UBC Publications

UBC Publications

UBC Publications

UBC Reports May 28, 1969

Item Metadata


JSON: ubcreports-1.0117807.json
JSON-LD: ubcreports-1.0117807-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): ubcreports-1.0117807-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: ubcreports-1.0117807-rdf.json
Turtle: ubcreports-1.0117807-turtle.txt
N-Triples: ubcreports-1.0117807-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: ubcreports-1.0117807-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

 • •> *
MAY   28,    1969,    VANCOUVER   168,   B.C.
Fourteen of UBC s top students, who will receive medals and prizes during Spring Congregation May 28—30 as heads of
various graduating classes, put on a happy face for the UBC Reports camera in the campus Centre for Fine Arts.
Standing, left to right, are: David W. Nichols, head of the architecture class; Gary K. Hewitt, commerce class leader;
Robert J. Epp, a mathematics student and winner of the Governor-General's Gold Medal; Miss E. Jane Termuende, tops
in agriculture; Miss Gloria M. MacKenzie, head of the secondary education class; Arthur L. Close, head of the law class;
Robert J. Duke, medical class head; John A.G. Fountain, an economics student and head of the arts graduating class;
Robert J. Clarke, dentistry class head, and John H. Salmela, who led the class in physical education and recreation.
Seated on the bench, left to right, are: Miss Lynda M. Berry, home economics leader; Miss Ingrid P. Buch, music class
head; Miss Joyce E.K. Page, tops in nursing, and Mrs. Annette Wigod, one of two persons tied for leadership in the
master's degree program in social work. For Congregation details, see page two. Photo by Extension Graphic Arts.
<' Dr. Arnold C Smith
Sir Michael W. Perrin
Dr. Alfred W.H. Needier
Professor R.G.N. Norrish
Record Class Graduates May 28-30
More than 3,700 students will receive their degrees
at the University of British Columbia's 1969 Spring
Congregation ceremonies May 28—30 in the campus
War Memorial Gymnasium.
Highlights of the three-day ceremony will be the
installations of Dr. Walter Gage as UBC's sixth
president on May 28 and Mr. Allan M. McGavin as
Chancellor of the University on May 30 to succeed
Mr. John M. Buchanan.
UBC will also confer honorary degrees on three
distinguished scientists and a noted Canadian public
servant at Spring Congregation.
On May 28, the honorary degree of doctor of laws
will be conferred on Dr. Arnold C. Smith,
secretary-general of the Commonwealth Secretariat
since 1965 and former Canadian ambassador to
Russia and the United Arab Republic. Dr. Smith will
also deliver the Congregation address.
On May 29 UBC will honour Sir Michael W.
Perrin, the Canadian-born chairman of the Wellcome
Foundation Ltd. and a key figure in development of
atomic energy in Great Britain. He will receive an
honorary doctor of science degree and give the
Congregation address.
On May 30 honorary doctor of science degrees will
be conferred on Dr. Alfred W.H. Needier, deputy
minister of fisheries for Canada, and Professor R.G.W.
Norrish, former professor of physical chemistry and
director of the department of physical chemistry at
Cambridge University, and a joint winner of the
Nobel Prize for chemistry in 1967. Dr. Norrish will
give the Congregation address.
Dr. Arnold C. Smith, who is currently
secretary-general of the Commonwealth Secretariat, is
a former Rhodes Scholar for Ontario and has had a
distinguished career in the foreign services of both the
United Kingdom and Canada.
Before transferring to the Canadian diplomatic
service in 1943 he was press attache of the British
Legation in Tallinn, Estonia, an attache in the British
embassy in Cairo and head of propaganda for the
division of the U.K. Ministry of State, Middle East.
He served with the Canadian diplomatic service in
Russia during the second World War and then
returned to Canada and became an adviser on various
committees representing Canada at the United
Nations and, subsequently, principal adviser to
Canada's permanent delegation to the UN.
He was Canadian minister to the U.K. from 1956
to 1958, Canadian ambassador to the United Arab
Republic from 1958 to 1961 and Canada's
ambassador to Russia from1961 to 1963.
Sir Michael Perrin, chairman of the Wellcome
Foundation Ltd., was born in Victoria, B.C. Educated
in Canada and England, Sir Michael holds degrees
in both chemistry and physics. In 1929 he joined
Imperial Chemical Industries, one of the world's
largest industrial complexes, and played a leading role
in the development of polythene. From 1941 to 1951
he was associated with Britain's atomic energy
program and had a key role in scientific liaison
between the U.K. and Canada.
The Wellcome Foundation which he chairs
distributes funds to support academic medical
Dr. Alfred W.H. Needier, Canada's deputy minister
of   fisheries,   is   a   former   director   of   the  federal
2/UBC Reports/May 28, 1969
Biological  Station at Nanaimo and one of Canada's
most respected fisheries scientists.
For more than 35 years he has studied the fisheries
resources of both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans in
such fields as migration, ecology and the biological
study of fisheries statistics. Oyster culture methods in
the Maritime provinces are a direct result of his
original work.
Dr. Needier has also been associated with a
number of international fisheries commissions and
with committees organized under the auspices of the
UN's Food and Agricultural Organization in Rome.
Prof. Ronald G.W. Norrish held the chair in
physical chemistry at Cambridge University for 37
years and was awarded the Nobel Prize with two
other chemists in 1967.
In his early work he laid the foundations for the
theory of chain reactions and in the 1950's
revolutionized the field of photochemistry. The
department he headed at Cambridge gained an
international reputation as one of the leading centres
in the world for research in physical chemistry.
Degrees Awarded
The University of B.C. Senate has approved
the awarding of posthumous academic degrees
to three outstanding students who died during
the past academic year.
ftfl ttnee of the students would have
graduated this year and received their degrees at
UBC's spring congregation May 28-30.
Posthumous degrees were awarded to:
Elwood A. Peskett, of Naramata B.C., an
applied science student in the department of
mechanical engineering. He died in December,
1968, at the age of 24.
Paul Donaldson, of Vancouver, a medical
student, who died in October, 1968, at the age
of 23. Donaldson, who was in his final year of
studies leading to the medical degree, was the
top student in the first year medical class three
years earlier.
Miss Irma Kriese, 31, who died on May 7.
Miss Kriese, of Edmonton, had completed all
the requirements for the master of arts degree in
the department of German.
Following are the heads of the 1969 graduating
The Governor-General's Gold Medal (Head of the
Graduating Classes in Arts and Science, B.A. and
B.Sc. degrees): Robert James Epp, Vancouver.
The Wilfrid Sadler Memorial Gold Medal (Head of
the Graduating Class in Agricultural Sciences, B.Sc,
Agr. degree): Miss E. Jane Termuende, West Vancouver.
The Association of Professional Engineers Gold
Medal (Head of the Graduating Class in Engineering,
B.A.Sc. degree): Norman Trusler, 100 Mile House.
