UBC Publications

UBC Publications

UBC Publications

UBC Reports Nov 14, 1973

Item Metadata


JSON: ubcreports-1.0117815.json
JSON-LD: ubcreports-1.0117815-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): ubcreports-1.0117815-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: ubcreports-1.0117815-rdf.json
Turtle: ubcreports-1.0117815-turtle.txt
N-Triples: ubcreports-1.0117815-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: ubcreports-1.0117815-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

The controversial Working Paper on University
Governance in British Columbia will be discussed at
two days of public hearings on the UBC campus in
The working paper, prepared by the Committee on
University Governance, chaired by Mr. John Bremer,
B.C.'s Commissioner of Education, was made public
on Nov. 2.
Hearings on the working paper will be held at UBC
on Jan. 22 and 23 at times and locations to be
Members of the University community have been
invited to submit briefs on matters raised in the
working paper for discussion at the public hearings.
Submissions should be sent to Mr. John Bremer,
Commissioner of Education for B.C., Douglas Building, Victoria, B.C. (The full text of the working paper
appears on Pages Two and Three of this issue of UBC
The six-member Committee on University Governance, which prepared the working paper, was established in September of this year by the Hon. Eileen
Dailly, B.C.'s Minister of Education.
The committee was asked to "consider the internal
and external forms of university governance, with
particular reference to the relationship between the
universities and the provincial government, and to
make recommendations to the Minister of Education
for appropriate changes in the Universities Act."
In addition to Mr. Bremer, members of the Committee are: Prof. William M. Armstrong, deputy
president of UBC; Miss Bonnie Long, external affairs
A.R. Grimwood Construction Ltd., of Vancouver,
has been awarded a $3,070,000 contract for the
construction of a new Museum of Anthropology at
The Museum, to be located on the site of the
former Fort Camp residence, north of Northwest
Marine Drive and designed by Vancouver architect
Arthur Erickson, is scheduled to be completed by
April 1, 1975. Work is expected to be under way by
Because of inflated building costs some design
features of the project have had to be temporarily
eliminated in order to bring the construction cost in
line with available funds. A large shallow pond, which
was to have been located in front of the building, will
not be constructed at this time and the proposed
transfer of totem poles and Indian buildings from
UBC's Totem Pole Park to the Museum site has also
been delayed.
Costs have been further pared by reducing
landscaping, eliminating some interior carpeting and
wood panelling, and other minor changes.
The Museum will house the University's famed
10,000-piece collection of Northwest Coast Indian
art, valued at close to $10 million, and the Walter and
Marianne Koerner masterwork collection of tribal art,
probably the most important collection remainingi in
private hands in North America.
Also on display will be an additional 10,000
artifacts which make up important named collections
of the Asian, classical and tribal worlds, and more
than 90,000 items from the prehistoric period of B.C.
Indian culture, accumulated over 25 years from sites
excavated under the direction of Dr. Charles Borden,
Professor Emeritus of Archeology.
The Museum is partly financed with a $2.5 million
grant received in May, 1972, from the federal
government as part of a $10 million federal fund
established to mark the 100th anniversary of B.C.'s
entry into Confederation.
Total cost of the project is not to exceed
The Museum will have both a public and academic
officer of UBC's Alma Mater Society; Prof. Walter D.
Young, head of the Department of Political Science
at the University of Victoria; Prof. Kenji Okuda, of
the Economics Department at Simon Fraser University; and Dr. Eileen Herridge, of the special programs
division of Vancouver City College.
Prof. Armstrong told UBC Reports that the
purpose of the working paper was to direct discussion
to specific points involved in the rewriting of the
present Universities Act, which has been in force
since 1963.
He said the terms of reference given to the committee were fairly narrow and were not a mandate to
OH, my aching back, says UBC Bookstore
employee Jim Gascoyne, shown taking a brief
break from stacking books in preparation for
the Bookstore's annual sale, which opens
today (Nov. 14) in Brock Hall for UBC
students, staff and alumni. Sale hours are 9
a.m. to 5 p.m. Sale is said to be the biggest
event of its kind in Canada. Some 250,000
volumes representing 80,000 different titles
are up for grabs at bargain prices. Books go on
sale to the general public on Nov. 19.
develop or suggest a totally new framework of higher
education for B.C.
"In our discussions," he said, "the committee
reached the conclusion that the Universities Act
should remain a flexible document which would
allow each university to develop internal structures
suited to its size and particular needs.
