty Association and the administration. In conclusion, Dr. Resnick stated that there were three major arguments to be borne in mind; the question of equity, the advantages of student participation, and democracy. Speaking on behalf of the Faculty Association, Professor Bryden expressed appreciation for the clarification of the situation vis-a-vis the collective agreement since the Faculty Association would take the position that this was a bargainable issue and the University could not unilaterally change the terms of conditions of appointment in the existing framework agreement without some negotiation process taking place. Professor Bryden also stated that, in his opinion, there was a substantial distinction between the selection of people for administrative positions and the selection of faculty whose employment is subject to the conditions of a collective agreement. He also maintained that there was a substantial distinction between the process of hiring and the process of tenure evaluation and promotion. 9850. November 14, 1990 Business arising from the minutes Student participation in matters of appointments, promotion and tenure (continued) Dr. Chase informed Senate that department heads in the Faculty of Science recently agreed that search committees should include women and that this could be a faculty member or, in the event that there was not a woman faculty member, this could be a graduate or undergraduate student. Dean Lusztig pointed out that Faculties do obtain input from students and yet stay within the collective agreement. He stated that there was no reason why students could not be consulted extensively by any group of faculty conducting deliberations. Dean Lusztig said it was important that people understand that for many years Faculties have acknowledged the important input that students can make, particularly in relation to teaching and supervision of theses and dissertations. He stated that the difficulty is that when it comes to actually voting on a particular issue, just as faculty who are junior to a candidate cannot exercise a vote, so too students are excluded from that. Dr. slonecker stated that in the selection of Deans and Department Heads, the committees were advisory and were not involved in the actual appointment. Dr. will pointed out that as far as appointments were concerned, even under the collective agreement not all faculty participate in decisions on tenure. The motion was put and carried. Chairman's remarks and related questions President Strangway asked Dr. slonecker to comment on the University's 1990 Fall Congregation Ceremonies. 9850. November 14, 1990 Business arising from the minutes Student participation in matters of appointments, promotion and tenure (continued) Dr. Chase informed Senate that department heads in the Faculty of Science recently agreed that search committees should include women and that this could be a faculty member or, in the event that there was not a woman faculty member, this could be a graduate or undergraduate student. Dean Lusztig pointed out that Faculties do obtain input from students and yet stay within the collective agreement. He stated that there was no reason why students could not be consulted extensively by any group of faculty conducting deliberations. Dean Lusztig said it was important that people understand that for many years Faculties have acknowledged the important input that students can make, particularly in relation to teaching and supervision of theses and dissertations. He stated that the difficulty is that when it comes to actually voting on a particular issue, just as faculty who are junior to a candidate cannot exercise a vote, so too students are excluded from that. Dr. Slonecker stated that in the selection of Deans and Department Heads, the committees were advisory and were not involved in the actual appointment. Dean will pointed out that as far as appointments were concerned, even under the collective agreement not all faculty participate in decisions on tenure. The motion was put and carried. Chairman's remarks and related questions President Strangway asked Dr. Slonecker to comment on the University's 1990 Fall Congregation Ceremonies. 9851. November 14, 1990 Chairman's remarks and related questions (continued) Dr. Slonecker stated that this special ceremony had been instituted to commemorate UBC's 75th Anniversary. He stated that three honorary degrees and degrees in course were to be presented at the ceremony, and that 75 anniversary medals were to be awarded in recognition of the contributions made by staff, faculty and people involved in university life over recent years. Dr. slonecker encouraged Senate members to take part in the ceremonies. President Strangway drew Senate's attention to the official opening of the Koerner Ceramic Gallery on December 10th and invited members to participate in the opening ceremonies. He noted that the gallery contained a collection of 15th and 16th century ceramics of incredible beauty. Correspondence The Secretary read to Senate a letter from Mrs. Blythe Eagles expressing appreciation for the kind tribute paid in memory of her late husband. Candidates for Degrees Lists of candidates for degrees, as approved by the various Faculties and Schools, were made