Acadia University Senate
Agenda
SENATE
AGENDA FOR 12 June 2006
2 June 2006
Dear Member of Senate:
I advise you that a meeting of the Senate of Acadia
University will occur at 10:00 a.m., Monday, 12 June 2006 in Room 132 of the Beveridge Arts Centre. The AGENDA follows:
1) Minutes
of the Meeting of 10 May 2006
2) Announcements
and Communications
3) Business
Arising from the Minutes
a) 2005-2006 Annual Reports from Senate
Committees (056-58-REP)
i) Research Ethics Board (As
ttached to May agenda.)
ii) Nominating (As ttached to May agenda.)
iii) Honorary Degrees (As ttached to May
agenda.)
iv) Research & Graduate Studies (As ttached
to May agenda.)
v) Academic
Program Review *
vi) Admissions & Academic Standing (Policy)
*
vii) Admissions & Academic Standing
(Appeals) *
viii) Board of Continuing Education *
ix) By-Laws *
x) Library *
xi) Faculty Development *
xii) Honours *
xiii) Curriculum *
xiv) Executive *
xv) Academic
Integrity *
xvi) Academic Discipline Appeals *
xvii) Timetable, Instruction Hours, & Examination
*
4) New
Business
a) Wendy Bedingfield - 2011 Canada Winter Games
& Acadia University's Academic Calendar (056-62-GAM) *
5) Other
Business
Yours sincerely,
Rosemary Jotcham
Registrar and Secretary of Senate
Items Carried Over/Tabled
- Ad hoc Committee
on Students with Learning Disabilities Report
Page 1/Attachment 3)a)v)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
056-58-REP
ACADEMIC PROGRAM
REVIEW COMMITTEE
Annual Report to
Senate for 2005-2006
May 10, 2006
Committee Members 2005-2006
Dr. Ralph Nilson, Vice-President (Academic) (Chair)
Ms. Rosemary Jotcham, Registrar (Secretary)
Dr. Linda Lusby
Dr. Heather Higgins
Dr. Heather Kitchin
Mr. Daniel Macintosh
Purpose of Committee:
(1)
To
determine policy and procedures for conducting program reviews;
(2)
To
determine annually which academic units are to be reviewed;
(3)
To
select the members of each unit review committee;
(4)
To
oversee the process of review in each case;
(5)
To
make recommendations to Senate on the basis of the findings of each unit review
committee
(6)
To
deal with such matters as Senate may from time to time entrust to the
Committee.
On June 13, 2005,
the academic senate of Acadia unanimously approved a new
program review process for academic units. The purpose of a unit review
is “to sustain, and wherever possible, enhance the quality of each academic
unit’s activities, and through each unit the University as a whole.” The
process outlines the information to be included in a unit self-study, and the
timeline for the review process. Below is the general timeline for academic
reviews:
MONTH
|
ACTIVITY
|
May
|
APRC to inform Senate as to
which units are to be reviewed in the coming year.
|
September
|
Self study initiated; review
team nominees submitted to VP-Academic
|
January
|
Self study received by APRC
|
February
|
Terms of reference determined
and Review team established, documentation sent to review team
|
March/April
|
Review takes place (2 to 3 days)
|
June
|
Report received by APRC and
transmitted to unit
|
October
|
Unit response received by APRC
|
December
|
Implementation plan finalized
within the faculty
|
Five years later
|
Follow up to review and
preparation of priorities and directions for next four years
|
The APRC met on February
21, 2006 to discuss upcoming reviews, suggest Review Team members,
and the overall process. (I also consulted with the Academic Deans and
University Librarian concerning the reviews.) It was determined that the School
of Music was to be reviewed March
27/28, 2006, and the Department of Chemistry on April 5/6, 2006.
As per the review process, each unit worked with the
Office of the Vice-President Academic to determine the review schedule and
finalize the review team. The following individuals were selected for each
review team:
School of Music Review Team:
External:
Dr. Fred Hall (Chair), McMaster University
Dr. Glen Carruthers, Brandon University
Internal:
Dr. Susan
Markham-Starr, Faculty of Professional Studies
Dr. Greg
Pyrcz,
Faculty of Arts
Department
of Chemistry Review Team:
External:
Dr. Robert Haines (Chair), University of Prince Edward Island
Dr. Anna Ritcey, University of Laval
Internal:
Dr. Anne Quema, Faculty of Arts
Dr. Robert Raeside, Faculty of Science
Each review
team met with faculty, students, staff, and other members of the community.