"For instance, it has been suggested that the committee should recommend an Open University similar
to the one now in operation in Great Britain. In fact,
there is nothing in the present Act which prohil
the establishment of such an institution. The comr
tee's working paper suggests that this kind of flexi
ity   should   be   retained   when   the   present  Ad
The working paper recommends extensive chan
in the structure of the Board of Governors and S
ate, the two main governing bodies of the universit
The paper proposes a 15-member Board of Ti
tees, with five members elected by Convocation (i
the graduates and faculty of the university), and ei
appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor in Coui
(i.e., the provincial government). The remaining 1
members would be the president and the Chancel
ex officio.
The   working   paper   also  proposes that faci
members   and    students   should   be   ineligible
election or appointment to the Board of Trustees of
their own university.
Prof. Armstrong pointed out that this proposal did
not bar UBC faculty members or students from
becoming members of the Board of Trustees at, say,
Simon Fraser University or the University of Victoria
and vice versa.
Under the present Universities Act, the Board of
Governors is made up of 11 persons, six appointed by
the Lieutenant-Governor in Council, three elected by
the Senate, and the President and Chancellor, ex
The working paper also proposes a restructuring of
the Senate to make it, said Prof. Armstrong, "a
stronger body than it is at present."
The proposed Senate would be made up of 25 per
cent administration members, 25 per cent students
and 50 per cent faculty members. This would produce a Senate of 72 members at UBC, including 18
students, six more than at present.
At present UBC's Senate is made up of 98 members, who are either elected or appointed. These include 15 members elected by Convocation, who
would be eliminated under the working paper
Another major change proposed in the working
paper is the establishment of a standing committee of
the Senate to assist the President in the preparation
of the university budget. Under the existing Universities Act, Senate has no responsibility for budget preparation. UBC's budget is now prepared by the
University administration and approved by the Board
of Governors.
Another major proposal in the working paper is
the creation of an 11-member Universities Council of
British Columbia to replace the existing Advisory
Board and Academic Board.
The Council would receive the operating and capital budgets of the universities, evaluate and consolidate these and transmit them to the Minister of
Education. It would also allocate the sum received
from the provincial government to the universities.
The Council would also concern itself with the
intermediate and long-range planning of university
development and would have the power to approve or
disapprove proposals for new institutes, and new
degree programs at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels.
Prof. Armstrong said that, following the receipt of
briefs and public hearings, the committee would evaluate the submissions and work with a lawyer appointed by the provincial government in drafting a new
Universities Act.
He said the draft Act might be ready for submission to the fall, 1974, session of the Legislature. WORKING
What follows, on these two pages of UBC
Reports, is the full text of the Working Paper on
University Governance in British Columbia,
prepared by a six-member Committee on
University Governance appointed by the B.C.
Minister of Education, the Hon. Eileen Dailly, in
September of this year. The Committee, chaired
by Mr. John Bremer, B.C.'s Commissioner of
Education, plans two days of public hearings on
the UBC campus on Jan. 22 and 23, 1974. The
Committee has invited members of the
University community to submit briefs on
matters raised in the working paper. (See story
on Page One.)
The Committee on University Governance was
appointed by the Minister of Education in September,
1973, under the chairmanship of John Bremer. The
Committee was asked to report to the Minister under the
following terms of reference:
"To consider the internal and external forms of
university governance, with particular reference to
the relationship between the universities and the
Provincial Government, and to make recommendations to the Minister of Education for appropriate
changes in the Universities Act."
This initial statement by the Committee is intended
to  encourage  the  examination   and  discussion of the
matters raised. The Committee invites interested groups
and   individuals   to   submit   written   briefs   and   make
presentations at public hearings that will commence in
mid-January, 1974.
The Act under which the public universities of British
Columbia operate was written in 1963 and, in many
respects, is still an effective document. The committee
sees no need to change those sections of the Act which
have worked well over the past ten years and which
continue to work well. However, the nature of the times
requires that changes be made which will ensure public
accountability and preserve the essential academic
autonomy of the universities.
The Committee assumes that any legislation respecting the universities in British Columbia would require
university practices to be in accordance with the provisions of any provincial human rights legislation.
In general, the Committee is reluctant to propose
changes which penetrate too deeply into the internal
structure and responsibilities of the universities, and sees
no reason why the three universities should have uniform internal administrative structures and procedures.
The Committee considers a university Board of
Governors to be the trustee of public funds which oversees the budgeting and expenditure of those funds. It
does not see the Board as a management committee
which initiates university policies, nor does it believe
that its members should be elected to represent "constituencies" in the university community.
