MSVU Senate Minutes -- March 25 2002.pdf
Date
2010-04-15T12:28:49Z
Authors
Senate, Mount Saint Vincent University
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Description
Present: S. Brown (Chair), P. Baker, R. BÄ rard, I. Blum, S. Boyd, B. Casey, W. Doyle, S. Drain, F.
French, P. Glenister, F. Harrington, K. Kienapple, B. King, L. Lewis, M. Lyon, C. Mathieson, J.
McLaren, S. Medjuck, L. Neilsen, D. Nevo, D. Norris, N. Parsons, S. Perrott, T. Roberts, E. Rosenthal, L.
Steele, L. Theriault, P. Watts, A. Whitewood, J. Woodsworth
Guests: R. Jeppesen, D. Forbes, A. Manning, Dr. Rapeepun, D. Oâ Conne
1. Approval of Agenda
S. Brown welcomed members of Senate and introduced two guests, Dr. Rapeepun and Darren
Oâ Connell.
It was agreed that Item 7.8 would be moved to follow Item 7.2.
Moved by B. King, seconded by L. Steele that the Agenda of March 25, 2002, be approved as amended.
CARRIED
2. Approval of Minutes of January 28, 2002
Moved by F. French, seconded by L. Neilsen that the minutes of January 28, 2002, be approved as
amended. CARRIED
3. Business Arising from the Minutes
There was no business arising from the minutes.
4. President's Announcements
S. Brown invited C. Mathieson to make an announcement. C. Mathieson informed Senate members that
the recipient of the Research Excellence award is Dr. Patrick Oâ Neill and she noted that announcements
have gone out on this matter. Dr. Oâ Neill has written back and expressed his pleasure at receiving this
award.
S. Brown noted that the Presidentâ Notes to the Community will be circulated in the next few days.
5. Question Period
There were no questions.
6. Unfinished Business
There was no unfinished business.
7. Committee Reports (Standing and Ad Hoc)
7.1 Senate Executive
There was no report.
7.2 Academic Appeals
L. Theriault reported that the Committee has met several times in the past month. One appeal was heard
and another is scheduled for this week.
7.3 Academic Policy and Planning
7.3.1 Notice of Motion: Senate Committee on Academic Policy and Planning, Terms of
Reference
J. Woodsworth noted that one line is to be changed to better reflect the current practice. This
will be presented at the April meeting for ratification.
7.3.2 Academic Plan
J. Woodsworth provided an update of the academic plan. She noted that the plan as presented
was a result of consultation and meetings with Chairs, Deans, and Faculty Council and has been
approved by CAPP unanimously. She noted that the plan also follows the strategic directions set
out in Blueprint and includes a large component on academic excellence.
A discussion then took place. A number of items raised include;
â ¢ With regard to the Canada Research Chairs, one Senator questioned how the
University is planning on filling these positions. Will there be one Chair in
each area or two Chairs in one particular area? J. Woodsworth noted that this
is still under review. Advertising has begun but it appears problematic to
gather applications for a number of areas at a time. She noted that it might be
easier to do single competitions as the process moves forward.
â ¢ The lack of reference to the Mountâ s vision and mission statements was
noted, in particular the lack of reference to women in the plan.
â ¢ The monitoring process seems passive and Senators would like to see it more
strongly worded with regard to reviews and approvals. Some felt that Senate
should be involved in this process by providing guidance and approval.
â ¢ On page 16 of the plan, it was noted that the retirements in Speech and
Drama are to take place in 2005 and not 2004 as noted.
â ¢ Crossover is required between the internationalisation and the enrolment
management plan.
â ¢ The external review sequence (page 21) time frame may need to be updated
as the Academic Plan has not yet been approved. There seems to be some
confusion as to which Departments had been notified and potential changes to
the sequence. J. Woodsworth noted that CAPP would take these comments
into consideration in their discussions over the next few weeks.
â ¢ The section concerning the graduate studies recommendations seems to be
descriptive and not prescriptive. CAPP should provide more targets or limits
that could be used as goals.