available for inspection by Senate members prior to the meeting. Dean McBride ) That the candidates for degrees and diplomas, Mr. Carter ) as approved by the Faculties and Schools, be granted the degree or diploma for which they were recommended, and that the Registrar, in consultation with the Deans and the Chairman of Senate, make any necessary adjustments. Carried 9852. November 14, 1990 Reports of Committees of Senate Admissions Committee General Policy on Admissions - revised Calendar statement Dr. Will, Chair of the Committee, presented the following proposed revision to the Calendar statement on General Policy on Admission under "Admission to the University": General Policy on Admission The University of British Columbia seeks applications from students who can benefit from and contribute to the varied and stimulating academic life at this University. The University's admission regulations and procedures are intended to identify such students and to ensure that they enter programs at a level which will allow them to get the maximum benefit from their university studies. The admission requirements in this section refer to the minimum educational level necessary for admission to the University. Reference must also be made to those sections of the calendar giving specific requirements for admission to the various programs of study in the Faculties and Schools. Excellent students who do not meet all of the published admission requirements may be considered for admission in exceptional cases. The University reserves the right, the published regulations notwithstanding, to deny admission on the basis of overall academic record and to limit enrolment by selecting from among qualified applicants those who will be admitted. An applicant must be able to undertake studies in the medium of the English language and produce evidence of competence to do so; where there is doubt an applicant may be required to take a test of facility in the English language prior to admission to the University and, if admitted, to take English language training. Advance Credit or Placement Advance credit and/or placement may be given... (no change in the existing two paragraph entry on advanced credit). Students with Disabilities (no change in the existing two paragraph entry on students with disabilities)" Dr. Will ) That the proposed revision to the Calendar Dr. Elder ) statement on General Policy on Admission be approved. 9853. November 14, 1990 Reports of Committees of Senate Admissions Committee General Policy on Admissions - revised Calendar statement (continued) Dr. Will informed Senate that the following statement had been removed from the Calendar: "Except in exceptional circumstances no student under the age of 16 is admitted." Dean Lusztig drew attention to the statement which says: "excellent students who do not meet all of the published admission requirements may be considered for admission in exceptional cases." He stated that he was supportive of the notion that excellent students who do not meet all of the published admission requirements be considered for admission in exceptional cases. However, the statement did not say who would consider such cases, and he therefore proposed the following amendment: In amendment: Dean Lusztig ) That the sentence: "Excellent students Dean McBride ) who do not meet all of the published admission requirements may be considered for admission in exceptional cases." be changed to read: "Excellent...exceptional cases by the Dean of the Faculty or the Dean's designate." Dr. Elder spoke against the amendment stating that the Senate Admissions Committee has the responsibility to admit students who may or may not meet the guidelines and she saw no reason to change the regular procedure. Dean Lusztig argued that Faculties would be more likely to attract good students if such students were not forced to go through the Senate Admissions Committee appeal procedure, and that his amendment would allow Faculties the necessary flexibility when dealing with exceptional students who do not meet all the admissions requirements. After further discussion the amendment was put and carried. 9854. November 14, 1990 Reports of Committees of Senate Admissions Committee General Policy on Admissions - revised Calendar statement (continued) In response to a query by Dean Marchak, the Registrar read to Senate a paragraph from the Calendar concerning fees for remedial work in connection with the English language requirement, and confirmed that students were responsible for the payment of such fees. The motion was put and carried. Dr. Will informed Senate that the Faculties of Arts, Science and Applied Science had established a joint committee to review their admissions criteria and that they would be recommending changes in due course. Committee on Appeals on Academic Standing Dr. Hickling, Chair of the 1987-90 Committee, had been invited to present the following annual report which had been circulated for information: "1. Introduction Under s.2.07 of the Policies and Procedures set out on pages 21 and 22 of the University Calendar for 1990-91, the Committee is required to make an annual report to Senate. That report must state "the number of appeals heard, their disposition, and the general nature of the