The Committee recognizes the traditional responsibility of Senate for the academic governance of the
university, but feels that the Senate's role in this respect
should be given greater clarity. It proposes, therefore,
that Senate be composed of students and faculty
members only.
The trustee role of the Board and the academic responsibility of the Senate at each university should be
seen in the larger context of the province and the nation.
To provide a framework in which there is adequate recognition of the public interests, the Committee proposes
the formation of a Universities Council of British
Columbia, the members of which would be drawn from
the   general   public.   This   council   would   replace  the
present Advisory Board and Academic Board and act as
an intermediary between the universities and the
Minister of Education. It would have power to support
and encourage co-ordination and planning of university
activities as well as provide a public review of those
The importance of the role of leadership in the
university is recognized by the Committee. It believes
that the President should maintain this role of leader and
continue to be the university's chief executive officer.
However, the Committee proposes that the President
participate in Senate as a member, rather than in the
chair, and prepare the annual budget in consultation
with a standing committee of Senate. This would expand
both the scope and accountability of the presidency. It
is further proposed that each president be included as a
non-voting member of the Council for the Universities of
British Columbia.
The Committee does not believe that co-ordinating
bodies between the Board of Governors and Senate, or
between the university and the community, need to be
established by legislation. Such links can be created by
the Board and Senate of each university. Moreover, the
Committee does not believe it would be wise to legislate
the creation of inter-university bodies to deal with the
proposed Council for the Universities of British
1. Few public institutions have been subjected to as
rigorous and widespread an examination of their structure and function as have today's universities. And few
public institutions have had to contend with the ramifications of the pace of social change in so many forms
as have the universities. It is not, however, to elicit
sympathy for these bodies that we need to be reminded
of these facts; it is to call to our attention the present
position of the university and to remind ourselves of the
burden society has placed on universities — and of the
burden universities can be to society.
2. In the recent past in British Columbia there have
been many proposals for changing the structure of the
universities. For the most part these have addressed
themselves to particular aspects of university governance. In pursuing its examination of the present structure of the province's public universities, the Committee
undertook to examine the whole structure and to concentrate particularly upon the relationship of the parts
one to the other rather than upon any single aspect.
3. The operational premise of the Committee is that
the political relationships that exist between the elements of the university community are, in the final analysis, a product not of legislation but of the power relationships that develop between students, faculty members, deans, presidents and boards of governors, and that
these relationships are unlikely to be modified in any
major way by statutory means. This is not a premise that
assumes that the status quo is always preferable. It is one
that recognizes the existence of strong traditions within
the universities and the human propensity of those
accustomed to these traditions to convert new forms to
old. Lasting change can be best assured by proposing
modest alterations that encourage new relationships to
develop from within.
4. The object, then, of this working paper is to propose ways in which these relationships can be more
clearly defined. The proposed changes would have the
effect of encouraging reform in university governance
without forcing it into a rigid mould of legislative provisos. The political assumption is that parliamentary
processes which rely more on precedent and the good
judgement of those engaged in the operations and less on
elaborate and cumbersome structures, are preferable.
5. The Committee has been particularly concerned
with the relationship between the universities and the
government. Universities are public institutions, spending
public funds and performing public functions. The fact
that governments should want some means of ensuring
that universities are spending public funds wisely and with
some recognition that the public treasury is not inexhaustible should cause neither surprise nor worry. Equally,
however, universities should be concerned that governments do not interfere in any direct or indirect way with
their operation. The strength of any university is its
6. To provide government with more than an earnest
assurance of responsibility and to protect universities
from political pressures, an agency to function as an
intermediary is needed. The Worth Report in Alberta, the
Wright Report in Ontario, the Oliver task force in
Manitoba and the Carnegie Commission all proposed the
creation of some kind of body to serve this purpose. This
committee takes the view that such an intermediary is
necessary in British Columbia. It would provide for the
reconciliation of accountability with autonomy and
would ensure a greater sensitivity to social needs in the
development of university education.
7. Boards of Governors have often been the principal
objects of criticism of the university. It is claimed that
they represent neither the university community nor the
public, that all too often they consist of captains of"
industry who evince little concern for matters academic^,
and that they rule the campus in a thoroughly dictatorial
manner. Without at this point disputing these assertions, it
is worth noting that apart from the university Chancellor,
members of these boards receive little public recognition
for the time and energy they devote to university matters,
and no material rewards beyond occasional lunches and
dinners at university expense. Moreover, their influence-
on university affairs, however significant their contribution, is often exaggerated.