Members of the university community also provided confidential written briefs
to the review teams. Each team will submit a report by June 2006
which will be reviewed by the individual unit and the APRC. As stated in the review process, the report will normally be considered a public document
and at the completion of the review process will be available to members of
Senate along with the unit’s response. The Department of Psychology and the School
of Business are also in the initial stages of academic program
reviews.
The 2005/06 academic year was the first for the new academic
review process. It has already been a valuable exercise which will provide
important information for understanding and supporting academic units. I
anticipate another active year in 2006/07.
Respectfully
submitted by the Chair,
ORIGINAL SIGNED
Ralph Nilson
Vice-President
(Academic)
Chair,
Academic Program Review Committee
Page 1/Attachment 3)a)vi)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
056-58-REP
ADMISSION &
ACADEMIC STANDING COMMITTEE (Policy)
Annual Report to
Senate for 2005-2006
May 10, 2006
Committee Members 2005-2006
Dr. Ralph Nilson (Chair)
Ms. Rosemary Jotcham (Secretary)
Dr. George Iwama
Dr. Bruce Matthews
Dr. Bill McLeod
Ms. Kim Rose
Dr. Andrea Schwenke Wyile
Dr. Barry Moody
Dr. Heather Hemming
Dr. Brenda Robertson
Dr. Elizabeth Johnston
Dr. Jianan Peng
Dr. Christopher Killacky
Dr. Gail Noel
Mr. Peter Eirikson
Ms. Jenny White
Purpose of Committee:
(7)
To
interpret and to apply the conditions of admissions and academic standing as
outlined in the University Calendar and to make recommendations to Senate with
respect to its policy as it relates to admissions, failures, and academic
regulations.
On October 11,
2005, the Academic Senate of Acadia passed the following motion:
“Senate directs the
Senate Admissions and Academic Standing Committee (Policy) to invite the office
of Enrollment Management to engage in ongoing dialogue and study of enrolment
matters and report annually to Senate about those investigations. The
AASC(P) shall determine the sequence and scope of their investigations but
should be guided as to topics and immediacy by input solicited from Senators in
the form of questions, issues, comments and concerns about enrolment,
recruitment, admission and retention strategies, policies, operating practices
and related factors. “
Following this direction from Senate, the AASCP met three
times during the 2005/06 academic year concerning enrolment matters. Ms. Shawna
Garrett, Director of Enrolment Management, was invited to
present to the committee concerning Acadia’s key
enrolment guidelines. Ms. Garrett articulated eight key guidelines for
enrolment, which included:
- Target enrolment: 3600-3800 undergraduate
students.
Page 2/Attachment 3)a)vi)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
056-58-REP
- Goal to become increasingly selective in its
admission of students. Current goal is to maintain enrolment without
compromising admission screening average of 70%.
- Program enrolment goals determined by a planning
document developed by the Academic Sector Planning Committee in 2001. The
target enrolments are reviewed by the VP Academic and Deans and are
adjusted as requested.
- Acadia aspires to be
increasingly Nova Scotian.
- Acadia aspires to increase the
number of students from the US
(primarily New England).
- In addition to Nova Scotia,
key Canadian student recruitment areas are New
Brunswick, Prince Edward Island,
Ontario, Alberta,
and British Columbia. While
Acadia continues to have a presence in Ontario, New Brunswick,
Newfoundland and PEI, recruitment efforts are aimed at maintaining (rather
than increasing) the number of students from these provinces. We look for growth
in Nova Scotia, Alberta
and British Columbia.
- The goal of
international recruitment is to have 15% of the student body from
countries other than Canada
and the US.
It is desirable to have 60 countries represented and the international
student population spread evenly as possible from those countries. Major emphasis has been placed on Bermuda
and the Caribbean last year and will be again this
year.
- The number of incoming transfer students in any one
year should be equal to the number of students lost through attrition.
Dr. Matt Calfin, Deans of
Students, presented a draft policy for Involuntary Administrative Student
Withdrawal, where committee members were able to make suggestions and better understand
the draft policy. The work on this policy continues.