â ¢ A snapshot of targets would be helpful. Some reference to the principles of
planning would be useful and would give a better idea of how to operate over
the next three years.
A discussion ensued with regard to the procedure once Senate accepts the report. It was noted
that the plan would be used as an umbrella to guide further recommendations. J. Woodsworth
noted that recommendations would need to be approved independently by the appropriate
bodies. She also noted that there is the possibility that not every recommendation will be
pursued or implemented as articulated.
Any additional comments or suggestions can be forwarded to J. Woodsworth. CAPP will take
all comments into consideration. The final document is to be presented to Senate Executive on
April 15 and ratification will be sought at the April Senate meeting.
7.3.3 Certificate in Professional Writing and Rhetoric
J. Woodsworth noted that CAPP had reviewed this proposal and approved it unanimously.
Moved by J. Woodsworth, seconded by S. Drain that Certificate in Professional Writing and
Rhetoric be approved. CARRIED
S. Drain introduced the Certificate to Senators. She noted that this certificate is a repacking of
courses that exist in the English Department and elsewhere in the University plus the addition of
a few new courses. It is meant to strengthen the offerings of the University and provide an extra
credential to students who are interested.
Students have indicated their interest in such a program however only in an informal manner.
Questions arose with regard to the co-op component of the certificate and the potential
difficulties in placing these students. S. Drain noted that she has been in discussion with the
Cooperative Education Coordinator and this individual feels confident that positions could be
found for these students.
7.3.4 Doctoral Program in Education Studies Proposal
J. Woodsworth informed Senators that CAPP reviewed this proposal for a inter-university
doctoral program and gave it unanimous support.CAPP felt it important to proceed with this
initiative since it not only fosters university cooperation but it would provide an opportunity for
people to get a PhD in Education in Nova Scotia.CAPP also indicated that if this proposal is
pursued and given the inter-university cooperation, it could be implemented with minimal
disruption on current faculty at the Mount.
Moved by J. Woodsworth, seconded by L. Neilson that proposal for a Doctoral Program in
Education be approved in principal so that the Department can continue in association with other
universities to develop, administer and deliver this program. CARRIED with one opposed (S.
Perrott).
It was noted that the education community strongly supports this proposal and that many
students have indicated their interest in following this program. This proposal has been in the
works for a number of years and it, in essence, picks up and continues the program cancelled at
Dalhousie University during the rationalization. A PhD program was also included as part of the
post-Shapiro report and it seems to have the endorsement of the Department of Education. J.
Woodsworth noted that the proposal is being presented to Senates of all participating
institutions. Acadia, St. Francis Xavier and the Mount are key partners.
Concerns raised include:
â ¢ Governance â How can the management of the program be dealt with in an
equitable manner if it is not dealt with at the same level of authority within
each institution? It was noted that there is a good spirit of cooperation and all
parties are aware of the importance of the level of participation from each
institution.
â ¢ Resources â Are there sufficient resources within the Department to deal with
the extra workload? The Department is currently undergoing a review of this
situation.
â ¢ Finances and Budgeting â Where will the financing come from for the
program? This, as well as the budgets are currently being developed. The
cost of the program will be reflective of the expenses. It is anticipated that
tuition would provide the bulk of the funding although these students would
become part of the funding formula calculations. The MPHEC submission
will include budget details.
â ¢ Time frame â What is the intended time frame if approved in principle by
Senators? J. Woodsworth noted that the anticipated program start date is
summer of 2003. The proposal could come back to the September Senate
meeting for review as the financial details would be prepared then.
â ¢ Review â MPHEC will mandate a review once the first co-hort completes the
program. A review by MSVU could be built in. This would allow us to
review how the program has affected administration and resources here.