appeals". The Committee is also required to "draw the Senate's attention to any other matters of general significance in the University which have arisen out of the Committee's work". In recent years the practice has been to submit the annual report in April or May. That precedent was not followed this year for two reasons. First, the Committee was required to dispose of a number of appeals scheduled for April and May. The timinq of those cases rendered it impossible to meet the deadline for either the April or May meetings of Senate. Secondly, since this was the final year of Senate for a number of the Committee members (including the chairperson), it was felt desirable to issue a report covering the period up to the September meeting of Senate, at which point the existing Committee's jurisdiction expired. The final award of the Committee was issued on 12th September, 1990, the date of the first meeting of the new Senate. 9854. November 14, 1990 Reports of Committees of Senate Admissions Committee General Policy on Admissions - revised Calendar statement (continued) In response to a query by Dean Marchak, the Registrar read to Senate a paragraph from the Calendar concerning fees for remedial work in connection with the English language requirement, and confirmed that students were responsible for the payment of such fees. The motion was put and carried. Dean Will informed Senate that the Faculties of Arts, Science and Applied Science had established a joint committee to review their admissions criteria and that they would be recommending changes in due course. Committee on Appeals on Academic Standing Dr. Hickling, Chair of the 1987-90 Committee, had been invited to present the following annual report which had been circulated for information: "1. Introduction Under s.2.07 of the Policies and Procedures set out on pages 21 and 22 of the University Calendar for 1990-91, the Committee is required to make an annual report to Senate. That report must state "the number of appeals heard, their disposition, and the general nature of the appeals". The Committee is also required to "draw the Senate's attention to any other matters of general significance in the University which have arisen out of the Committee's work". In recent years the practice has been to submit the annual report in April or May. That precedent was not followed this year for two reasons. First, the Committee was required to dispose of a number of appeals scheduled for April and May. The timing of those cases rendered it impossible to meet the deadline for either the April or May meetings of Senate. Secondly, since this was the final year of Senate for a number of the Committee members (including the chairperson), it was felt desirable to issue a report covering the period up to the September meeting of Senate, at which point the existing Committee's jurisdiction expired. The final award of the Committee was issued on 12th September, 1990, the date of the first meeting of the new Senate. 9855. November 14, 1990 Reports of Committees of Senate Committee on Appeals on Academic Standing (continued) 2. The Number, Nature and Disposition of Cases (i) Total number Since the last report on 5th April 1989, the Committee has heard and disposed of twelve appeals. Although the number may be relatively small in comparison with that processed by other committees, the hearings were sometimes quite lengthy. The longest hearing lasted a total of ten sitting hours, spread over three days. Another took five and a half hours, ending at 11.24 p.m. The total number of appeals appears to be comparable to that of the previous year when allowance is made for the extended period covered by the present report. (ii) The Jurisdiction of the Committee and the Disposition of cases The opening words of s.2.01(1) of the Committee's terms of reference may suggest that the Committee has an all-encompassing jurisdiction where the decision appealed may have an impact upon the appellant's academic standing. It states that "The Committee shall hear and dispose of appeals by students from the decision of Faculties on matters of academic standing...". However, that has to be read in the light of the remainder of s.2. It will be noted, first, that the Committee has no jurisdiction at all if the sole issue raised in an appeal turns on the exercise of academic judgement. Secondly, in order to succeed, an appellant has to persuade the Committee that the decision under appeal was arrived at through "unfair or improper procedures". That phrase is defined as including "the consideration of information which ought not to have been considered, and the failure to consider information that ought properly to have been considered". Thirdly, whilst it is sufficient to show that a wrong decision on the merits may have been arrived at, the appellant must establish a causal relationship between the decision and the alleged unfair or improper procedure. Failure to establish any of those elements means that the Committee must dismiss the appeal: see s.2.04(1). In the period covered by this report, the appellants succeeded in only three cases. When it allows an appeal the Committee may either reverse the decision and grant such academic standing as it deems appropriate or quash the decision and send it back to the Faculty to be dealt with in accordance with proper procedures. The Senate Committee chose the latter course in one case where there had been a failure to obtain or consider information. In one case it was held that on the particular facts the Faculty concerned was precluded from denying that the student concerned had fulfilled the degree requirements. In the other successful appeal, the Committee directed that the student be allowed to sit an examination as an unclassified student after the majority of the Committee had concluded that insufficient steps had been taken to bring home to her the policies and practices governing her admission to the course. 