The committee also discussed issues surrounding the International
Baccalaureate (IB) program being introduced in Nova
Scotia high schools and how Acadia
can accommodate advanced standing for IB students without compromising academic
standards. There will be significant growth in IB programming in Nova
Scotia and there is considerable competition among
Universities in recruiting these highly qualified students.
Enrolment Issues
Information provided to the AASCP indicates significant
enrolment challenges facing Acadia University.
Full-time undergraduate enrolment has declined 11.3% over the past two years,
and currently sits at its lowest level in six years. If these trends continue
the Acadia student population will decline below 3100
full-time undergraduate students in five years, which would be 14% below the
current targeted undergraduate student population. Meanwhile, the international
student population has more than doubled over the past five years and now
represents over 18% of the student population (compared to 9% in 2000/01).
While this increase has helped to offset some of this enrolment shortfall, it
has also increased support demands for administrative and academic units.
Page 3/Attachment 3)a)vi)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
056-58-REP
As discussed at the most recent meeting of the AASCP,
enrolment concerns represent both a challenge and an opportunity for the
university. The new Strategic Plan for Acadia has
articulated a bold vision for the university community. Part
of the implementation process for the Plan will be a broader discussion of the
appropriate size of the student body, who those students are, and where those
students come from. Determining these
factors will best enable the Acadia community to deliver
a high-quality “personalized education for a complex world.” This will be an
important discussion for the AASCP, and the Academic Senate, as these enrolment
measures can effect (or are influenced by) admissions policy or academic
regulations.
The AASCP will be producing a fuller report to Senate on
these enrolment issues at a later date.
Respectfully
submitted by the Chair,
ORIGINAL SIGNED
Ralph Nilson
Vice-President
(Academic)
Chair,
Admission and Academic Standing Committee (Policy)
Attachment 3)a)vii)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
056-58-REP
ADMISSION &
ACADEMIC STANDING COMMITTEE (Appeals)
Annual Report for
2005-2006
May 10, 2006
Committee Members 2005-2006
Dr. Ralph Nilson (Chair)
Ms. Rosemary Jotcham (Secretary)
Dr. Michael Dennis
Dr. G. Corbeil
Prof. Patrick Lahey
Dr. Nancy Clarke
Dr. Jeff Hooper
Dr. Robert Pitter
Mr. Peter Eirikson
Purpose of Committee:
(8)
To
hear appeals against academic regulations or the interpretation of such
regulations that have not been resolved at the Departmental, School, or Faculty
level or through the Registrar's Office.
Business:
The committee heard 40 appeals since the last report to
Senate in May 2005.
There were 35 appeals against academic dismissal. Twenty-six
of these students were permitted to return to Acadia without
spending a year on dismissal; 21 of these were required to participate in the
Academic Support Program.
There were 2 successful appeals against the residency
requirement. In each case the students asked to do either their 3rd
or final year elsewhere. In both cases, they had taken the rest of their
studies at Acadia.
Two students appealed the regulation that requires degree
requirements to be met within 7 years of beginning their program; both were
successful.
One student appealed the requirement to complete 6 hours of
credit in a language other than English for a Bachelor of Arts (Honours)
degree. This appeal was not granted.
The Committee continues to track the success of students who
are continued on appeal to assess the effectiveness of the interventions that
are provided through the Academic Support Program.
Respectfully
submitted by the Chair,
ORIGINAL
SIGNED
Ralph Nilson
Vice-President
(Academic)
Chair,
Admission and Academic Standing Committee (Appeals)
Attachment 3)a)viii)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
056-58-REP
BOARD OF CONTINUING AND DISTANCE EDUCATION
Annual Report to Senate for 2005-2006
May 10, 2006
Board Members 2005-06:
Dr. Ralph Nilson, VP
Academic
Dr. Bruce Matthews, Dean of
Arts
Dr. George Iwama, Acting
Dean of Science
Dr. Bill McLeod, Acting Dean of Faculty of Professional
Studies
Ms. Rosemary Jotcham,
Registrar
Mr. Joan Masterson, Vice
President, Finance
Mr. Peter Eirikson, ASU
Vice President, Academic
Dr. Nancy Van Wagoner,
Director, Continuing and Distance Education
The Board met several times over
the past year to address the issues facing the Division of Continuing and
Distance Education (DCDE).