The Kiwanis Club Gold Medal and Prize, $100
(Head of the Graduating Class in Commerce, B.Com.
degree): Gary K. Hewitt, Vancouver.
The University Medal for Arts and Science (Head
of the Graduating Class in Arts, B.A. degree): John
A.G. Fountain, Vancouver.
The Law Society Gold Medal and Prize, Call and
Admission Fee (Head of the Graduating Class in Law,
LL.B. degree): Arthur L. Close, Vancouver.
The Hamber Gold Medal and Prize, $250 (Head of
the Graduating Class in Medicine, degree of M.D.):
Robert J. Duke, Vancouver.
The Horner Gold  Medal for Pharmacy (Head of
the   Graduating   Class   in   Pharmaceutical   Sciences,
B.Sc,  Pharm. degree):   Miss Beverly  C.   Henderson,!
New Westminster.
The Helen L. Balfour Prize, $250 (Head of the
Graduating Class in Nursing, B.S.N, degree): Miss
Joyce Ellen Kathleen Page, Richmond.
The Canadian Institute of Forestry Medal (best
all-round record in Forestry in all years of course,
B.S.F. degree): R. James Pearson, Vancouver.
The H.R. MacMillan Prize in Forestry, $100 (Head
of the Graduating Class in Forestry, B.S.F. degree):
David S. Jamieson, Port Alberni.
Dr. Maxwell A. Cameron Medal and Prize, $100
(Head of the Graduating Class in Education, B.Ed,
degree, Secondary Teaching field): Miss Gloria M.
MacKenzie, Vancouver.
Dr. Maxwell A. Cameron Medal and Prize, $100
(Head  of the Graduating Class in Education, B.Edi
degree.  Elementary Teaching field): Colin Anthony
Farrell, Vancouver.
The College of Dental Surgeons of British
Columbia Gold Medal (Head of the Graduating Class
in Dentistry, D.M.D. degree): Robert John Clarke,
The Royal Architectural Institute of Canada Medal
(outstanding student in Architecture, degree of
B.Arch.): David Wayne Nichols, Vancouver.
The Ruth Cameron Medal for Librarianship (Head
of the Graduating Class in Librarianship, degree of
B.L.S.): Anthony Albert Metie, Vancouver.
The Canadian Association for Health, Physical
Education and Recreation Medal (Head of the
Graduating Class in Physical Education and
Recreation, B.P.E. degree): John H. Salmela,
Special University Prize, $100 (Head of the
Graduating Class in Home Economics, B.H.E.
degree): Miss Lynda M. Berry, North Vancouver.
Special University Prizes, $50 each (Outstanding in
the Graduating Class in Social Work, M.S.W. degree):
Mrs. Leslie Bella, Winnipeg and Mrs. Annette Wigod,
Special University Prize, $100 (Head of the
Graduating Class in Music, B.Mus. degree): Miss
Ingrid P. Buch, Vancouver.
Special University Prize, $100 (Head of the
Graduating Class in Rehabilitation Medicine, degree
of B.S.R.): Miss Barbara Vaughan-Parks, Quebec.
Volume 15, No. 12-May 28,
1969. Published by the
University of British Columbia
and distributed free. J.A.
Banham, Editor; Barbara
Claghorn, Production Supervisor. Letters to the
Editor should be addressed to the Information
Office, UBC, Vancouver 168, B.C. r**
► ..
THE long-awaited preliminary report of the UBC
Senate's Committee on Long-Range Objectives
was delivered to the Senate at its meeting May
21. The document so far is only an initial draft
of the first four chapters of the committee's report.
The complete and revised report is expected to be
ready in the fall and will be offered as a guide to the
development of the University over at least the next
In its preliminary report the committee tackles
two complex and controversial issues: the question of
limitation of enrolment at UBC, and improvement of
the academic organization of the University.
The committee was unable to reach unanimity on
either of these issues. The majority of the committee
recommends limiting UBC's enrolment to 27,500, but
its chairman dissented. On the question of changing
the organizational structure of the University, the
committee divided 6—5. The majority favored some
modification of the existing structure; the minority
proposed dividing the University into a number of
federated colleges.
(Much of the text of Chapter Four of the report,
dealing with structural change, is reprinted on the
next three pages.)
In a brief introductory chapter, the report refers
to an earlier document of similar nature, Guideposts
to Innovation, published in 1964.
The committee notes the changes in the
"intangible environment" on campus over the last
five years, and how they have affected the
committee's structure and its operations.
Guideposts was prepared by a committee of seven
faculty members and one alumni Senator, appointed
by and reporting directly to the President.
The present committee is a creature of the Senate.
Four of its members were elected by Senate, five
lere appointed by the President, three are ex-officio
and two were co-opted by the other members.
Two members of the Guideposts committee are
members of the Senate Long-Range Objectives
Committee. They are Prof. Cyril Belshaw, head of the
department of anthropology and sociology, and Prof.
John Norris, acting head of the department of
Other members are Dr. Robert Clark, director of
academic planning; Dr. W.D. Finn, head of the
department of civil engineering; Mr. K.M. Lysyk,
professor of law; Dr. J.R. Mcintosh, professor of
education; Mr. D.F. Miller, member of the Board of
Governors; student senator Donald Munton; Dr. M.W.
Steinberg, professor of English; Dr. R.W. Stewart,
professor of oceanography; Mr. D.R. Williams,
^lumni representative; and Chancellor John M.
Buchanan, President Walter H. Gage and Registrar
J.E.A. Parnall, who are ex officio members.
The Belshaw report notes that the Guideposts
committee contained no student representation and
that its report was pervaded by "the implicit and
imperturbable conviction that the faculty knew what
is best for students, at least in the broad realm of
academic affairs." That assumption, the committee
notes, is no longer unchallenged.
IN Chapter Two, the committee deals with the
question, "What should be the main academic
goals at this University?" The three goals it
identifies are the preservation and extension of
knowledge; the development of the individual
student; and serving the needs of people in society.
The report devotes more space to the University's
social role than to the other two goals. It says the
University should help students prepare for a career
that will be useful to them and to society, but
without overemphasizing technical training that could
well be provided elsewhere.
It notes that some students and faculty members
feel the University should become more an
instrument for social reform, through political,
practical or cultural means.
The committee concludes that the University
should not give strong emphasis to the preparation of
students for political participation; that the
University itself must continue to remain neutral in
political controversies; and that faculty members and
graduates should become more involved in political
affairs but only as individuals and not as spokesmen
for the University.
In its concluding comments in this chapter, the
committee says: "We recognize that increasing
numbers of students are challenging goals and
priorities within the University. More and more they
are asking moral questions. They are questioning the
moral    values   faculty    members   bring   to   the
First Four Chapters of
Long-Range Report
Presented to UBC Senate
Committee Calls
for Comments
The Senate Committee on Long-Range
Objectives has called for comments on the first
four chapters of its preliminary report
presented to Senate May 21. Faculty members,
students, graduates and other interested
members of the University community are
asked to make their views known to the
chairman. Dr. Cyril Belshaw, by mid-August.