7.3.5 Memoranda of Understanding: Siam University, Hokuriku Gakuin Junior College,
and Renmin University of China
J. Woodsworth provided a brief description of the three institutions involved.
Moved by J. Woodsworth, seconded by M. Lyon that the Memoranda of Understanding (MOU)
between MSVU and Siam University, Hokuriku Gakuin Junior College and Renmin University
of China be approved. CARRIED
A question arose with regard to the significance of MOU with these institutions. J. Woodsworth
noted that the Junior College is a predominantly womenâ s institution and has studies in Child and
Youth. They approached us for the partnership. The other two institutions are ones that J.
Woodsworth visited and they also have primarily women in the particular fields of study
described.
A list of criteria should be established that could be used when setting up these partnerships. It
was felt that the Mount should look for institutions that have a focus on women and distance
learning.CAPP will review this suggestion.
A question arose with regard to the review process at the termination of the MOU. Generally
these agreements are renewed unless they have been inactive. It was suggested that periodic
reports on the status of the agreements should be given to Senate. Senators also felt that they
should have an opportunity to review these agreements and decide whether they should be
pursued or not.
A general discussion then ensued with regard to the Canada Research Chairs.A written report
will be presented at the April meeting. J. Woodsworth noted that the positions have been
advertised but decisions have not been made.
Concerns were expressed with the way that the candidatesâ files were being reviewed and
circulated.As well, the timeliness of the process has caused concern particularly in light of the
fact that other institutions have made offers.
The Canada Research Chairs Committee is comprised of members of CAPP and the Director of
Research.J. Woodsworth chairs the Committee.Chairs were first advertised in February 2001
through a broad based ad. This was followed up with a further ad in the fall.J. Woodsworth noted
that a grievance has been launched with regard to the procedures and that it is being reviewed at
this time.
7.4 Committee on Teaching and Learning
J. Woodsworth announced that the winner of the Instructional Leadership Award is Dr. Susan
Drain. It will be presented at convocation.
The Committee is beginning to plan for faculty day that is scheduled for August 29. The theme
will be teaching and learning across cultures. Among other program items, a panel of faculty and
students will discuss what it is like to teach and be international students.
7.5 Graduate Studies
M. Lyon reported that the Committee has met twice and will be bringing a proposal forward in
April.
7.6 Undergraduate Curriculum
7.6.1 Undergraduate Curriculum (for information) (documentation attached)
S. Medjuck reported the following undergraduate curriculum changes for information
7.6.1.1 Public Relations
a) Changes to existing courses
i. PBRL 2012, Delete Prerequisite ENGL 1120
ii. PBRL 3016, Delete Prerequisite MATH 2209
iii. PBRL 1188, New Prerequisites
iv. PBRL 2288, New Prerequisites
v. PBRL 3388, New Prerequisites
7.6.2 Undergraduate Curriculum (for action)
7.6.2.1 English
a) Addition of New Courses
i. ENGL 2222, Introduction to Editing (half unit)
ii. ENGL 3331, Studies in Professional Writing and Rhetoric I (half unit)
iii. ENGL 3332, Studies in Professional Writing and Rhetoric II (half unit)
Moved by S. Medjuck, seconded by S. Drain, the addition of ENGL 2222, ENGL 3331 and ENGL 3332.
CARRIED.
7.7 Committee on Appointment, Promotion and Tenure or Permanence for
Academic Administrators (CAPTPAA)
There was no report.
7.8 Committee on Information Technology and Services
E. Rosenthal reported that the Committee has met twice since the last Senate meeting. Remote
access for faculty has been rolled out and discussions continue with regard to classroom security.
The Committee also discussed the Academic Plan. E. Rosenthal encouraged Senators to forward
any ideas they may have on faculty training.
7.8.1 Computer Usage Agreement Agreements
D. Forbes explained the background to the recommendations. She noted that there are currently
two policies that govern computer usage and this agreement combines both into one document.
She also noted that the new agreement outlines the proper procedures for discipline and the
consequences of violating the agreement
Moved by F. French, seconded by E. Rosenthal that the new Computer Usage Agreement be approved as
presented. CARRIED.