Dr. Nancy Van
Wagoner resigned from her position of Director of DCDE after
almost seventeen years of service in the position. Dr. Van Wagoner developed
many new initiatives and programs while fostering significant growth in DCDE. The
Board congratulated her on her many years of dedicated service. Over the past
seventeen years as she has built the program, she created a successful unit
meeting the goals that had been established.
Ms. Susan Oland,
Managing Director of DCDE, also resigned her position during the past academic
year to pursue an external opportunity. Ms. Oland provided excellent service to
DCDE and the Board also thanked her for all of her efforts. Ms. Kim
Rose was appointed Acting Managing Director of DCDE.
The Board also reviewed and
discussed the accomplishments and challenges of DCDE over the past year, and
reviewed goals for the coming year. DCDE is in a time of transition and more
discussion will take place over the coming months.
Respectfully submitted by the
Chair,
ORIGINAL SIGNED
Ralph Nilson
Vice-President (Academic)
Chair, Board of Continuing
Education
By-Laws Committee
Annual Report to Senate
May 10, 2006
The
Committee met several times over the 2005/2006 academic year to deal with
matters referred to it by Senate.
Responses
submitted to Senate from the By-laws Committee were:
October 2005 Senate Meeting
-A
recommendation/motion for Senate’s response to the Board of Governors,
regarding the proposed changes to the appointment process for the Chancellor.
March 2006 Senate Meeting
-A response
to the question of whether or not Senate
had the legal authority to create a new Council for Graduate Studies.
May 2006 Senate Meeting
-A motion to discuss modifications to the Proposed
Restructuring of Senate R&GS Committee (056-53-RGS) so as to incorporate
the restructuring into the Senate By-laws.
Respectfully submitted:
Patricia Corkum, Chair
Andrew Mitchell
Anne
Quéma
Attachment 3)a)x)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
056-58-REP
SENATE LIBRARY COMMITTEE
Annual
Report to Senate for 2005-06
Committee Members:
Heather Hemming (Chair), Peter Eirikson (Student
Vice-President Academic), Ian Hutchinson (Business), Sara Lochhead (University
Librarian), Jianan Peng (Science), George Perry (Professional Studies), Marc
Ramsay (Arts), Ann Smith (Librarian), Leigh Whaley (Arts), Glenn Wooden
(Theology)
Terms of Reference:
To develop policy recommendations to the library sector
regarding a strategic approach to collection development and regarding, for
example, issues such as weeding practices (deaccessioning), acquisitions of
electronic journals, access/ownership, and decision-making on purchases for the
library
To advocate for necessary and appropriate resources for the
academic functions of the library
To address academic concerns regarding the library,
including the formulation of policy, by making recommendations to the
University Librarian and where and when necessary by making motions for Senate
to act upon, in addition to making an annual report.
Report:
The Senate Library Committee met once this year on March 3, 2006. The committee focused
its attention on the development of a Collections Policy and a draft of this policy was then circulated to
the Faculties of Arts, Pure and Applied Sciences and Professional Studies. It
has not yet been circulated to the Faculty of Theology. Once all input has been
received, a revised draft will be reviewed by Senate Library Committee and
brought to Senate for approval.
Respectfully submitted,
Heather Hemming,
Chair, Senate Library Committee.
Attachment 3)a)xi)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
056-58-REP
Faculty Development Committee Report
Members: (2005-2006)
Darcy Benoit (chair)
Robert Pitter
Ann Marie Powers
Jonathan Wilson
Meetings:
No meetings were held this year.
Business:
The committee was following the issues associated with the
Learning Commons to determine the role that the Learning Commons would play in
faculty development. A member of the FDC was invited to attend meetings of
Leaning Commons Committee. The chair is currently attending said meetings and
will continue to provide input until his term ends.
Respectfully submitted by the Chair,
Darcy G. Benoit
Chair, Faculty Development Committee.
Page 1/Attachment 3)a)xii)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
056-58-REP
Honours Committee
Report to Senate,
May 2006
In the
Fall, the Committee considered a request from the Faculty of Science to
eliminate the step of distributing honours thesis to external readers for
review, i.e. having a faculty member outside the student’s “home” department
review the thesis after is has been
approved by the supervisor and department head(s). In response to this request the Registrar’s
office compiled the following summary of the external review process for 98
theses submitted for the 2004/05 academic year;
External reader’s findings /
recommendations
|
Number
|
No
corrections required
|
10
|
Few
(<10), minor changes required
|
38
|
Many
(>10), minor changes required
|
41
|
Significant
changes required for thesis to be deemed acceptable.
|
9
|
Total
|
98
|
Based on
this data and consideration of the type of feedback students receive from
external readers, the committee unanimously agreed that the external review
process should be maintained.