This issue of UBC Reports includes a
summary of the first three chapters of the
report (this page) and the bulk of Chapter Four
dealing with revision of the organization of
UBC (see Pages Four, Five and Six).
Only a limited number of copies of the
report have been reproduced. Inquiries should
be directed to the secretary of Senate, Mr.
J.E.A. Parnall, Registrar, General Services
(Administration) Building, phone 228-3159.
decision-making process in department, faculty and
Senate meetings.
"Very many faculty members do not feel
equipped by virtue of their own scholarly training to
cope with these questions. Often they would prefer
to avoid them.
"We believe that the students are justified in
raising these questions and expecting faculty
members to discuss them. This is not an argument for
importing a discussion of Plato's doctrine of the
good, the true and the beautiful into a class on
mineralogy or differential equations. But it is an
argument for developing the sort of university where
students feel free to raise such questions with their
professors in informal gatherings, and where at least
some faculty in every department are willing to
engage in dialogue with the students on these and
related topics."
Chapter Three of the Belshaw committee's report
approaches the academically and politically hot issue
of restricting enrolment at UBC.
The committee says that the basic question of how
many students should be provided for in all the
public universities and colleges of B.C. is a political
question and that it must be resolved in the political
The decision as to how many students should be
admitted to UBC, it says, is a matter for the
University's Board of Governors. It adds that it hopes
its recommendations will be useful to the Board.
But it says that, because of UBC's special position
in the field of higher education in British Columbia,
"we cannot responsibly advocate any enrolment
-policy without taking into consideration the needs of
other universities and colleges in the province, and
the needs of students who may want to attend our
institution or others."
After discussing enrolment trends and some
projections into the future, the committee in a
majority recommendation calls for the restriction of
total undergraduate enrolment on the present campus
to a maximum of 22,000.
The majority also recommends that the annual
rate of increase of graduate enrolment be limited to
15 per cent, reaching a maximum of 5,500 in
1974—75. It says these enrolment policies should be
reviewed by a Senate committee every five years, and
new recommendations made for the succeeding
(In the winter session of 1968-69 UBC had an
enrolment of 17,632 undergraduates, including 1,209
enrolled in post-bachelor professional programs, and
2,456 graduate students for a total enrolment at Dec.
1, 1968 of 20,088. The committee's majority
recommendations, if adopted, would impose a ceiling
on total enrolment of 27,500 students, in a ratio of
four undergraduates to one graduate. This would
mean an addition of 4,368 undergraduate and
professional students and 3,044 graduate students).
The committee also recommends that first-year
entrance requirements for B.C. students be raised to
65 per cent, the level now required for students from
outside the province, beginning with the academic
year 1970-71.
(UBC's policy in the recent past has been to admit
all applicants with a B.C. Grade XII average of 60 per
cent or better. However, on Feb. 26, 1969, Senate
adopted a new policy guaranteeing admission to first
year only to those students with an average of 65 per
cent or better, and stipulating that those with
averages ranging from 60 to 65 per cent would be
accepted "only if the University has the physical,
financial and educational resources to accommodate
Raising first-year entrance requirements for B.C.
students to 65 per cent will not be enough, in itself,
to restrict enrolment to the limits proposed, the
committee said. For long-term effectiveness,
enrolment must be limited in both first and second
years of the largest faculties—arts, science and
The majority of the committee recommended an
enrolment-quota system, beginning in the fall of 1970
for a five-year period, covering the first two years in
these faculties and in agricultural sciences and
physical education and recreation education, and for
the first year in commerce and business
The quotas, the majority said, should be equal to
enrolment in the programs concerned at Dec. 1,
1969, or the average enrolment for the four years
1966-67 to 1969-70. Deans should be free to adjust
the proportions of the quota alloted to first and
second year within their own faculties.
WHERE the demand for admission to a
program exceeds the quota, the report said,
limitation should be based on academic
ability. The committee opposes quotas based
on the student's geographic origin or previous
In his minority submission, Prof. Belshaw agreed
with the 65-per-cent entrance requirement but said
the attempt to limit enrolment to 27,500 is arbitrary
and unjustified.
In Prof. Belshaw's view, the total enrolment of the
University should be based on the number of students
that each faculty or college considers it has the
capacity to educate. This consideration would take
into account appropriate teaching methods and the
availability of teaching staff, space, equipment and
The calculations built up in this way would
constitute a "student admissions budget" which
would be subject to review and negotiation with the
University authorities.
In its discussion of enrolment trends, the
committee noted that a forecast made by the office
of academic planning in April, 1968, predicted that,
under existing admission policies, undergraduate
enrolment would rise to about 30,000 and graduate
enrolment to 4,400 by the fall of 1973.
This forecast is now being extended to a 10-year
period and revised in light of the effect on UBC
enrolment of the development of other universities
and colleges.
The committee said that when it publishes the
final edition of its report in the fall, it hopes to be
able to forecast the University's enrolment, program
by program, for the next 10 years.
"What seems highly probable," it said, "is that
under existing enrolment policies total enrolment a
decade hence will be in excess of 40,000. Is this in
the best interests of students, the faculty and
(What follows is the bulk of Chapter Four of the
preliminary report of the Committee on Long-Range
Objectives of the UBC Senate).
At the outset we define what it is we intend to
consider in this chapter, and what we are excluding. We
are not considering the composition or role of the Board
of Governors, or the relation between the role of the
Board and that of the Senate. These topics lie outside
our terms of reference. We are concerned with criticisms
of our existing academic organization at the level of the
department or school and the faculty, and the relations
between them and the Senate.
There are observable weaknesses in our present
academic organization. They are likely to be accentuated
as the university continues to grow. What are they?
(i) The Faculties of Arts, Education and Science, and
several departments within Arts and Science already
have become so large that it is becoming increasingly
difficult for them: (a) to provide an environment for
students and for faculty that permits direct discourse
and association; (b) to maintain internal cohesion and
communication; (c) to co-ordinate and staff classes with
many sections; (d) to interest faculty members in
teaching service courses provided primarily for those
who will specialize in other departments.
(ii) It is difficult to establish and develop
interdisciplinary programs, partly because so many
faculty members conceive of their academic
responsibilities almost solely in departmental terms.
How serious are these criticisms, and how far reaching
are their implications? In answering these questions the
committee is divided. On the central issue the vote was 5
to 6. The minority of the committee believes that the
criticisms are so basic that a fundamental restructuring
of the university is essential. The majority believe that it
is possible to deal constructively with the criticisms by
modifications within the existing system. We shall refer
to the main ideas of the minority as the Federated
Colleges Proposals. We begin with them, and then give
the majority comments upon them with alternative
The Federated Colleges Proposals are based upon two
assumptions: (i) it is desirable that the academic units of
which a university is composed and within which faculty
and students work and identify, should be relatively
small; (ii) the university as a whole should be large,
primarily because size, if used effectively and positively,
can provide academic opportunities which can not
otherwise be created.