8. The function of Boards of Governors, strictly interpreted, is to act as public trustees on behalf of the crown —
the trustor, and to serve the university — the beneficiary <
the trust. This is a necessary function if universities are to
have the benefit of public funds. The logic of the trustor-
trustee relationship requires that trustees have no interest
in the trust beyond serving both trustor and beneficiary. It
also follows that beneficiaries cannot be trustees.
9. Proposals for reform have usually included provisionl
for   faculty   and   student   membership   on   Boards   of,
Governors. Apart from the violence this does to the logitj
of the trustor-trustee relationship, there seems to be little
advantage in greatly increasing the size of Boards or of
making them into university assemblies such that the real
work of governing is carried on by one or more small:
committees — as has happened in other jurisdictions where
such remedies have been attempted.
10. Because their proceedings are more or less secret;"
Boards of Governors appear to be more active and influential in university affairs than they really are. A
thorough demystification of the role of Boards would
reveal the fallacy of the assumption that faculty and
student membership on Boards would open the way tc
more significant participation in university governance
for these groups. The Committee does not accept this
11.lt proposes that the size of the Board of Governors
be increased to 15 with five members elected by Convocation and eight appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor--!
in-Council — the remaining two members being the
President and the Chancellor, ex-officio. The Committee^
would also propose that the Board be styled the Board ofj
Trustees, and that faculty members and students of the
particular university be ineligible for election or appointment.
12. To those who would at this point protest that by
excluding faculty and students from the Board, thg
Committee is denying the possibility of real democracy
on the campus, it should be pointed out that the trui*]
nature of democracy lies not in who sits where but in
the relationship of the parts to each other and to the
whole. It is pointless to argue that democracy demands|
the election of a monarch if in fact that monarch
absolute; far better to keep the crown as hereditary and
invigorate the assembly. Trusteeship is the principal))
responsibility of the Board.	
13. It was the Duff-Berdahl commission that in 1966
pointed out for those who had eyes to see that the reaU
locus of power on the campus was the Senate. It was in*
this body that the academic decisions were taken priot
to their almost perfunctory ratification by the Board. As I
they are presently constituted, Senates tend to be too
large to be effective — at least this would seem to be the
case with the University of British Columbia. At the same |
time, too small a Senate loses the advantages that size
lends to an assembly in which debate is the basis for]
decision  making.  Moreover, small  Senates suffer fronl'
either   a   limited  committee  structure  or  overworked |
members, or both.
14. Apart from size, the Committee considered the |
role of "lay" members of Senates and came to the conclusion that the interests of the community could bel
better served in other ways. Experience in this and other]
provinces indicates that the provision of a relatively!
small number of lay members on academic senates is not|
a satisfactory way to ensure community input. The desirability of maintaining a modest sort of participating!
connection for members of Convocation is met by thel
proposal that Convocation elect five members of the J
Board of Trustees. Community responsibility in th
broader and more significant context is provided for ini
the proposals relating to the university/government|
intermediary body.
15. It is proposed that Senate have a purely academic|
composition. This would consist of the Chancellor;
President, Academic Vice-president or equivalent, Deans
of Faculties, Chief Librarian, Director of Continuing
Education or equivalent, a representative of each affiliated college, a number of students equivalent to the total
9/1 IRr  Ror,ortc/Aln»    Id    IP/73 of the preceding membership, and a number of faculty
equal to twice the total of preceding membership, ex
eluding students. In other words, each Senate would
p-»consist of 25 per cent administration, 25 per cent stu
dents and 50 per cent faculty members. At present this
would produce a Senate of 72 at UBC, 44 at the Univer
sity of Victoria and 40 at Simon Fraser University.
16. The inclusion of the Director of Continuing Education, or the equivalent,  is a matter of some impor
tance. The extension of a university's academic services
wbeyond  its walls was once a secondary operation designed as much to fulfill  a public relations role as to
educate extra-mural students. Today a major part of a
university's teaching function must involve part-time students, extra-mural students and students engaged not in
'degree work but in continuing education of a variety of
„kinds. A university's out-reach is now vitally important
and  clearly  a  matter that  must  engage  a  significant
portion of Senate's attention.
17. The Committee recognizes the fairly obvious fact
that matters of student discipline no longer require the
'elaborate structures that were a product of the era when
the university functioned in loco parentis. It is therefore
proposed that the Faculty Council be abolished. Disciplinary matters which are not within the normal sphere of
the civil or criminal law should be handled by bodies to be
established by the universities in consultation with appropriate student representatives. Final appeal from these
bodies should lie to a standing committee of the Senate.