The table
provided on the following page provides a breakdown by Faculty and department
of the 112 honours thesis submitted for the 2005/06 academic year. At the time of submitting this report, a
summary of the nature of the feedback secured from external reviewers for the
2005/06 theses was being compiled.
Finally,
the Committee recently received a request from an individual faculty member to
consider variability in the expectations of honours thesis across different
departments in the University. This
matter will be considered by the committee at its next meeting to be called in
early June, 2006.
Page 2/Attachment 3)a)xii)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
056-58-REP
Honours Thesis Submitted – 2005/06
Breakdown by Faculty & Department
|
Faculty / Department
|
Number of thesis
|
Faculty
of Arts
|
|
ECON
|
3
|
ENGL
|
9
|
FRAN
|
1
|
HIST
|
8
|
PHIL
|
2
|
POLS
|
4
|
SOCI
|
5
|
ECON
|
3
|
sub-total
|
32
|
|
|
Faculty
of Professional Studies
|
|
BUSI
|
4
|
KINE
|
6
|
sub-total
|
10
|
|
|
Faculty
of Science
|
|
BIOL
|
22
|
CHEM
|
5
|
COMP
|
6
|
ENVS
|
1
|
GEOL
|
3
|
MATH
|
2
|
NUTR
|
3
|
PHYS
|
6
|
PSYC
|
22
|
sub-total
|
70
|
Total
|
112
|
Attachment 3)a)xiii)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
056-58-REP
Annual Report of the Senate Curriculum Committee (2005-06)
Members
Ashley Buote: Student
Deborah Day: School
of Education
Scott Follows: School
of Business
Rosemary Jotcham: Registrar
Heather Kitchin: Sociology
Sara Lochhead: Librarian
Franklin Mendivil :
Mathematics and Statistics
Anne Quéma :
English
Elhadi Shakshuki :
Computer Science
Romira
Worvill : Languages and Literatures
The Curriculum committee met twice on December 5, 2005 and January 23, 2006.
The two meetings were devoted to a long and thoughtful
analysis of twenty-one different proposals for changes and modifications to
academic programs. Some of these proposals were minor, while others presented
major and complex revisions to existing programs.
Faculty representatives were invited to present the
rationale for major proposals. The latter exercise is not a final examination
or oral defence. Instead, it is a key component of a cooperative process and
should be regarded as a means of transmitting and clarifying information that
will assist the members of the Committee in making final and enlightened
decisions.
Correspondence between the chair on behalf of the Committee
and chairs and directors of departments and schools took place either to
request further clarification or to indicate the Committee’s response to
presentations by representatives.
Changes to the curriculum for the Faculties of Arts,
Professional Studies, and Pure and Applied Science were approved by Senate on January 9, 2006.
Anne Quéma
Chair of the Senate Curriculum Committee
May 9, 2006
Attachment 3)a)xiv)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
056-58-REP
Senate Executive Annual Report for
2005-06
Committee Members 2005-06:
P.
Abela
W.
Bedingfield
S.
Bondrup-Nielsen
G.
Dinter-Gottlieb
G.
Iwama
R.
Jotcham
B.
Matthews
S.
Markham-Starr
L.
McDonald
W.
McLeod
R.
Nilson
I.
Wilks (chair)
Duties:
“The
duties of the Executive Committee shall be as follows: between meetings of
Senate, to consider matters that in its judgement call for senatorial action or
that by statute law may require senatorial action; to consider matters referred
to it by Senate” (Constitution and
By-Laws VII).
“Under
unusual circumstances the Executive Committee may cancel regular monthly
meetings. It may not cancel two such
meetings in succession” (Constitution and
By-Laws IV.1c).
Summary of Activities:
The
Executive did not meet this year.
The
members of the Executive were e-mailed meeting agendas in advance of the
general membership for comment.
Comment:
The
proper role of the Senate Executive continues to be an unresolved issue.