9856. November 14, 1990 Reports of Committees of Senate Committee on Appeals on Academic Standing 2. The Number, Nature and Disposition of Cases (ii) The Jurisdiction of the Committee and the Disposition of cases (continued) The significance of the very limited success rate has to be weighed in the light of the limited jurisdiction of the Committee. It does not possess a roving commission to deal with student complaints of every kind that may remotely relate to the appellant's academic standing. In particular, it has no jurisdiction over the content of courses, the manner in which they are taught, or the competency of instructors - matters which were the real, underlying complaints in some of the appeals brought before the Committee. Thus dismissal of an appeal under s.2.04(1) does not necessarily mean that in the Senate Committee's opinion the matter had been handled properly. In several of the cases brought before the Senate Committee the gist of the complaint was that the Faculty or Department concerned had failed either to listen to or to deal effectively with grievances about which the students felt strongly. The complaints were brought before the Senate Committee because there appeared to be no other mechanism by which the grievance could be ventilated. Whilst the Senate Committee was compelled to allow a hearing into the alleged procedural errors involved, it lacked the authority to deal with or remedy the real complaint. Had there been adequate alternative machinery in place, it seems likely that the Senate Committee's load would have reduced by at least 25%. It has been suggested by several members of the Senate Committee that the creation of the office of a University Ombudsperson might well provide a more satisfactory method of dealing with such complaints than an appeal to the Senate Committee. Indeed, the creation of such an office could well obviate the necessity of an appeal in some cases that clearly do fall within the Senate Committee's jurisdiction. It could help to ensure that fair procedures are followed in situations in which the Faculty or Department concerned has no procedure or no adequate procedure for dealing with appeals or complaints. That is a matter of continuing concern to the Senate Committee. It will be recalled that it was raised by the Senate Committee in its last report (see 1989 Report, p.3). 3. The Right to Legal Representation In one of the appeals, the Senate Committee was invited to disqualify itself from sittinq on the ground that it was biased against students appearing with lawyers. The application was rejected as unfounded. The Committee has no objection to students appearing before it with counsel. In the past year, twenty five percent have done so. Where the appellant is not represented, it is a common practice of the Senate Committee to relax the procedures set out in part IV of the Policies and Procedures of the Committee. The student appellant is allowed the maximum latitude consistent with a fair hearing. The 9857. November 14, 1990 Reports of Committees of Senate Committee on Appeals on Academic Standing 3. The Right to Legal Representation (continued) Committee tends to administer the rules more strictly where the appellant is represented by counsel, though even in such a case it will relax the normal rules rather than leave the appellant with the impression that a full and fair opportunity to present the case was not allowed. The presence of counsel usually results in the alleged procedural errors being defined with greater particularity than when the student is unrepresented. The Senate Committee is also very conscious of the fact that in some of the cases coming before it the student's chosen career is in issue. Five of the cases heard by the Committee since April 1989 involved students from professional Faculties who had been denied promotion or the right to proceed further. De facto a negative decision by the Senate Committee would spell the end of the student's career. In each of those cases, the appeal was lost. In two of them, the appellant was represented by counsel. In short, it is not the policy of the Senate Committee to discourage legal representation if that is the appellant's wish. Cost is often a deterrent, though students should be aware that legal assistance can be provided free of charge through the Law Students Legal Advice Program (L.S.L.A.P.) under which the student counsel are supervised by a salaried legal aid lawyer. Legal advice may result in the screening out of unmeritorious cases, though there is nothing to prevent a student from pursuing an appeal even if there is no chance of success. 