The first premise leads directly to challenging the
need for the two main units of daily administration in
the university—the faculty and the department. Do we
really need to have faculties at this university? The
enormous diversity in size of the faculties in itself leads
to a questioning of the important role of the faculty as
an academic unit.
This question becomes all the more pertinent in that
deans, but not department heads have direct access to
the President to present their budgetary case. Yet there
are four departments, namely English, Mathematics,
Physics and Chemistry, each of which, as of December 1,
1968, had a larger academic staff than each of six
faculties. It would be possible to replace the present
twelve faculties by three Academic Divisions operating
on this campus. Later a fourth division could be added
which might operate on one or more satellite campuses.
The Faculty of Graduate Studies would be converted
into a Graduate Council. The Senate would prescribe its
duties and its structure. Membership in this council
would come from academic units concerned with
graduate work.
The chief functions of departments would be to
supervise appointments of individuals to the various
colleges and institutes. Departments would also maintain
and allocate centralized facilities, when this was deemed
necessary. Departments would also sponsor research and
seminars not covered by colleges and institutes. The
institutes would be special-purpose organizations,
concerned with providing academic services or handling
sharply focussed research to advance knowledge with
regard to a co-ordinated set of problems.
Each Academic Division would be governed by a
Vice-Chancellor and an Academic Council. For each
4/UBC Reports/May 28, 1969
college there would be a Principal in charge of
administration and a Faculty Assembly for internal
academic government. Especially in the large colleges it
would be desirable to have what could be called
divisions, rather similar in functions to present
departments, though these would not need to be
organized along the lines of disciplines.
Each Academic Division would have its own
geographic location on campus. The nucleus of
Academic Division One would be the present Faculty of
Arts. It would occupy primarily that part of the campus
to the north of the present Physics, Chemistry and Civil
Engineering Buildings. No college on campus would be
permitted to exceed 2,500 students. This division would
Proponents of the federated colleges concept
suggest the following as an approximate timetable
that could be followed in working toward the
implementation of their proposals on this campus.
In 1969/70 it would be essential to restrict
enrolment for the following year. The guiding
principle would be to accept students up to the
capacity of the existing facilities and the expected
financial resources. At the same time that this was
being worked out, the university should be
negotiating with the Provincial Government for
changes in the Universities Act and the acquisition
of land in the University Endowment Lands for a
satellite campus.
Study groups would be formed from existing
faculties to work out details for the creation of the
new Academic Divisions. By 1970/71 the faculties
would be considering concrete proposals from the
study groups, and would make recommendations
concerning these proposals to the Senate and the
Board of Governors. By 1971/72 the three
Academic Divisions on campus would begin their
operations and the fourth one could commence on
the satellite campus in 1972/73.
In the long run, possibly in two or three
decades, the degree-granting powers of Senate
could be decentralized to the Academic Councils.
These in effect would become the Senates of
constituent universities in a federated system.
commence virtually at once, with colleges designated
somewhat as follows. The maximum enrolment
suggested is indicated.
English literature, comparative literature and
history—2,500 students.
music, fine arts, theatre, creative writing and
architecture—2,000 students.
specialists in specific non-English languages and
literature—2,000 students.
AND LITER AT URE-including humanistic and
comparative study of linguistics, comparative literature,
and comparative studies with particular regional
emphasis, such as Asian and Slavonic Studies—1,500
upon anthropology, sociology, psychology, economics,
political science, and a scientific: approach to linguistics
and history—2,500 students.
SCI ENCE —based upon grouping together those
disciplines which concern themselves professionally with
social, economic and personal organization. This would
include the present School of Community and Regional
Planning, the School of Social Work, and programs in
such fields as Adult Education and Recreation—500
(viii) COLLEGE OF LAW-700 students.
college conceivably could be allocated to another
division—2,500 students.
At a future date two colleges and two institutes could
be added to Division One. These are:
be  developed   for  those  who  wish  to   use  the social
sciences as a  basis for  professional  work,  or for its '   '•■
relevance for contemporary problems—1,000 students.
Both of these could be elite institutes grouping
special programs in the relevant disciplines of an
advanced research and scholarly character. These
institutes would be staffed by joint appointments by »
faculty members on leave from colleges, and by special
full-time staff. Probably the present Institute of Asian
and Slavonic Studies, of International Studies and of
Industrial Relations could be reconstituted and included
in these institutes.
college would consist of a group of tutors and adyj^-s
available to direct students engaged in individual ^&/
apart from organized classes—500 students.
In these proposals Academic Division Two would be
located in the area now occupied by Chemistry, Physics,
the Biological Sciences, Medicine, Dentistry and
Pharmacy. Tentatively there are five colleges and two
institutes proposed for this Division. The third Academic
Division would occupy the south and south-west part of
the campus. Three colleges would be in this division,
including Engineering, Agricultural Sciences, Forestry,
Secondary and Graduate Education.
A fourth division should be developed, preferablyin
the present University Endowment Lands area ^Ba
satellite campus. Several colleges that could be included
in such a division are indicated.
SCIENCE—This would be a two-year college designed to j
introduce students to the scope of the disciplines and
their methods. It would help students who were
uncertain about their vocational goals when they came
to the university. They should be able to choose a
particular discipline more in accordance with their needs
after a year or two in this college—1,500 students.
be a four-year experimental college for students who
prefer a general degree to one obtained by concentrating , *
upon any one discipline. It could be an extension of the
present first year Arts I experimental course to cover
four years—1,500 students.
(iii) COLLEGE OF ARTS-Such a college might be
established to reduce enrolment pressures on colleges in
Division One—2,000 students.
(iv) COLLEGE OF SCIENCE-A similar purpose
could be served by this college in relation to Division
Two-2,000 students. '     •
EDUCATION-This college, unlike the present
Department of Continuing Education, would have its
own faculty members.
EDUCATION-2,500 students.
Some of the colleges would be partly residential. This
could be achieved by designating certain residences as
being attached to particular colleges. The colleges then
would have control over the residences, but in principle
a certain proportion—perhaps 20 percent—of places in
the residences would be reserved for students not
attending the college for their main work. As buildings
attached to colleges increased, space for tutorials, classes
and offices could be arranged in or close to residences 9LLEGES OR CHANGES IN PRESENT SYSTEM
where this was practicable. Such measures would reduce
the present high degree of separation of the academic
program and life in the residences.
The allocation of space under these proposals to
individual colleges and institutes would be handled
differently for various types of organization within
Academic Divisions. In some instances existing buildings
could be divided in such a way that some colleges could
have physical locations in a defined area. Other colleges
'would be primarily academic administrative units
making use of general university facilities. Where
expensive laboratory facilities were involved, control
might be vested in one college, which might lease space
to other colleges.