7.9 Nominations
K. Kienapple reported that there are still some vacancies on Committees. He noted that a call for a
faculty elected position to the review Committee for the Dean of Student Services has been put out. He
also noted that a call has gone out for the Senate elected positions and only six submissions have been
received to date. The Committee anticipates difficulty in filling these positions.
7.10 Library
F. French reported that the Library Committee continues to find ways to deal with the strategic plan and
how to relate it to the budget. The Committee will be working with the Executive on this matter. The
Committee continues to work on a document that would ensure the vitality and strength of the library and
once this report is complete, Senators will be asked for their feedback.
7.11 Research and Publications
C. Mathieson noted that a draft document on release time for new scholars is currently being
developed and will be forwarded to Senators once completed. She also congratulated four new
grant holders, Hazel MacRae, Leslie Brown, Janice Keefe and Katherine Side.
7.12 Student Affairs
S. Boyd indicated that the Committee continues to meet and deal with ongoing issues.
7.13 Undergraduate Admissions and Scholarships
L. Theriault reported that the Committee has met four times since the last Senate meeting. Issues involve:
â ¢ Inequities in faculty involvement â The Committee is moving to address this.
â ¢ Disbursement of bursary funds â There has been an increase in the number of applications and
therefore there will be more disbursements.
â ¢ Scholarship program â The Committee is looking at ways to maximize the number of scholarships
offered. Renewable scholarship offers are also being considered. L. Theriault reported that there was
a smaller take up rate of the high end scholarships last year and a higher take up rate of those in the
middle.
The Committee will be meeting in early April to deal with entrance scholarship offers. These should be
in the mail by April 15 and the response date, which is common to all universities, is May 15.
7.14 Writing Initiatives Committee
S. Drain reported that the Committee met last week and that it also hosted its fourth and final brown bag
luncheon. The Committee will meet again this week to prepare a report on these sessions and to bring
forward recommendations.
7.15 University Research Ethics Board
S. Perrott reported that the Committee has been very active renewing a number of proposals.
Work continues on amendments to the human research policy. Guidelines are being designed to
enhance academic freedom but not impinge on a researcherâ s right to carry out their work.
Questions arose with regard to some definitions such as â minimal riskâ . S. Perrott noted that it is
important to develop local case law to develop these definitions. In the fall, an occasional letter
from the Research Office will be sent out to explain certain terms.
8. Other Reports
8.1 Board of Governors
P. Baker reported on a discussion held at the Board meeting with regard to Public Private
Partnerships. She also informed Senators that Gwen Haliburton and Jane Smith were appointed
the Board representatives to the Search Committee for the Vice-President (Academic).
She also noted that the Board discussed enrolment particularly as it related to the Mountâ s physical
capacity to handle students. Board members were interested in whether or not the Mountâ s facilities were
being used to their maximum potential. Discussion also revolved around the definition of capacity and
how it should be measured.
8.2 Studentsâ Union
L. Lewis reported that on the annual spring elections. The vacant positions will be filled in
September.
The Studentsâ Union budget was passed on Friday. It is a balanced budget. Agreements have
been worked out with all creditors.
The Annual Awards Night Banquet is scheduled for April 4.
L. Lewis noted that the Studentsâ Union wants to build relationships with various groups on
campus, in particular faculty. Representatives from the Union are setting up meetings with
Departments in an effort to pursue various initiatives. They would like to see more faculty
involvement in student programs and more students involved in faculty events. In particular, L.
Lewis noted the importance of faculty at the Annual Awards Night Banquet and Convocation.
She noted that students often want to personally thank their professors for their commitment at
these events and they are often disappointed when faculty members do not participate.
S. Brown congratulated L. Lewis on her re-election and extended congratulations to other
members of her team.
9. New Business
There was no new business.
10. Items for Communication
Communication will follow to the appropriate body on the new courses and programs, the faculty day
preparations and the Memoranda of Understanding.
11. Adjournment
Moved by L. Lewis, that the meeting be adjourned at 10:10 p.m. CARRIED