4. Relationship between Applications for Review of Assigned Standing and Policies and Procedures of Senate Committee Page 24 of the 1990-91 Calendar prescribes the procedure to be followed in applying for a review of assigned standing. The first paragraph under the heading of Policies and Procedures for Senate Appeals on Academic Standing (p.21 of the Calendar), sets out the steps the student should follow in appealing decisions relating to their academic studies. It appears that some degree of confusion has arisen over the relationship between these Calendar entries. Whilst in this report the Senate Committee does not propose a change, it is suggested that the newly constituted Senate Committee may wish to consider the two paragraphs, with a view to clarifying the relationship between them. 5. The Functioning of the Committee It would be remiss of the Committee not to record its thanks to the Office of the Registrar, and to Mrs. Frances Medley in particular, for the assistance rendered to the Committee over the course of the year. To Mrs. Medley fell the task of scheduling the hearings - a task always discharged with tolerance and good humour." Prof. Bryden ) That the report be received for information Dr. Sobrino ) Carried 9858. November 14, 1990 Reports of Committees of Senate (continued) Nominating Committee Dr. Elder, Chair of the Committee, presented the following report: 1. Proposed membership of Ad Hoc Committee on Teaching Evaluation At its meeting of October 10, 1990, Senate agreed to the establishment of an ad hoc committee to review the policy, administration and the use of teaching evaluations, in consultation with the Faculties and students, and to report back to Senate on its recommendations. The Nominating Committee recommends the following membership: Dr. R. L. Chase Dr. J. G. T. Kelsey Miss W. A. King Mr. 0. C. W. Lau Mr. B. D. Prins Dr. P. Resnick Mr. M. Sugimoto Dr. J. Vanderstoep 2. Vacancies on Senate Committees The Nominating Committee nominates the following persons to fill vacancies on Senate Committees: Agenda Committee Dr. C. E. Slonecker - replacing Dr. A. J. Elder Academic Policy Committee Miss S. A. Mair - replacing Ms. T. L. Jackson Admissions Mr. J. A. Moss - replacing Miss W. A. King Dr. Elder ) That the recommendations of the Mr. Banfield ) Nominating Committee be approved. Carried Committee on Student Awards Dr. Cook, Chair of the Committee, presented the report. Dr. Cook ) That the new awards (listed in the Appendix) Chancellor Peterson) be accepted subject to the approval of the Board of Governors and that letters of thanks be sent to the donors. Carried 9859. November 14, 1990 Reports of Committees of Senate Committee on Student Awards (continued) Dr. Cook ) That the Van-Tel Credit Union - Sadie Dr. Varah ) Mcllwaine Memorial Bursary be received for discussion. Carried It was explained in the material circulated that the Committee wished to seek Senate's advice on matters related to the application of its policy and guidelines included in the document entitled Conditions of Acceptance of Student Awards approved by Senate on May 23, 1990. It was stated that in October 1973, Senate approved two similar awards offered by this donor. (The Van-Tel Credit Union - Les King Memorial Bursary and the Van-Tel Credit Union - Leo Morris Memorial Bursary), and that although the University no longer accepts new awards which are tenable at other post secondary institutions, Senate has previously accepted such new awards where similar awards offered by the same donor are already in place. It was noted that this new award and many existing awards contain non-academic restrictions which fall outside the "affirmative action" context of Senate's policy and guidelines. Dr. Cook reported that the Senate Committee on Student Awards had considered the award on three occasions. The Committee was unable to reach consensus as to whether the award was consistent with the policy adopted by Senate last May. The discussion that followed focused on the fact that the award was tenable at several institutions. It was noted that the University no longer accepts new awards that are open to students at other institutions but it has accepted such awards where similar awards offered by the same donor are already in place. There was considerable discussion about the ability of the University to evaluate applicants who are attending other institutions. It was suggested that these awards 9860. November 14, 1990 Reports of Committees of Senate Committee on Student Awards (continued) should be administered by the donors, however many donors would have difficulty in evaluating transcripts and in many cases the donors wanted to isolate themselves from the selection process. Dr. Dawson suggested that the University might continue to administer the awards but that the donors should be charged for this service. It was also suggested that UBC should not only consider whether it ought to accept new "affiliation awards" but that it should consider the possibility of handing back existing ones. Dean Lusztig stated that although the University had accepted such awards in the past, now that guidelines had been established there was no obligation to continue to accept such