How would the Senate be affected by these
proposals? What would be the relations between the
Senate and the Academic Divisions? Advocates of the
Such changes would, of course, require a new
University Act as far as this university is concerned.
Other universities in the province would not need to be
governed by the same Act, and could have legislation
appropriate to their needs.
Advocates of the federated colleges concepts believe
that the main features of an act for the University of
British Columbia should incorporate three points: (i)
recognize the legal existence of the university; (ii) define
the composition and authority of the Board of
Governors; and (iii) recognize the existence and
authority of Senate, whose composition and authority
would be decided by the existing Senate and modified
by subsequent Senates.
An approximate four-year timetable for the
discussion, modification and implementation of the
federated colleges proposals is provided in Appendix I to
this chapter. (See box on opposite page.)
The advocates of the proposals described above
believe that the following are the chief advantages they
The Senate Committee on Long-range Objectives
met continuously in recent months to prepare
the first four chapters of their report and lay the
grAtodwork for coming sections. The committee
wcKhaired by Dr. Cyril Belshaw, anthropology
and sociology, seated at the head of the table.
Other committee members are, clockwise from
the head of the table, Mr. Donald Munton,
* 'student Senator; Prof. William Finn, civil
engineering; Miss Rayleen Nash, committee
secretary; Chancellor John M. Buchanan; Mr.
Kenneth   Lysyk,   law;   Prof.   J.R.   Mcintosh,
system envisage that within a few years there would be
30 or more colleges and institutes. If they reported
directly to the President and to the Senate, the central
, administrative apparatus would become unwieldy. Too
many units would be competing for attention ancl funds.
Grouping the colleges and institutes into Academic
Divisions is recommended as a way of coping with this
problem. These would operate almost as independent
entities rather similar to universities in a federated
university system. The Academic Councils of the
Academic Divisions would have full powers to authorize
new programs in colleges and institutes, and to modify
existing programs.
Thus the Senate would not examine, as it now does,
the academic details of new programs and new courses.
What then would the Senate do?
(i) It would authorize the charter setting out the
philosophy and objectives of each college and institute.
(ii) It would legislate in terms of general policy and
serve as a point of appeal if it was believed that its
.policies were not being followed.
(iii) It would plan and co-ordinate academic affairs.
To make this feasible, all budgets would be submitted
for debate to Senate. The Senate Budget Committee
would review the budgets of each college and institute,
as well as each Academic Division, and recommend
adjustments in these submissions to the Board of
Governors. The Board would be expected not to make
budget decisions with academic implications without the
approval of the Senate Budget Committee.
education; Prof. M. W. Steinberg, English, and
Prof. R.M. Clark, economics and UBC's
academic planner. Other committee members
who were not able to be present at the meeting
are Mr. Donovan Miller, Convocation member of
Senate and a member of the Board of
Governors; Prof. John Norris, history; Prof.
R. W. Stewart, oceanography, and Mr. David
Williams, a Convocation member of Senate.
President Walter H. Gage and Mr. J.E.A. Parnall,
UBC's registrar, are ex officio members of the
committee. Extension Graphic Arts Photo.
(i) With its flexibility and high degree of
decentralization, the proposed federated colleges system
would make it easier to accommodate the increasing
numbers of students who will be enrolled at the
university in the years ahead than the present
organization or some minor modifications of it. Not
only can much larger numbers be accommodated, but
they can be absorbed into a variety of academic
environments that increase the attractiveness of learning
and living on campus.
(ii) The existence of a large number of small scale
colleges and institutes, each with its own autonomous
program, would permit a wider range of student and of
faculty choices than is likely otherwise to exist.
(iii) The collegiate arrangements would provide for
groupings of relevant courses, involving combinations of
disciplines, in a variety of locations. For most of their
work students in the colleges would not be required to
move from one end of campus to another. For example,
medical students studying sociology would be able to
obtain most, if not all, of the sociology they need in
their own college, instead of having to trek to the Angus
or Buchanan Buildings.
(iv) Insofar as possible each college would have its
offices, classrooms, study areas, lounges and laboratory
space under its own control. Students would come to
know other students with whom they shared several
classes each week.  In these circumstances it would be
easier for students to identify with their college and its
(v) It would be easier than at present to create new
institutes or colleges to co-ordinate interdisciplinary
(vi) Under the present arrangements some
departments are reluctant to handle service courses,
especially for students who are unlikely to do most of
their subsequent work in the department concerned.
Also some departments have little incentive to hire staff
with a particular interest in interdisciplinary functions,
especially if such individuals wish to devote most of
their time to work not directly related to the main fields
of concentration in the department. Each college, having
its own budget, will be able to call on the department to
help it recruit faculty members to meet its needs. All
faculty members of a college or institute will also be
members of a department. Therefore no individual
faculty member need feel second-rate or inferior merely
because he is alone or has only one or two colleagues in
his discipline who are members of the same college. For
example, a mathematics professor in the College of
Humanities would still regard himself as a full member
of the Mathematics Department. He would attend and
take part in seminars and colloquia organized by the
Mathematics Department.
This plan contains a number of valuable ideas which
can be implemented whether or not the basic proposals
for academic reorganization are adopted. For example,
such ideas as the creation of a satellite campus, an
orientation college, and a college of general studies, and
the proposals to develop a closer link between the
academic programs and the life of the colleges could be
adopted under the existing administrative organization
of the university. We shall return to a consideration of
each of these suggestions. There is room for many
modifications in the proposals, and the reorganization
proposed does not depend for its validity upon the
adoption of all the details described above. Thus the
precise number of colleges and institutes and their
allocation to a particular Academic Division are not of
prime importance in the proposals, and these details
could be modified substantially. The essence of the
proposals lies in a type of further decentralization of
administration in the university.
In this some members of the committee see not only
constructive answers to the criticisms (of existing
structures of departments, schools and faculties
described above), but also an open vista to a more
sophisticated style of university life that could develop
on this campus.
A small minority of the committee believe that there
are more effective methods of coping with the criticisms
of the existing university organization.... To these
members of the committee the following are the chief
disadvantages of the federated colleges proposals.
(i) ... the recommended administrative organization
is substantially more complicated than the existing
system. It introduces another layer of university
government, the Academic Divisions, with their
Academic Councils and the Vice-Chancellors. In
addition, a substantial number of colleges will need to
have their own divisions, each with its chairman. The
majority are convinced that the proposals would entail
considerably more expensive university government,
both in terms of dollar costs and in the amount of time
spent by faculty members in serving on committees and
in writing letters and reports. They also believe the
recommended system would tend to be more costly in
terms of capital facilities, arising out of the natural
desire of each college and institute to control its own
space in so far as possible. Evidence already exists on
this campus to indicate that space is utilized more
efficiently when it is under centralized control.