18. To enable the presidents to participate more actively in the debates of Senate, it is proposed that each
Senate elect its own chairperson annually. To enable the
Senate to participate fully in the governance of the university it is proposed that each Senate establish a stand
ing committee to meet with and assist the president in
the preparation of the university budget. In this connection there is no evidence to support the necessity for
secrecy in budgeting. Where open budgeting has been
instituted the results have been uniformly positive.
19. As envisaged by the Committee, the Senate is the
central agency in the academic governance nf the university. Composed solely of those for whom the academic
decision-making process is of central and overriding con
cern, it would exercise a wide and significant authority
within the powers presently assigned under the existing
Act. The Committee would propose no change in its
powers beyond proposing that it be charged more speci
fically with the academic governance of the university,
and providing for the active involvement of a Senate
standing committee in the central budgeting process. So
constituted it would have the potential to bring about
whatever changes in the academic style and pursuits of
the university that it chose.
20. The one change in the structure of the Faculties
that the committee would recommend at this point
would be that Faculties make provision for student representation at a level and in a manner to be decided by
the faculty members and students of each Faculty. There
is no doubt that student involvement in the governing
processes of the university is highly desirable and worthwhile as a means of ensuring that the university is aware
of the needs and wishes of its student body and of the
wider community their views often reflect, and also as
means of providing students themselves with valuable
insights into the bases of decisions that have ramifications beyond the immediate concerns of a particular
course or discipline. For these reasons the Committee
proposes that there should be student representation on
the Senate and on the Faculties.
21. The Committee recognizes that attempts to mini-
Tnize power or distribute it widely on the campus are
seldom successful. In what it proposes the Committee
seeks to ensure that power is exercised openly and in a
context that provides responsibility within the existing
I 22. The rearrangement of the operating parts of a
ijiniversity invariably produces situations in which the old
order reasserts itself in new forms that are not immediately recognizable but are, nonetheless, as undesirable as
before — assuming that the desire for change was based on
valid criticism. Equally ineffective are attempts to distribute power widely by new structures, massive infusions of
electoral devices and a plague of elected committees. Such
changes succeed only in making it difficult for decisions to
be reached and even more difficult to determine responsibility once they have been reached. And, almost inevitably, either the old power structure or a new and more
subtle one will emerge to flourish behind a thicket of
procedures that purport to be the essential mechanisms of
democracy. Democracy is less a tangle of procedures and
more a way of political behavior that relies upon good
faith and the notion of responsible; and visible
23. It is the Committee's proposal, therefore, that the
office of President remain essentially as it is in the present
Act, except that the Senate be involved in the budgetary
process and that the President no longer chair Senate. In
short, it is the view of the Committee that the President be
the chief executive officer of the university, accountable
to the Senate in matters of academic governance, and
responsible to the Board in its role as public trustee.
24. Amongst the more vexatious questions that have
faced universities have been those involving questions of
appointment, tenure and renewal of contract. Universities have responded to these questions in their own
25. It is the view of the Committee that these are
matters which properly belong to the universities themselves to deal with where they do not touch upon areas
served by the civil and criminal jurisdictions. The Committee believes it to be of fundamental importance, however, that universities establish and make public specific
and simple procedures for dealing with matters under
these headings. It proposes that the procedures be formulated by appropriate university bodies, in consultation with the Faculty Association or an equivalent agency. The Committee would also propose that when the
president makes his recommendations regarding personnel matters to the Board of Trustees, that he be required
to report the findings of the appropriate committees at
the same time.
26. While the Committee generally favors the view
that administrators in the universities should hold office
for fixed terms and that faculty should play the major
role in any selection process, it does not think that it
would be wise to provide for such terms and procedures
in legislative form. The particular circumstances of each
university require local initiative in these questions within the general guidelines that the Act establishes.
It seems obvious that universities should provide
specific dismissal procedures, for example, to ensure that
the tenure provisions serve the purpose for which they
were designed: the protection of the academic from
interference in the free and open pursuit of scholarship
and not as a barricade to protect the incompetent from
legitimate confrontation with their own inadequacy. It is
the hope of the Committee that one result of the
changes it is proposing would be the encouragement of
free and open discussion of every aspect of a university's
operation, including procedures governing appointments,
promotion and tenure, salaries, dismissal and discipline.
27. A matter of major concern to both universities
and the governments that support them has been the just
apportionment of spheres of independence and involvement. Governments quite properly require an accounting
of the funds they annually contribute to universities in
the. form of capital and operating grants. They become
justifiably concerned when they hear rumors of wasteful
expenditure, yet are denied budgetary control over the
universities. For their part the universities prefer being
treated not as mendicants but as the rightful recipients
of as large a portion of the public purse as they alone
feel their purposes require.