awards. He also pointed out that since this was a bursary for sons, daughters and legal dependents of members of the Van-Tel Credit Union, the University was not in the best position to evaluate applicants. Dean Lusztig ) That Senate reaffirm its guidelines and Mr. Scow ) that the Committee indicate to the donors that the University is unable to accept this bursary. Carried Tributes Committee Criteria for awarding Honorary Degrees Dr. Dennison, Chair of the Committee, presented the following report which had been circulated at the meeting: "The Tributes Committee considered the motion approved by Senate on December 13, 1989 (Hill/Auld, p.9637) regarding the criteria used in nominating candidates for Honorary Degrees. In response, the Tributes Committee wishes to amend and reaffirm the statement of criteria, as follows: 9861. November 14, 1990 Reports of Committees of Senate Tributes Committee Criteria for awarding 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. The criteria for the award of an honorary degree are excellence, eminence, and accomplishment. Nominees are 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. For the information of Senate, the following elaboration is provided: "In determining the final list of nominees, the Tributes Committee recognizes that contributions fitting these criteria of excellence cover a wide range of service and may come from many groups in society. Normally, the Tributes Committee does not nominate individuals currently holding political office, or current members of granting councils and similar organizations." Dr. Dennison ) That Senate reaffirm the criteria in its Mr. Thorn ) amended form. Carried Faculty of Science Faculty membership - proposed revisions Dean McBride withdrew the proposed revisions to the Faculty membership list pending further modifications. Endowed Programs and Professorships The following list of programs and professorships, endowed through the UBC Fundraising Campaign, had been circulated for information: Arts Joan Carlisle-Irving Artist-in-Residence Program Arnold and Nancy Cliff Writer-in-Residence Program 9862. November 14, 1990 Endowed Programs and Professorships (continued) Commerce B. I. Ghert Family Foundation Junior Professorship in Finance and Policy Canfor Corporation Professorship in Management Information Systems Finning Ltd. Junior Professorship in Finance Finning Ltd. Junior Professorship in Marketing R. L. Cliff Junior Professorship in Accounting Real Estate Foundation Junior Professorship in Real Estate Finance Real Estate Foundation Junior Professorship in Urban Land Economics Pharmaceutical Sciences Shoppers Drug Mart Professorship in Pharmaceutical Sciences Dr. Birch informed Senate that donors and the matching program of the province of B.C. were endowing programs of this sort which have a significant impact on the academic enterprise. He noted that the distinction between a professorship and a chair, under current University policy, is that a chair is endowed with a minimum of a million dollar endowment. A professorship consists of an endowment somewhat less than that which is added to an operating budget position. Academic Terms - Endowed Chairs Dr. Birch presented for approval the following chairs, which had been endowed through UBC's Fundraising Campaign: Applied Science Chair in Mining and the Environment Clifford Frame Chair in Mining and Mineral Process Engineering Comineo Chair in Minerals and the Environment (with Science) Arts Maclean Hunter Chair in Non-Fiction and Business Writing Patricia F. Rodgers Chair in Applied Ethics Medicine Jack Bell Chair in Schizophrenia Louise A. Brown Chair in Neuroscience E. W. Hamber Chair in Medicine Sauder Family Chair in Paediatric Infectious Diseases 9863. November 14, 1990 Academic Terms - Endowed Chairs (continued) Science Comineo Chair in Minerals and the Environment (with Applied Science) Sauder Family Chair in Viral Diseases of Children Warren chair in Nuclear Physics Dr. Birch explained that the Nathan T. Nemetz Chair in Conflict Resolution was being withdrawn for the time being. Dr. Birch ) That the Chairs listed be approved. Dean McBride ) In response to a query, Dean Lusztig explained that junior professorships were being established in order to assist Faculties in the recruitment process. The motion was put and carried. Report on the Status of Degree Programs with the Colleges Dr. Birch presented the following report, which had been circulated: "This is the second year of UBC's partnership with Okanagan and Cariboo Colleges in offering third and fourth year courses in Arts and Science and the UBC Elementary Teacher Education Program (Cariboo only). As reported to Senate in September 1989, agreements were reached in the spring of 1989 to offer UBC courses leading to the UBC degree of B.A. , B.Sc. and B.Ed. (Elem.) at these two interior colleges, as UBC's contribution to increasing access for undergraduate education in the province. The intention of the joint venture is to assist the colleges to become independent degree granting institutions within the next nine years. The courses and programs are UBC's. The instructors must be approved to teach our third and fourth year courses by the UBC department and dean. The students are college students, paying college tuition, receiving college transcripts, but a UBC degree. The diploma will be amended to include the notation "in association with Okanagan College" or "in association with Cariboo College" and space for college official signatures. A draft degree certificate is attached. Convocation ceremonies at which our Chancellor will confer the UBC degrees will be held for the first cohort at the college locations in the spring 1991. 