But more expensive university government, in the
sense of higher cost per student, might be justified in the
improvements if sense of community and quality of
education were sufficiently great. Is it essential to have
the more expensive government in order to achieve these
worthy goals? The majority believe that a main cause of
dissatisfaction on the part of many students is to be
continued on the next page
UBC Reports/May 28, 1969/5 IC C P^/ICT   continued from page five
found in their disagreement with many faculty as to the
proper priority on objectives for this university.
Disagreements over curriculum and dissatisfaction with
excessively large classes are also major sources of
disagreement. We shall make specific recommendations
with regard to all of these points later, primarily in
Chapter V.
The existence of many classes over 100 students is in
part a reflection of our chronic shortage of revenues, as
well as the deliberate choice on the part of some
departments which prefer to keep instruction costs
relatively low in some courses in order to have more
money for research and graduate instruction. All of the
committee agree that greater freedom to initiate
curriculum experiments is desirable. The majority are
not convinced that a more complicated and costly form
of university government is needed in order to achieve
this goal.
Would the federated college proposals be helpful in
improving the morale of faculty members? Are there
better ways of seeking to achieve this? The answer to the
first question is not a simple yes or no. Many faculty
members would prefer to be members of a college or
institute as well as members of a department, rather than
simply members of the latter alone. Others would regard
the dual commitment unnecessary, and would be
unwilling or unable to participate fully in both the
college and the department. This is especially likely to
be the case for a faculty member in a college where the
main interest of faculty and students lies in disciplines
far removed from his own in subject matter and
methodology. The majority believes that the department
in most instances has been an effective unit of university
organization, largely because it corresponds to the
natural area of interest and concern for most faculty
It is essential to deal with the problems that arise in
large departments. We do not see any simple answer that
will be appropriate in every case. In some instances the
obvious answer to excessive size lies in the dividing of an
existing department or faculty into two or more
departments. This already has happened many times in
the history of this university. A division may take place
because of mere growth in size. Or in other cases it may
arise because of a wide and continuing divergence within
a department as to the appropriate areas within the
discipline to be emphasized in future development.
The unanimous recommendations we shall be making
for the internal and outside reviews of the affairs of
every department and school will afford a useful
opportunity to obtain an independent opinion on this
question. Such reviews may point to the need to create
new departments or schools, or to divide and regroup
existing departments and schools. In yet other cases
where there is broad agreement within a department as
to its overall objectives, there still may be friction within
it. Some or many members may feel that if they attend
department meetings regularly their time will be wasted
in discussing areas of specialization in which they are not
involved. In these circumstances it may be appropriate
to divide a department into sub-structures, each of
which will deal with matters of academic concern to its
(ii) The system of decentralized organization in the
federated college proposals would make it much more
difficult to curtail non-essential duplication of courses
and services in the university. Such duplication could
arise readily because those responsible for curriculum in
one college might not be sufficiently aware or concerned
about what is being done in other colleges. To the extent
that this overlapping occurred among different divisions,
it would be more than difficult to eliminate. True, the
Senate Budget Committee would review all budget
proposals that emanate from the Academic Divisions.
But under the federated college system the Senate would
not examine the academic details of new programs and
courses. Therefore, in the opinion of the majority,
although the Senate Budget Committee could demand as
much evidence as it wished, it is unlikely that this
Committee would have sufficient knowledge to wield a
skilful pruning knife.
(iii) Thus the task of the Senate in exercising proper
surveillance over the whole academic enterprise would
be made more difficult. Who then would perform this
function? It is not the function of the Board of
Governors to make strictly academic decisions. In
making financial decisions the Board would have less
authority than at present. Most financial decisions taken
by   the   Board   have   academic   implications  and   the
6/UBC Reports/May 28, 1969
proposals explicitly include the provision that where this
is the case the Board should be expected not to make
decisions without the approval of the Senate. In these
circumstances the burden on the President would be
increased. He would tend to enlarge his staff of advisors,
and to rely as much as he could on advice from his
Vice-Chancellors and Vice-President. But each
Vice-Chancellor would have his own division to defend,
so that the President could not count on receiving
disinterested counsel on contentious issues. The majority
of the committee believes that the outcome would be a
system of university government in which it would be
even more difficult for the President to provide
effective leadership than under the present system.
(iv) There is a danger under the federated colleges
that at least some of the colleges would require what
many faculty members and students would regard as
excessive specialization. This is often a difficult as well
as contentious sort of problem under any system of
university government. But at least under our present
system it is clear that responsibility for dealing with this
issue rests in the one academic forum that includes all
the faculties—the Senate. In the proposed system each
Academic Council would have this responsibility, subject
to general Senate supervision. But each Council,
composed of faculty members in the constituent colleges
and institutes of the Academic Division, is less
representative of the overall needs of the university than
the present Senate. While appeals from the decisions of
the Academic Councils could be carried to Senate,
experience under the present Senate suggests that there
would be a general disinclination on the part of Senate
to take responsibility in an area that in fact had been
basically delegated to the Academic Councils.
The entire committee is in agreement that changes are
essential to create a more personalized environment for
students and faculty—a problem in particular for the
largest faculties and departments. We agree also that
changes are needed to make it easier for interdisciplinary
programs to be created and to be administered
The majority believes that the difficulties referred to
are not primarily to be solved by organizational changes,
because the problems arise from rather strongly held
attitudes and beliefs about curriculum, teaching and
This leads the majority to put more emphasis on
changes which include the following: (i) creation of an
orientation college in Arts and Science to assist students
in the first two years of university work in choosing
their programs for subsequent years; (ii) creation of a
college of general studies for students who do not wish
to take a major or honours in Arts and Science or a
degree in a professional faculty; (iii) development of a
closer link between the academic programs and the life
of the residences; (iv) establishment of a promotions
policy which avoids creating the impression, which is
currently widespread, that teaching ranks substantially
below research as evinced by publications as a criterion
for promotion. This in turn involves making proposals
for appropriate criteria to evaluate teaching.
In addition, the majority favour the changes which
are considered in the remainder of this chapter under
recommendations 6 to 10. Specifically favoured are: (i)
the appointment of an administrator with the powers of
a department head for newly organized areas of
interdepartmental studies. Such a person would have a
budget and the same authority as a department head in
recruiting faculty members; (ii) the provision by
departments, schools and faculties of statements of
objectives for the next five years; (iii) the provision of
review statements concerning activities of departments,
schools and faculties at least every five years, prepared
within these academic units; (iv) the provision of outside
independent appraisal of the performance of
departments, schools and faculties at least every five
years; (v) the appointment of a standing committee of
Senate to receive and review reports under (ii) to (iv)
and to recommend to Senate any action thought
desirable in the light of these reports.
recommend that the present type of structure of
faculties, departments and schools be retained with
modifications to make the system more responsive to
changing conditions, without the adoption of a
federated colleges system.