28. Rising costs, changing attitudes toward post-
secondary education in general, the need to avoid competition between universities for public funds ancl the
need to avoid wasteful duplication of resources requires
the establishment of an intermediary serving as the agency within which the interests of government and university are reconciled. Such an agency would minimize confrontation and provide a framework for mutual interaction and persuasion. It would also serve to ensure the
co-ordination of programs and resources amongst the
universities and provide for systematic public influence
in the development of university education in British
29. This Council, as the Committee envisages it, would
be composed of 11 lay persons appointed by the
Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council, with the presidents of
the universities, a representative of the Department of
Education plus the chairman of any equivalent body established for the province's colleges as non-voting members.
It would meet at least monthly during the academic year.
It would elect its own chairman and would appoint a full-
time executive director and such staff as it would require
to perform its functions. These would include receiving
the operating and capital budgets from each of the universities, evaluating and consolidating these and transmitting
a total request to the Minister of Education. It would
allocate the sum received from the government to the universities. The Council would also concern itself with the
intermediate and long range planning of university development and would have the power to approve or disapprove proposals for new institutes, and new degree programs at the undergraduate and post-graduate levels. In
addition, it would work with the universities in promoting
co-operative ventures and in co-ordinating existing and
future developments.
30. In the performance of its duties it would have the
power to require from the universities such documents
and information as it felt it needed and would, as well,
be empowered to carry out or contract for studies or research projects related to its area of responsibility. While
the Committee can see no reason for making specific
legislative provision, it would urge the government to
consider the advisability of establishing longer and more
flexible budgetary periods.
31. An important responsibility of the Council would
be the preparation and publication of an annual report
which would include all the budgetary information submitted to it by the universities and submitted by it to
the government, as well as details of its allocation to the
universities. In addition the report would include a general appraisal of the state of university education in the
32. While the Council would have specific powers
with respect to new degree programs and would have the
sole responsibility for allocating the general government
grant for universities, its general responsibility would lie
in the areas of encouraging, advising and warning the
universities without at the same time interfering with
their necessary and legitimate autonomy in internal matters. It should not, for example, be within the Council's
powers to exercise line-item budgetary control. Within
the grant of funds made by the Council, and having
regard for the Council's advice, the universities would be
responsible for their own allocations. The Council could
provide advice based on the work of its staff or outside
contract research in a wide variety of areas and would
actively encourage co-operation and co-ordination
between the universities.
33. It is the belief of the Committee that the Council
would stand between the universities and the government, serving as a wise counsellor to both and as a third
voice in the deliberations affecting universities in British
Columbia. The presence on the Council of the chairman
of any equivalent body serving the College constituency
would provide much needed co-ordination between the
two ranges of higher education offered in the province.
34. Proposals have been made for the establishment of
formal inter-university bodies to represent the province's
universities before the Council. The Committee can see no
advantage in legislating the establishment of such a body
and, moreover, is concerned that such a development
would create an adversary relationship between the universities and the Council. The Council, and not some
other body, should be the focus and the forum for inter-
university relationships as well as university/government
35. The Committee would propose that the Council
establish a number of ad hoc or standing committees
that would serve in an advisory capacity. These committees would include individuals from other educational
bodies and from community groups whose interests and
concerns intersect with the aims and development of
university education in the province.
36. The Committee on University Governance has not
directed its attention to any of the myriad proposals for
alternative forms of curriculum, structure and content
although it is the Committee's intention to provide a compendium of such proposals with a working bibliography in
its final report. Apart from the view already stated that
little of any positive value would be achieved by massive
restructuring of the existing universities, there is a more
compelling reason for not dealing with this subject. That
reason is simply that, in the Committee's opinion, there
is nothing in the present or proposed structure of the
province's universities that would prevent the development and institution of most of the proposals for educational reform now current. Moreover, it is obviously
more consistent with the democratic objective of university reform to encourage the development of new forms
from within rather than to legislate them from without.
37. It is the Committee's firm belief that such resistance to change as may be found in the universities is a
function of attitudes within each campus and not a function of the structure within which these attitudes exist.
The most that any structural change can do is provide a
framework within which ideas may develop freely with
the assurance that there is a legitimate forum in which
they may be debated and which has the authority to implement those winning the support of the members of
the academic community. It is the Committee's view
that the changes proposed in this working paper will
enhance the potential for change from within the structures of university governance. It should be noted that
one of the functions the Committee envisages for the
Council is the application of its research capacity in the
areas of educational alternatives at the university level.