9864. November 14, 1990 Report on the Status of Degree Programs with the Colleges (continued) "All courses conform to UBC standards. Instructors have been interviewed by representatives of the UBC departments and their credentials evaluated. All instructional assignments have been approved by the relevant UBC department and office of the dean. A list of instructors is attached. Funding for UBC's participation in these joint ventures has been provided by the Province of British Columbia under the Access program. Arts received $232,000, Science $261,000 and Education $125,300 to defray costs for liaison. In addition, the University was provided $65,500 to cover expenses relating to the colleges incurred by supporting departments such as the Library and Registrar's Office. No UBC operating funds are being used to service our participation. Liaison coordinators for the Faculties are now dealing with the continuing development of the program at the colleges. Arts is discussing the development of majors (notably history and international relations) at Okanagan College, and working with Cariboo College on thematic options within the General B.A. degree. The measures which Arts is insisting on to assure academic quality are that the range of courses at the third and fourth year level offer the student a significant amount of choice (as a guideline, twice the number of courses required in a two-year cycle), and that the library be adequate to support the work of students undertaking a major. Education is discussing the possible expansion of its program at Cariboo to include the preparation of secondary teachers. On October 25, 1990, the Faculty of Science approved the motion that Cariboo and Okanagan Colleges be granted permission to offer UBC courses and programs leading to B.Sc. major degrees in Animal Biology, General Biology, Chemistry, Mathematics and Physics effective the 1991/2 academic year. There is a concern that the colleges are having difficulty retaining students to complete their degrees in the Arts and Science programs. Although information is sketchy at present, the colleges appear to be losing students to the universities because the students want to have a major or because they had planned to transfer to a professional program. The offering of majors at the colleges may reduce this problem. Support for scholarship is another area of concern. The libraries must be developed so that they become useful resources for research purposes. Also, the resources necessary for limited research, including time, funding, space and equipment, must be provided. The intentions of those at the colleges appear to be on the right track, and earlier this fall I wrote to our Ministry to request that it provide further support for research activities. For Education at Cariboo, space is an issue which needs to be resolved for next year. It is important that the college provide regular instructional space within the mainstream of the college milieu. The liaison activities have been extremely important to the on-going development of the colleges. During this past summer, both Arts and Science offered fellowships, funded by the Access grant, for college instructors to work collaboratively at UBC; 13 instructors received the 9865. November 14, 1990 Report on the Status of Degree Programs with the Colleges (continued) awards. The college Education instructors all spend time with instructors of the same courses on the UBC campus. There continues to be a steady flow of visitors from UBC for lectures and seminars; all are well-received at the colleges and we believe their visits have a favourable impact on the academic environment. Many departments worked hard in recruiting last spring and a heavy recruiting load is anticipated next year as the programs expand. The general liaison is reasonably good, with designated faculty members within departments for particular courses and continual liaison by the department heads and the Faculty Coordinators. I would like at this time to recognize the fine efforts of the Faculty Coordinators: Dr. Ronald Shearer, Dr. John Sams and Dr. David Thomas, of Arts, Science and Education, respectively." In discussion, Dr. Dennison reminded Senate that the university-colleges, while accruing many benefits from their association with the universities, also face a number of challenges. One task being to ensure the retention of the comprehensive community college concept, which incorporates a wide range of non-degree programs, while under pressure from new instructors to inculcate university values. Dr. Dennison stated that a second challenge which will confront college instructors will be in meeting expectations from the university for scholarly activity. The opportunities which exist for university faculty in this regard, library and laboratory facilities, support