The minority, who lost by only one vote on the
federated colleges issue, also favours generally all nine of
the above recommendations (those prior to Majority
Recommendation 5), with such modifications as would
be appropriate for a federated colleges system. But the
minority believes that these recommendations do not go
far enough and advocates the following alternative
recommend that the Senate adopt in principle the
federated colleges system for the University of British
Columbia and that the Senate request the President, the
Board of Governors, and all academic authorities in the
university to implement such a system as soon as
Under the present structure of the university, most if
not all university appointments in a discipline are made
in the department which has responsibility for teaching
and research in that particular discipline.
Interdepartmental programs and institutes take care to
recognize the academic primacy of the disciplines, and
to relate appointments to the basic departments. In the
interests of economy and effective academic
co-ordination, the university up to the present time has
resisted duplication of disciplinary departments.
On the whole this structure has furthered the
development of the basic disciplines. It has been less
successful in fostering emerging interdepartmental study
areas, although two notable programs are exceptions to
this, namely the Institutes of Oceanography and of
Fisheries. Effective attack on many problems facing
contemporary society requires the successful fusing of a
variety of disciplinary skills. This fact indicates to us the
need to have a structure that facilitates the emergence of
interdepartmental studies, in response to the needs of
society and the enthusiasms of faculty members
experienced in the relevant disciplines. There is usually
no budget for the direct employment of additional
faculty by the interdepartmental organization. Yet such
faculty members may be needed to obtain a properl^B
diversified and balanced faculty team. These
considerations lead to the following recommendation.
RECOMMENDATION 6: We recommend that when
the Senate and the Board of Governors approve of the
establishment of a new interdepartmental program, (i)
the Board be asked to appoint a head for the program
with authority comparable to other department heads;
and (ii) the Board be asked to provide a budget for the
interdepartmental program that can be used to engage
the services of faculty members.
As at present, such faculty members could, of course,
hold appointments in a particular discipline as well as.in
the new program. For administrative purposes new
interdepartmental programs should be attached to the
faculty with which its faculty members will be most
closely related in terms of disciplinary interests. In ^^
majority of cases this is likely to be Science, Applieo^
Science, Arts or Medicine.
RECOMMENDATION 7: We recommend that every
five years each faculty, school and department be
required to produce a statement of objectives for the
next five years which would be forwarded to the
President and to the Senate.
RECOMMENDATION 8: We recommend that every
five year period each faculty, school and department be
required to prepare a statement comparing its objectives
as set out in previous statements with its achievements in
the past five years. This statement should be sent to the
President and the Senate.
RECOMMENDATION 9: We recommend that every
five years the performance of each department, school
and faculty should be reviewed by a committee
appointed by the Senate in the light of both the
statement of five year objectives and the wider needs of
the university. Included in the matters under review
should be the stewardship of the Head, the Director and
the Dean.
RECOMMENDATION 10: We recommend that the
Senate should elect a standing committee on academic
review, with the following terms of reference: (i) to
determine near the beginning of each academic year
which departments, schools and faculties should be
asked during that year to prepare (a) statements of five
year objectives, (b) internal reviews of operations for the
past five years, (c) independent outside reviews of
operations for the past five years.
(ii) To indicate the topics to be covered in the
statements of five year objectives and the statements of
review, (iii) To receive submissions concerning the
composition of outside review committees from students
and faculty members, (iv) To appoint the members of
the outside review committees, subject to the
concurrence of the President, (v) To receive and
consider the statements of five year objectives and the
review statements, and to recommend to the Senate any
actions deemed advisable in the light of these reports. SIX western Canadian universities have
formed a consortium called WESTAR—
Western Telescopes for Astronomical
Research—to further construction of a
156-inch telescope on Mount Kobau in the
interior of B.C.
WESTAR will receive from the federal
government the existing assets for the Mount
Kobau project and launch a public appeal for
$10 million to enable completion of the
At a meeting on May 6, UBC's Board of
Governors approved a proposal that UBC act
as fiscal and business agent for the consortium
and hold title to the assets turned over by the
federal government. This proposal is subject
to approval by the Boards of other participating universities.
UBC's Board also approved the appointment of Dr. Vladimir Okulitch, dean of
science, and deputy president William M.
Armstrong as UBC's representatives on the
WESTAR Board of Management.
The question of the future of the Mount
Kobau telescope has been in doubt since
September of last year when the federal
government announced it was cancelling the
project as an economy measure.
In the ensuing months, Dean Okulitch, an
amateur  astronomer  himself,   succeeded   in
carousing   interest   at   six   western   Canadian
'universities for the formation of a consortium
which would be able to continue the project.
Consortium members to date are UBC and
the Universities of Victoria, Calgary, Leth-
bridge and Alberta and Notre Dame University in Nelson. A possible additional member
of the consortium is the University of
Dr. B.G. Wilson, dean of arts and science at
the University of Calgary and an x-ray
astronomer, was elected chairman of the
consortium at a meeting held at UBC May 1.
He said any interested Canadian university
would   be   welcome   to   participate   in   the
>consortium's work.
He said the government decision to turn
over the assets to the consortium "represents
a major step forward with respect to facilities
for astronomical research and astrophysical
research in Canada. The consortium has now
considered organizational arrangements which
might meet the government requirement and
its members will be seeking approval from
their respective universities regarding their
The assets to be turned over to the consortium are valued at more than $4 million and
consist of a 156-inch fused quartz mirror
blank which weighs 17 tons and is currently
stored at the Corning Glass Works in New
York state; the machine which will grind and
polish the blank, which is currently stored in
Vancouver; various peices of optical equipment for use in the grinding and polishing
process and the engineering plans for the
telescope. The consortium has also been
guaranteed the use of the Mount Kobau site
itself for erection of the telescope.
THE site, near Oliver, B.C., is served by an
access road for movement of heavy equipment and includes a trailer camp, a diesel-
operated power station and a number of
meteorological and astronomical instruments.
The site has been leased by the provincial
government to the federal government for a
period of 99 years.
The federal government has also given
assurances that federal astronomers would
continue to give technical help in the grinding
of the mirror, which is a four-year task, and
construction   of  the observatory.   In  return.
UBC's dean of science, Dr. Vladimir Okulitch, left, and professor of astronomy Dr. Michael Ovenden scrutinize a model of the 156-inch Mount Kobau telescope. Photo by Extension Graphic Arts.
federal government astronomers will be able
to use the facility when it is complete.
A $10 million public appeal is necessary to
complete the telescope because participating
universities are unable to commit capital
funds to the project.
Dean Wilson said the name "Western
Telescopes for Astronomical Research" had
been chosen because it was hoped to coordinate work going on at other telescopes of
various kinds in western Canada. A federal
government radio telescope is located 15
miles north of the Mount Kobau site.