President Walter H. Gage is currently studying the
report of a committee established to consider
non-academic staff matters raised in the Report on
the Status of Women at UBC.
The report contains 14 recommendations, three of
which, bearing on University policies in advertising
jobs, were implemented before the receipt of the
report. The balance will be implemented. President
Gage said, where it is within the competence and
financial capacity of the University to do so.
"The committee is to be congratulated on
preparing a report which thoroughly reviews the
non-academic staff matters raised in the Report on
the Status of Women at UBC," President Gage said.
"The new report makes it clear that, in the main, the
University's policies on non-academic staff matters as
they relate to women have been those which have
been followed in Canada and society generally."
The eight-member committee to consider
non-academic staff matters was established by
President Gage in March of this year and was chaired
by Mr. Knute Buttedahl, associate director of the
UBC Centre for Continuing Education. The Report
on the Status of Women at UBC, released in January
of this year, was prepared by the Women's Action
Group, an informal organization of faculty, staff and
The Buttedahl committee's report said it found
that two basic points made in the Status of Women
Report were valid. These were:
• That sex-typed female job categories have lower
salaries within the University than categories which
are sex-typed male; and
• That   in   proportion   to   their   number,  fewer
Nov. 26 Deadline Set
UBC's Master Teacher Awards Committee has set
Nov. 26 as the last day for nominations for the
1973-74 awards.
The Master Teacher Awards were established in
1969 by Dr. Walter Koerner, a former chairman and
member of UBC's Board of Governors, in honor of
his brother, the late Dr. Leon Koerner, and are
intended to give recognition to outstanding teachers
of UBC undergraduates.
Winners of the 1973-74 awards will share a $5,000
cash prize contributed by Dr. Koerner. For the first
time this year, winners of Certificates of Merit in the
competition will each receive a cash award of $500.
The task of assessing nominees who are eligible for
the awards will begin before the end of the first term
of the current Winter Session.
At least two members of the screening committee
visit the classroom of each eligible nominee, and
department heads and deans are asked for an
assessment of each candidate in terms of a list of
stringent criteria.
Regulations governing the awards and the criteria
list are available at the Office of Academic Planning
in the Main Mall North Administration Building; the
Woodward Biomedical Library; the Main and
Sedgewick Libraries; the H.R. MacMillan Building
(Room 270 - General Office); the AMS Business
Office in the Student Union Building; the UBC
Bookstore; the Biomedical Branch Library, 700 West
10th Ave.; and the Office of the Dean, Faculty of
Candidates may be nominated by UBC students,
faculty and alumni.
Nominations should be sent to the chairman of the
Master Teacher Awards Committee, Dr. Ruth White,
c/o The Office of Academic Planning, Main Mall
North Administration Building, Campus.
Members of the Master Teacher Awards
Committee    include    representatives   of   the    UBC
Three errors appeared in the article on UBC's
new dental plan in the Oct. 10 edition of UBC
The article said that less than the required 65
per cent of faculty and employed staff had
subscribed to the plan by Sept. 1. The figure
should have read 75 per cent. The deadline for
subscribing was extended a month and by Oct. 1
about 76 per cent of non-union staff and faculty
members had subscribed. As a result, the plan is
now in effect.
The article also stated that the plan would
cover half the cost of treatment of chronic gum
disease. In fact, the plan will cover 70 per cent of
the treatment cost.
And contrary to what appeared in the article
there is no maximum annual amount that can be
claimed by persons subscribing to the plan.
We regret any confusion that might have
occurred as a result of this misinformation, which
was based on specifications which were later
revised without the knowledge of UBC Reports.
faculty, the Alumni Association and the student
body. Two student members of the committee are
third-year Science student Margaret Robinson and
second-year Arts student Eric Wyness.
UBC's Board of Governors has awarded Commonwealth Construction Co., of Vancouver, the contract
for construction of the first phase of a new Asian
Centre to be built adjacent to the Nitobe Memorial
Garden on the western edge of the campus.
The Board was informed that Mr. Joseph L.
Whitehead, president and publisher of the Journal of
Commerce of Vancouver, had agreed to serve as the
new chairman of a committee to raise funds for the
completion of the Centre. He replaces Mr. Alan F.
Campney, who was forced to resign as chairman for
health reasons but who will continue as a member of
the committee.