Respectfully
Submitted by the Chair,
ORIGINAL
SIGNED
Ian Wilks
Attachment 3)a)xv)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
056-58-REP
The Academic Integrity Committee
Report to Senate – May 2006
Committee membership:
R. Jotcham
Registrar
M. Grieve
Faculty
of Arts
R. Pitter
Faculty
of Professional Studies
H.
Teisman
Faculty
of Pure & Applied Science
Tanja
Harrison
Librarian
Peter
Eirikson
Student
Committee mandate:
(1) to advocate for any additional resources that are
necessary and appropriate to support effective proctoring of tests and
examinations, plagiarism detection software, campus awareness programs, etc.;
(2) to
recommend practical and technical measures to deter and detect cheating and
plagiarism;
(3) to monitor
University policy on cheating and plagiarism and to recommend any changes
deemed necessary;
(4) to promote
uniform procedures across campus for reporting cheating and plagiarism;
(5) to oversee
a Registry in the Registrar's Office of reported incidences of penalties
applied for cheating and plagiarism in order to deter repeated offences; and
(6) to review
as necessary policy and procedures in other Canadian universities and to act as
a liaison with outside organizations as appropriate.
The committee met on March 15, 2006 to consider three matters:
. Copyright as
it relates to textbooks – This topic
was considered in response to concerns raised by a number of faculty members
that some of their colleagues were breaking copyright laws by providing
portions of texts or entire textbooks through photocopying rather than
requiring students to purchase the books. The committee will provide reminders
to all members of faculty related to the copyright laws. There is expertise on
campus through the Library for anyone with concerns about the appropriate
application of the laws. There will be a link from the Academic Integrity
Website to the Library Website to provide additional information and resources.
Acadia’s position regarding copyright and the source of
information on the subject will form part of new faculty orientation.
. The Academic
Integrity Website – The contents of
the site has been established. The site is being redesigned to conform to the
new Acadia website style. This work should be completed by
September.
. Turnitin.com
– The committee considered the
implications of using this software from the perspective of the integrity of
the process, privacy, and intellectual property rights. It was agreed that as
long as students were made aware that their course work was being submitted,
there was no violation of the students’ rights.
Respectfully submitted,
Rosemary Jotcham
Committee Chair
Senate Academic Discipline Appeals
Committee
ANNUAL REPORT 2005 - 2006
STATUS:
Appointed and meets only when
necessary.
DUTIES:
To deal with the matter of
academic discipline which cannot be resolved by the Vice-President (Academic).
MEMBERSHIP:
G. Perry
R. Mehta
H. Kitchin
P. Eirikson
Student Position is Vacant
ACTIVITIES:
It was not necessary for this
committee to meet during this reporting period.
Attachment 3)a)xvii)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
056-58-REP
TIMETABLE, INSTRUCTION HOURS, & EXAMINATION COMMITTEE
2005-2006 Annual Report to Senate for May 30th, 2006
The TIE Committee met on October 20th to look at
the Calendar Dates for the 2006/2007 Academic Year. We also met to look at the motion submitted
by Andrew Mitchell, School of Engineering
from the June 13th meeting of Senate: Accommodations for Students with Learning
Disabilities. We invited Dr. Mitchell to
the October 20th meeting to discuss his concerns and clarify his
submission. We then set up a meeting on
October 25th to meet with Jill Davies.
The Calendar Dates for the 2006/2007 were submitted to the
November meeting of Senate and were approved.
A proposal was sent to Senate for the December meeting on
‘Recommendations relating to special examinations for students with disabilities”. .
Based on discussions at Senate, an ad hoc committee was struck to address the issues surrounding the
proposal on Students with Disabilities.
The committee was invited to meet with Susan
Markham-Starr, representing the ad hoc committee, to be part of the consultation process to address
any other issues that fall under the TIE Committee’s mandate that would affect
students with disabilities. The
committee met with Susan on May 18th,
2006.
Attachment 4)a)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
056-62-GAM
Motion for the Senate meeting
of 12
June 2006
Should the Annapolis Valley Bid for the
2011 Canada Winter Games
be successful, Senate hereby expresses its commitment to schedule a two-week
study break in the winter term for the academic year 2010/2011.
For more information on this
event and request, Senators may refer to www.valleycanadawintergames.ca
Wendy Bedingfield