He said he expected approval of the
consortium would be completed this summer
and that members were optimistic about the
prospect of raising funds over a ten-year
Various members of the consortium
expressed enthusiasm for the telescope. Prof.
Michael Ovenden, head of astronomy at UBC,
said the mirror blank was, in his opinion, the
best ever produced.
He pointed out that while the initial
investment in the telescope would be high it
would have a very long life. He said the
73-inch telescope at the Dominion Astro-
physical Observatory in Victoria was now 51
years old and still in active use.
If the Mount Kobau telescope was erected
today it would be the second largest in the
world, exceeded only by the Mount Palomar
telescope   in   California.   By   the   time   the
Mount Kobau project is completed there will
probably be other, larger telescopes in
The Russians recently cast a 240-inch
mirror made of pyrex glass, which cracked
during the cooling process and has had to be
SEVERAL members of the consortium
said they expected excellent viewing
conditions at Mount Kobau. Dean 0-
kulitch said research studies carried out
last winter had labelled Mount Kobau an
exceptional location for a telescope. For
observation purposes, the Kobau site is judged
to be superior to Victoria, as good as Mount
Palomar, and almost as good as the site
proposed for a telescope in Chile.
The disadvantages of the site are short
summer nights for viewing purposes and
weather conditions during the winter. "But
we expect to have at least 1,400 hours of
good observing time on Kobau," Dean
Okulitch said.
Attending the May 1 meeting at UBC as
representatives of the universities concerned
with the WESTAR project were: Dean Wilson,
University of Calgary; Deans Armstrong and
Okulitch, Prof. Ovenden and Dr. W.C. Gibson
for UBC; Dr. Earl Milton, University of
Lethbridge; Prof. John A. Jacobs, University
of Alberta, and Dr. J.L. Climenhaga, University of Victoria.
UBC Reports/May 28, 1969/7 a0^ UBC ALUMNI    ■ ■
UBC President Walter Gage congratulates winners of Alumni Awards of Student Merit, Anne
Smith, (left) and Don Munton (right) at UBC Alumni Annual Meeting. UBC Extension Graphic
Arts Photo.
Communications media are causing cracks in the
Communist bloc, says Stanley Burke, host of the
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's National TV
Burke, 46, a 1948 UBC bachelor of science in
agriculture graduate, made the comment during his
keynote address to the UBC Alumni Association
annual meeting on May 7. More than 200 alumni
attended the meeting, held in the UBC Faculty Club.
Another highlight of the annual meeting was the
presentation of the Alumni Award of Merit to noted
Canadian humorist and playwright, Eric Nicol. The
award, the association's highest honor, goes annually
to a UBC graduate whose contribution in his
particular endeavor has been outstanding.
Nicol, a columnist with the Vancouver Province
for 18 years, is the author of numerous books, TV
and radio scripts and plays, and a three-time winner
of the Leacock Medal for humor.
Recognition was also paid to student achievement
by the annual meeting. Alumni Awards of Student
Merit, each carrying a $50 book prize, were made to
graduate political science student Don Munton and to i
third-year   rehabilitation   medicine   student   Anne"
Munton received the graduate award for his
contribution to student government, the University
Senate and to residence life. Miss Smith was awarded
the undergraduate award for her work in developing
an active undergraduate society in rehabilitation
medicine. UBC president Walter Gage made the
presentations. (See picture at left).
The meeting also saw the election of new officers
to the Board of Management, the body which governs
the Alumni Association. Elected by acclamation as
president for 1969—70 was Vancouver lawyer Sholto
Hebenton, BA'57, BA(Oxford) '59, BCL(Oxford)
'60, LLM(Harvard) '61. He replaces Stan Evans,
BA'41, BEd'44, in the post. The other key members
of the new executive are: First Vice-President, T.f
Barrie Lindsay, BCom'58; Second Vice-President,
Frank C. Walden, BA'49; Third Vice-President, Mrs.
Frederick Field, BA'42; and Treasurer, William
Redpath, BCom'47.
Conference Probes University Problems
"I believe that higher education in British
Columbia has reached the crisis point and that we
must act at once if present and future generations of
students are not to suffer irreparable loss of
The former President of the University of B.C., Dr.
F. Kenneth Hare, made this grim remark in a special
news conference called last November to make the
public aware of the difficult situation facing the
It is in recognition of this crisis that the UBC
Alumni Association has organized Beyond 1969, a
conference on B.C. higher education, to be held June
13 and 14 at Totem Park, UBC. The conference has
been designed to give alumni and the public insight
into the crisis facing B.C. higher education in general
and UBC in particular. Outstanding speakers will
discuss the problem, its implications and possible
"I believe this conference is the most important
project this association has undertaken in many
years," conference chairman Barrie Lindsay said, in
announcing the program. "If higher education is not
to deteriorate in B.C., the public should be made to
better understand the nature of the crisis which Dr.
F. Kenneth Hare, the former president of UBC,
pointed to so often.
"I don't believe either the public or our alumni
fully appreciate the problem of financing and
8/UBC Reports/May 28, 1969
planning higher education. This conference is
designed to both provide information and to
stimulate thought and action."
The conference keynote address will be given
Saturday morning, June 14, by UBC President Walter
Gage. The remainder of the day will be taken up with
a series of major speeches, panels and discussion
Former UBC president Dr. John B. Macdonald,
who is now executive vice-chairman, Committee of
Presidents of the Universities of Ontario, will give the
banquet address Saturday evening. He will speak on
"Administration of Higher Education in Ontario."
Other conference speakers include: UBC Deputy
President William Armstrong; Dr. Ian
McTaggart-Cowan, UBC dean of graduate studies and
chairman of the B.C. Academic Board; John Young,
Campbell River Secondary School principal; Andrew
Soles, principal of Selkirk College; Dean Goard,
principal of the B.C. Institute of Technology; Dr.
Cyril Belshaw, UBC head of anthropology and
sociology and chairman of UBC Senate Committee on
Long-Range Objectives; Ture Erickson, head of the
Sedgewick Library, UBC; Michael Doyle, UBC Alma
Mater Society external affairs officer; Susan Shaw,
chairman, UBC Alma Mater Society High School
Visitation Committee; Sholto Hebenton, UBC
Alumni Association president; Barrie Lindsay, UBC
Alumni    Association   first   vice-president;   Frank
Walden,   second   vice-president;   and   Jack   Stathers,
UBC Alumni Association executive director.
If you would like to attend, please complete and
mail the accompanying coupon to the UBC Alumni
Association, 6251 N.W. Marine Drive, Vancouver
167, B.C.
A conference on B.C. higher education
June 13 & 14, Totem Park Residences, UBC
Yes, I would like to attend the BEYOND 1969
Alumnus     Faculty      Student      Community
Conference registration fee ($5) enclosed	
bill me	
UBC Alumni Association
6251 N.W. Marine Drive
Vancouver 167, B.C.


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