To date, a total of $1,650,000 has been raised or
pledged in Canada and Japan towards the
construction of the Centre. After subtraction of the
cost of replacing parking areas displaced by the
building, $1.5 million is available for the first phase
of construction. Completion of the building is
contingent on the raising of additional money by Mr.
Whitehead's committee.
The Canadian and B.C. governments have each
given $400,000; another $250,000 has been pledged
from the profits of Japan's Expo '70; the Federation
of Economic Organizations of Japan is conducting a
campaign to raise $550,000; and $50,000 has been
raised in Canada.
The Centre will be a re-creation of the Sanyo
Electric Company's pavilion, one of the hits of Expo
'70 at Osaka. Structural components of the pavilion
were shipped to Vancouver in 1971 as a gift from the
people of Japan in honor of B.C.'s Centennial and
have been in storage on the campus ever since.
When completed, the Centre will house the
University's 180,000-book Asian Studies library and
offices for faculty and graduate students in the
Department of Asian Studies and the Institute of
Asian and Slavonic Research. There will also be a
public area for cultural displays and performances.
Sister Catherine Wallace, the recently elected
president of the Association of Universities and
Colleges of Canada, and Canada's only woman
university president, will speak twice at UBC next
week as a Dal Grauer Memorial Lecturer.
Sister Catherine, who is president of Mount Saint
Vincent University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, and a
strong advocate of women's rights, will give her first
UBC lecture at 12:30 p.m. in UBC's Old Auditorium
on Tuesday (Nov. 20).
Her topic will be "Women and the Numbers
The following evening (Wednesday, Nov. 21) she
will speak in the common block of Totem Park
Residence at 8:15 p.m. on the subject "Women and
the Just Society."
women occupy supervisory and administrative
In accordance with its terms of reference, the
committee chaired by Mr. Buttedahl then made a
study to discover in what way this inequality might
be the result of University policies and practices as
distinct from those generally found in society.
"The committee found," the report said, "that
UBC does not discriminate in any policies which it
has articulated but that its practices, which follow
those of society in general, at times are discriminatory to women."
This leads to the committee's first recommendation: "That the University in its leadership role in the
community undertake an obligation not only to
declare itself publicly against discrimination, but also
to work actively to ensure that policies and practices
within the University serve to eradicate any vestige of
discrimination even though such discriminatory
practices may prevail in the larger society."
The committee also found that certain personnel
policies of the University aggravate the feelings of
discrimination among women employees on the
The committee recommends that "it be made clear
to all sections of the University community that men
and women are to have equal opportunity for
employment and advancement. In addition, for some
time at least, when a job opening occurs for which
there are both male and female applicants equal as to
experience, qualifications and personality considerations, that the preference be given to a female candidate."
Other recommendations made by the committee
are designed to lessen feelings of discrimination
among women employees. These include:
A policy of openness on matters affecting employment and welfare, including the publication of a revised and enlarged staff handbook and a departmental
reference manual; and establishment of a more
refined grievance procedure, revolving around the
concept of an ombudsperson attached to the Office
of the President.
The committee also recommends that the University undertake a study to determine a more appropriate and fair weighting scale for financial reward
with regard to mental effort as compared to physical
effort, and clerical skills as compared to technical
skills; and that a different method be devised to provide a fairer adjustment for merit and length of
service in annual salary adjustments.
Three recommendations in the report bearing on
University policies in advertising jobs were implemented prior to the receipt of the report. These are:
• That advertising literature and hiring practices
should make it clear that women are wanted in all
occupations and professions;
• That all display advertising for UBC positions
should carry a rider that the job is open to both men
and women; and
• That classified advertising for jobs should carry
no stipulation as to gender, unless the stipulation is
inherent in the job definition.
The committee also recommends that UBC clarify
and extend policies concerning unpaid leave of absence, compassionate leave and course attendance for
job improvement for non-academic staff, and that
UBC consider ways in which equivalent benefits can
be extended to regular, part-time employees.
The committee also "invites unions on campus to
study their policies toward women in order to eradicate any discrimination that may exist and to help
the University provide enlightened leadership by ensuring equal job opportunities for men and women."
Vol. 19, No. 15 - Nov. 14,
1973. Published by the
University of British Columbia
and distributed free. UBC
Reports appears on Wednesdays
during the University's Winter Session. J.A.
Banham, Editor. Louise Hoskin and Jean
Rands, Production Supervisors. Letters to the
Editor should be sent to Information Services,
Main Mall North Administration Building, UBC,
Vancouver 8, B.C.
A/IIRP.Rpnnrts/Nnw   14   1973


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