services and lower teaching loads etc., are not available to the same extent in the colleges. Dr. Dennison urged the university to be sensitive to these problems in their dealings with the university-colleges. In commenting on Library services to the colleges, Dr. Patrick noted that over the two year period there had been an increase from 700 loans to 2,500. Dr. Patrick also drew attention to an item in the guidelines which states that a special commitment must be made to fund the development of additional library resources, and asked if colleges were receiving enough resources for the development of their libraries. Dr. Patrick also expressed concern that if, as it appeared, faculty at the colleges were going to have to participate in scholarly research there would be a further demand which the Library had not considered. 9866. November 14, 1990 Report on the Status of Degree Programs with the Colleges (continued) Dr. Birch responded that funding for the development of additional library resources for the colleges was being given priority both by the colleges and the province. In response to a query concerning procedures for appeals on academic standing from students at the colleges, Dr. Birch stated that provision had been made whereby students would be dealt with at the colleges. Report on Enrolment 1990-91 The report of the Registrar on enrolment for 1990-91 had been circulated for information. The Registrar commented that graduate enrolment was 12.1% higher than at this time last year. In contrast, undergraduate enrolment was up by 3.3%, and overall, as a consequence of those two numbers, enrolment was up by 4.5%. The meeting adjourned at 10.00 p.m. The next regular meeting of Senate will be held on Wednesday, December 12, 1990. Secretary Confirmed Chairman 9867. November 14, 1990 APPENDIX Awards recommended for acceptance by Senate B.C. Directors of Occupational Therapy Book Prize - A book prize is offered by the B.C. Directors of Occupational Therapy. The award is made on the recommendation of the School of Rehabilitation Medicine to a student in the graduating class who demonstrates excellence in the fourth year courses in management and administration, and shows qualities of leadership, creativity, and the ability to motivate others. (Available 1990/91 winter Session) Phyllis Ellen Driver Memorial Bursary - Bursaries totalling $500 in memory of Phyllis Ellen Driver have been endowed by her brother David, family and friends. After graduating from St. Joseph's School of Nursing, Victoria, 1938 and McGill University, Montreal, 1963, Phyllis returned to Victoria and was a dedicated teacher of nursing until her retirement. The bursaries are available for students in graduate programs in nursing. (Available 1991/92 Winter Session) Joy Messaros Memorial Bursary - A $750 bursary is available for a student with a physical disability who demonstrates financial need and determination to overcome obstacles caused by physical disability. Part-time students are considered. Physical disability is defined as a severe ambulatory/mobility impairment resulting in functional limitation. (This does not include those with sensory loss of sight or hearing or learning disabilities alone.) when more than one applicant qualifies, academic achievement is considered. (Available 1990/91 Winter Session)
- Library Home /
- Search Collections /
- Open Collections /
- Browse Collections /
- UBC Publications /
- [Meeting minutes of the Senate of The University of...
Open Collections
UBC Publications
Featured Collection
UBC Publications
[Meeting minutes of the Senate of The University of British Columbia] 1990-11-14
jpg
Page Metadata
Item Metadata
Title | [Meeting minutes of the Senate of The University of British Columbia] |
Publisher | [Vancouver : University of British Columbia Senate] |
Date Created | 1990-11-14 |
Subject |
University of British Columbia |
Geographic Location |
Vancouver (B.C.) |
Genre |
Periodicals |
Type |
Text |
FileFormat | application/pdf |
Language | English |
Identifier | UBC_Senate_Minutes_1990_11_14 |
Collection |
University Publications |
Source | Original Format: University of British Columbia. Archives |
Date Available | 2015-07-15 |
Provider | Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library |
Rights | Images provided for research and reference use only. Permission to publish, copy, or otherwise use these images must be obtained from the University of British Columbia Senate: http://senate.ubc.ca/ |
DOI | 10.14288/1.0115799 |
AggregatedSourceRepository | CONTENTdm |
Download
- Media
- senmin-1.0115799.pdf
- Metadata
- JSON: senmin-1.0115799.json
- JSON-LD: senmin-1.0115799-ld.json
- RDF/XML (Pretty): senmin-1.0115799-rdf.xml
- RDF/JSON: senmin-1.0115799-rdf.json
- Turtle: senmin-1.0115799-turtle.txt
- N-Triples: senmin-1.0115799-rdf-ntriples.txt
- Original Record: senmin-1.0115799-source.json
- Full Text
- senmin-1.0115799-fulltext.txt
- Citation
- senmin-1.0115799.ris
Full Text
Cite
Citation Scheme:
Usage Statistics
Share
Embed
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"
src="{[{embed.src}]}"
data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
async >
</script>
</div>

https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/cdm.senmin.1-0115799/manifest